*05650-11

*05650-11
BEFORE THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
In Re: Application for increase in water and
wastewater rates in Alachua, Brevard, DeSoto,
Hardee, Highlands, Lake, Lee, Marion, Orange,
Palm Beach, Pasco, Polk, Putnam,
Seminole, Sumter, Volusia, and Washington
Counties by Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
)
1
DOCKETNO. 100330-WS
)
)
)
)
Dated: August 10, 201 1
DIRECT TESTIMONY
OF
SUSAN CHAMBERS
on behalf of
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
OPC
CLKaQ-
1
BEFORE THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
2
AQUA UTILITIES FLORIDA, INC.
3
TESTIMONY OF SUSAN CHAMBERS
DOCKET NO. 100330-WS
4
5
I. Introduction.
6
Q.
Please state your name, position, and business address.
7
A.
My name is Susan Chambers. I am the National Customer Service Manager for
8
Aqua America (“Aqua”). My business address is 762 W. Lancaster Avenue, Bryn
9
Mawr, Pennsylvania 190 10.
IO
II
Q.
Manager?
12
13
What are your duties and responsibilities as the National Customer Service
A.
I am responsible for serving the customers of Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. (“AUF”
14
or the “Company”) in the areas of customer service and Call Center operations,
15
including quality control.
16
17
Q.
Please describe your educational background and work expertise.
18
A.
I have worked for Aqua for 24 years. I have recently been appointed to the
19
position of National Customer Service Manager. Prior to this appointment, I was
20
the National Customer Billing Manager and took on that role in 2005. Prior to
21
that, I have held several positions in Aqua’s billing and accounting departments
22
and became Aqua’s billing manager in 2001. I have a B.S. degree in Accounting
23
from Cabrini College in Radnor, Pennsylvania.
24
25
I
11. Puroose and Summary of Testimonv.
2
Q.
What is the purpose of your testimony?
3
A.
I appear on behalf of AUF to discuss the Company’s good customer service and
4
its strategy for continuing to enhance customer service. I also discuss the
5
Company’s continuing commitment to address customer satisfaction.
6
7
Q*
Are you sponsoring any exhibits to your direct testimony?
8
A.
Yes. I am sponsoring the following exhibits:
Exhibit SC-1 -
9
is a compilation of AUF’s actions taken in response to
10
customer comments made during prior hearings in this
11
proceeding.
Exhibit SC-2 -
12
is AUF’s detailed response to issues raised by a customer
receiving service from AUF’s Arredondo Farms system.
13
14
Exhibit SC-3 -
is AUF’s Final Phase I1 Quality of Service Monitoring Report.
15
Exhibit SC-4 -
is AUF’s Report on Commission Complaints - 201 1.
16
Exhibit SC-5 -
is AUF’s Report on Commission Complaints - 2009-2010.
17
18
Q.
Please summarize your testimony.
19
A.
AUF has a strong commitment to customer service. The Company is dedicated to
20
anticipating and meeting the needs of its customers by effectively utilizing
21
customer service representatives (“CSRs”), field technicians, and technology to
22
enhance the quality of the service that AUF provides to its customers.
23
continues to listen attentively to the concerns of its customers and has
24
implemented a number of significant proactive measures to address customer
25
satisfaction.
4
AUF
I
2
Since AUF’s last rate case in Docket No. 080121-WS, AUF’s customer service
3
has been the focus of a rigorous and unprecedented monitoring review by the
4
Commission, its Staff and the Office of Public Counsel (..OPC”). The results of
5
that monitoring clearly show that AUF has good customer service and is
6
committed to improving that service.
7
needed to ensure quality of service.
No further action by the Commission is
8
9
111. AUF’s Commitment to Customer Sewice.
IO
Q.
Please describe AUF’s commitment to customer service.
11
A.
AUF’s mission is built around a strong commitment to customer service. We
12
have a Customer Field Services Manager in Florida who manages all customer
13
service functions between the Call Center, Billing and Customer Service. This
14
includes service orders, billing issues, water quality issues, meter reading and
15
customer interface. We have a Call Center dedicated to AUF-related calls, and we
16
are committed to making sure that our CSRs are well trained to respond to
17
customers in an effective, prompt and courteous manner.
18
19
Q.
provides to customers?
20
21
22
Has AUF taken steps since its last rate case to enhance the sewices it
A.
Yes. Since the last rate case, AUF has implemented a number of proactive
measures to improve its customer service. For example:
23
To identify trends or potential problem areas, and to appropriately resolve
24
customer concerns, AUF has formed a “Complaint Analysis and
25
Remediation Team” (“CART”), which consists of all Call Center
5
1
supervisors and their managers, as well as the Supervisor of Compliance.
2
The team meets on a monthly basis to address all escalated calls and to
3
identify areas where further coaching and training are needed. When I use
4
the terms “escalated calls” I refer to calls and communications received
5
from customers requesting futher review by either a supervisor or
6
manager.
7
AUF has refined the tracking of customer on-site meter and bench test
8
procedures to make those tests more timely and efficient.
9
To
enhance
customer
responsiveness
and
efficiency,
AUF
has
10
standardized its processes for its field technicians to improve the
11
interactions between the field technicians and the Call Center.
12
AUF prepared and provided an informational brochure to remind
13
customers about contacting the Call Center when they leave or return to
14
their Florida home. This proactive measure is helpful because many of
15
AUF’s customers use their Florida home as a second residence in the
16
winter. The brochure was designed to encourage customers to contact the
17
Call Center when they leave for the summer so that their account is
18
properly noted as “seasonal.”
19
AUF developed a water conservation and leak detection informational
20
section on the website. This can be found at
21
http:Nwatersmart.aquaamerica.com.
22
These are just some of the measures AUF has taken since the last rate case to
23
improve its customer service. AUF is constantly looking for ways to enhance
24
customer satisfaction.
25
6
I
Q.
customer meetings that previously took place in this proceeding?
2
3
Has AUF attempted to address proactively customer concerns raised at the
A.
Yes. Between October 14, 2010, and November 18, 2010, AUF attended and
A
participated in 9 customer meetings, at which time the customers were allowed to
5
ask questions and provide input regarding AUF’s quality of service.
6
listened attentively to all of those customer comments. AUF customer
1
representatives reviewed every single issue raised during the public input
8
hearings. Depending on the nature of the issue, AUF followed up with meetings,
9
phone calls, meter tests, field visits and follow-up letters. In addition, AUF filed
IO
with the Commission a formal response to the customer comments from each of
II
the meetings and from the May 24, 201 1 Agenda Conference. Attached to my
12
testimony as Exhibit SC-1 is a compilation of all of AUF’s responses to the
13
customer comments, which AUF has previously filed with the Commission.
AUF
14
15
Q.
forums?
16
17
Has AUF attempted to proactively address customer concerns raised in other
A.
Yes. AUF filed a detailed response to concerns raised by a customer receiving
18
service from AUF’s Arrendondo Farms system, which is attached to my
19
testimony as Exhibit SC-2. In addition, AUF has contacted this customer and will
20
be meeting with the customer in the near future to discuss specific issues which
21
the customer has raised.
22
23
Q.
What other steps has AUF taken to address customer concerns?
24
A.
Customer input is extremely important to AUF and the Company continues to
25
take steps to address issues raised by customers at customer meetings.
7
For
example:
I
AUF has taken significant steps to address customer concerns with respect
to the aesthetic quality of water. This is explained in detail in Mr.
4
Luitweiler’s direct testimony,
5
Furthermore, in order to address customer requests for online payment
options, AUF has developed a new program
- Aqua Online - that allows
utility customers to view and pay bills online.
This new program is
currently available to AUF’s customers.
AUF listened attentively to those customers who expressed concerns that
10
their water service had been “shut off’ for nonpayment. AUF is sensitive
II
to these concerns and has a termination of service policy that is more
12
consumer friendly than the service termination regulations set forth in
13
Commission Rule 25-30.320(2), F.A.C.
14
15
16
17
Q.
Commission’s Rules.
I8
19
Please compare AUF’s service termination policies with those set forth in the
A.
Under the Commission’s Rules, a customer has 21 days to make a payment before
20
being considered delinquent. Once an account becomes delinquent, those rules
21
authorize the utility to terminate service for nonpayment for
22
provided that the utility supplies the customer with at least 5 working days written
23
notice in advance of termination. Under AUF’s policy, the customer is provided
24
at least 10 days advance written notice indicating that service will be discontinued
25
if payment is not received.
amount past due,
In addition to providing more advanced written
8
1
shutoff notice, AUF also attempts to call the customer prior to discontinuing
2
service, which is not required by the Commission’s Rules. Furthermore, unlike
3
the Commission’s Rules which allow for service to be terminated for failure to
A
pay
5
termination&o
6
$100. Furthermore, although not required by Commission Rules, AUF routinely
7
offers a payment plan for outstanding bills for qualified customers. Qualified
8
customers are customers who have not broken previous payment agreements more
9
than twice. Finally, where service is terminated for failure to pay, AUF’s policy
IO
is to reinstate service within the next business day following the date of payment
11
confirmation.
amount of an outstanding bill, AUF’s policy is to proceed with service
in those instances where the outstanding amount owed exceeds
12
13
Q.
Company measures and monitors the quality of its customer service?
14
15
Other than customer service meetings, are there other means by which the
A.
Yes, AUF closely monitors the types of calls coming into its Call Center as well
16
as the complaints filed at the Commission. AUF also utilizes its own quality of
17
service metrics which are part of its robust quality assurance program.
18
19
Q.
Company monitoring calls coming into its Call Center.
20
21
Please provide examples of changes that were implemented as a result of the
A.
Certainly. Since the last rate case, AUF has implemented a process where an alert
22
message is placed on a customer bill if a customer has a high bill or the bill covers
23
a period longer than 35 days. The high bill alert prompts the customer to
24
investigate for potential leaks and visit Aqua’s website for more detailed
9
information. The long period bill alert advises the customer that they can request a
payment arrangement upon contacting the Call Center.
2
3
4
In addition, in order to improve the CSR responsiveness and make sure that
5
escalated calls coming into the Call Center are responded to in a timely fashion,
6
AUF has developed an electronic work queue ( “ E W Q ) that is used to monitor
7
and track supervisor customer call backs. The EWQ is audited by the Quality
8
Assurance Team, which is compromised of Senior CSRs.
9
10
Q.
in order to ensure quality of service.
I1
12
Please explain how AUF monitors the complaints filed with the Commission
A.
AUF closely monitors the complaints coming into the Commission and
13
categorizes the complaints in order to track and respond to root cause trends. For
14
the first seven months of 201 1 AUF averaged 10 complaints per month. By
15
comparison, the average number of complaints filed regarding AUF in 2009 and
16
2010 were 18 per month and 13 per month, respectively. This is shown in my
17
Exhibit SC-5. As shown in my Exhibit SC-4, 56 out of 71 (79%) complaints in
I8
201 1 were related to a high hill or billing dispute.
19
20
AUF has acted promptly and properly to resolve the complaints filed at the
21
Commission’s Call Center. Indeed, all of the complaints filed during the Phase I1
22
monitoring period have now been closed.
23
24
10
I
Q.
filed regarding AUF since 2007?
2
3
Have you identified any trends in the volume of complaints that have been
A.
Yes. In 2007 AUF averaged receiving 20 Commission complaints per month. In
4
201 1, that average has dropped to I O complaints per month, which equates to a
5
50% reduction in complaint volume. This decrease in complaints during this
6
period is significant, particularly when one considers that over the same time
7
frame AUF .had initiated two rate cases, and customer complaints and inquiries
8
typically increase around the time of a rate case. Although AUF is proud that the
9
number of complaints has decreased over the last 4 years, AUF recognizes the
IO
importance of tracking formal complaints and will work hard to see the number of
II
complaints continue to decrease even further.
12
13
Q.
own metrics. Why doesn’t AUF use the Commission’s metrics?
14
15
You mentioned that AUF measures and monitors its service quality using its
A.
The Commission has not adopted its own standards to monitor or measure a water
or wastewater utility’s quality of service.
16
17
18
19
Q.
How does AUF employ its metrics to monitor and measure quality of service?
20
A.
AUF has been proactive in establishing its own quality of service metrics as part
21
of a robust quality assurance program. A detailed discussion of those quality of
22
service metrics and how AUF utilizes those metrics to improve service and
23
address customer satisfaction is set forth in my Exhibit SC-3.
24
I
It is important to note that AUF did not establish these self-imposed metrics at
2
easily attained levels so that it could simply justify the status-quo. Instead, AUF
3
designed its metrics to challenge employees to stretch their customer service
4
performance toward excellence. AUF’s operations are guided by challenging
5
targets which take into account that, while 100 percent perfection is not always
6
achievable or cost effective, AUF’s customers expect 100 percent reliability.
7
AUF strives to provide 100 percent reliable customer service in all service
8
categories. However, as with any water, gas, electric or telecommunications
9
utility, 100 percent perfection is not always attainable. The fact that AUF has
10
been proactive in adopting its own quality of service metrics, illustrates AUF’s
11
commitment to quality of service.
12
results of those quality of service metrics demonstrate that AUF’s service quality
13
has steadily improved since its last rate case.
Moreover, as shown in Exhibit SC-3, the
14
15
Q.
You state that the quality of AUF’s customer service has been the subject of
16
rigorous monitoring by the Commission and others since the last rate case.
17
Can you elaborate on that monitoring process?
18
A.
Yes. AUF last sought rate relief from the Commission in 2008. After conducting
19
a formal hearing, the Commission determined that AUF’s quality of service was
20
marginal for all systems except the Chuluota System, which was found to be
21
unsatisfactory. The Commission thereafter granted AUF rate relief for all of its
22
systems, except for the Chuluota water and wastewater systems. In addition to
23
granting rate relief, the Commission established a monitoring plan (“Initial
24
Monitoring Plan”) to enable it to monitor AUF’s customer service in three areas:
25
the general handling of customer complaints, the specific handling of complaints
12
at AUF’s Call Center, and the accuracy of AUF’s metering readings and resulting
2
bills.
3
Initial Monitoring Phase
4
5
The Commission’s Initial Monitoring Plan required AUF to file monthly reports
6
on customer complaints, Call Center sound recordings, and meter reading logs
7
and route schedules for the six-month period from May 2009 through October
8
2009. Every call from an AUF customer that came into the Call Center during
9
this time period was recorded and provided to the Commission Staff for review.
IO
AUF complied with the Commission’s Initial Monitoring Plan in all respects.
11
AUF timely submitted extensive complaint logs and Call Center sound recordings
12
for each month, which allowed Commission Staff to objectively review first-hand
13
all customer calls to determine the quality of service provided by AUF’s CSRs.
14
AUF also provided Commission Staff with all of its meter reading route schedules
15
for the entire six month monitoring period along with the actual meter reading
16
logs for all of those systems. This allowed Commission Staff to personally visit
17
AUF systems soon after AUF’s meter readers had completed their reads and
18
documented the usage on the meter. Commission Staff compared its volumetric
19
reads to the AUF meter reading log to independently test for meter and billing
20
accuracy.
21
22
At the end of that intensive independent review process, Commission Staff filed a
23
detailed report and recommendation on March 4, 2010, which concluded that
24
AUF’s handling of customer complaints, meter reading, customer billing and
25
environmental compliance was adequate.
13
2
On March 16, 2010, the Commission considered Staffs recommendation and
3
observed that its Staff had spent an extraordinary amount of time objectively
4
reviewing the quality of AUF’s customer service and further found that Staffs
5
review of the actual CSR sound recordings was the most reasonable means to
6
determine if AUF is performing adequately. The Commission went on to affirm
7
that of the 738 total sound recordings reviewed, its Staff had independently
8
determined that “the majority were handled in a courteous and professional
9
manner and the representatives were taking the appropriate action to resolve all
10
issues in the call.” Order No. PSC-10-0218-PAA WS (April 6,2010) at p. 6. The
11
Commission also acknowledged that AUF had implemented a number of other
12
measures to improve its customer service with respect to its Call Center, its field
13
technicians and its customer outreach.
14
15
The Commission ultimately concluded that the results of the Initial Monitoring
16
Plan showed “substantial imarovement in AUF’s customer service, [but that]
17
additional monitoring was required to ultimately render a determination as to the
18
adequacy of AUF’s quality of service.” Id. at 12 (emphasis added).
19
20
Phase N of Monitoring
21
Recognizing that its Initial Monitoring Plan had imposed substantial cost and time
22
requirements on utility Staff and Commission Staff, the Commission directed its
23
Staff to continue to monitor AUF’s customer service through the end of 2010 on a
24
more limited basis. The Commission also ordered AUF to collaborate with the
25
OPC and other parties to “develop a cost-effective, efficient, and meaningful
14
I
monitoring plan, and to bring the supplemental monitoring plan to us within 45
2
days.” Id at 13. Thereafter, AUF, OPC and the parties ultimately agreed to a
3
proposed Phase I1 Monitoring Plan which eliminated the requirements that AUF
4
produce sound recordings, meter reading information, and complaint logs, but
5
continued a more limited monitoring of customer service and certain aesthetic
6
water quality issues. To ensure that this Phase I1 Monitoring Plan was cost-
I
effective and efficient, the reporting requirements specifically agreed upon by
8
OPC and AUF were structured around (i) non-proprietary reports that AUF was
9
already using internally to monitor and ensure quality of service (with the
10
exception of one report that was created specifically for the Phase I1 Monitoring
11
Plan), and (ii) an aesthetic water quality improvement program that AUF already
12
had underway.
13
14
The Phase I1 Monitoring Plan required AUF to provide on a monthly basis the
15
following customer service-related reports:
16
A Management Quality Performance (“MQP”) Report, which tracks on a
17
monthly basis the reasons for customer calls. This report is used by AUF
18
management to understand recent performance and identify any adverse
19
trends.
20
A Florida Complaint Support Information Report, which provides non-
21
proprietary information for each of the complaint-related calls that
22
underlies the MQP Report for each month.
23
A Florida Scorecard, which includes quality of service metrics for each
24
month and is used by management to incentivize its employees to provide
25
excellent quality of service to customers.
15
A Call Center Monitoring Statistics Report, which tracks the key
2
performance indicators of AUF’s Call Center on a monthly basis, and is
3
used by AUF management to ascertain whether it is meeting its targeted
4
service performance levels.
5
A Call Quality Report for AUF’s Call Center, formatted such that monthly
data can be tracked for each of the individual call center separately.
A Service Order Status Report, which tracks AUF’s service order log and
8
the timeliness of closing service order requests.
9
An Estimated Read Report, which allows for the tracking of the number of
estimated reads and the investigating any adverse trends.
IO
11
12
By Order No. PSC-lO-O297-PAA-WS, dated May 10, 2010 (“Phase I1 Monitoring
13
Order”), the Commission approved the Phase II Monitoring Plan agreed to by the
14
OPC and AUF. In so ruling, the Commission acknowledged that many of its
15
customer service concerns regarding meter reading, meter accuracy and billing
16
that led to the Initial Monitoring Plan had been addressed. Pursuant to the Com-
17
mission’s directives, AUF filed a final report on February 28, 201 1, summarizing
18
the results of AUF’s Phase I1 reporting requirements. See Exhibit SC-3.
19
20
Q.
What did the results of Phase I1 Monitoring Reports show?
21
A.
The detailed results of the Phase II Monitoring Reports are set forth in AUF’s
22
Final Phase I1 Quality of Service Monitoring Report, which is attached as Exhibit
23
SC-3 to my testimony. The results of that report show that AUF has been
24
proactive in adopting aggressive quality control methods and has done an
25
excellent job in meeting those service quality goals. The results of the Phase I1
16
Monitoring Report also show that AUF has made steady improvement in the
2
quality of customer service since the last rate case. For example, the CSR Call
3
Quality scores improved dramatically when compared to 2008. See Exhibit E to
4
Exhibit SC-3. Also, the Estimated Read Report shows that the estimation rate for
5
Florida has been consistently below the target goal of 1 percent. See Exhibit G to
6
Exhibit SC-3. This steady improvement is also reflected in the downward trend in
7
complaints filed with the Commission that I previously discussed.
8
9
Q.
with respect to the quality of AUF’s customer service?
10
I1
Since the last rate case, have the Commission and its Staff made any findings
A.
Yes. As I mentioned above, the Commission and its Staff have closely monitored
12
the quality of AUF’s customer service for over a period of almost two years, and
13
not once has the Commission or its Staff found that the quality of AUF’s
14
customer service was unsatisfactory.
15
Commission Staff found:
In fact, as far back as March 4, 2010,
16
Based on staffs review of AUF’s processes for handling
17
customer complaints, meter reading, and customer billing,
18
as well as its environmental compliance, staff recommends
19
that AUF’s performance as specified in the Monitoring
20
Plan detailed in the Final Order is adequate.
21
Staff Recommendation, dated March 4,2010, in Docket No. 080121-WS, at
22
13. (emphasis added).
23
continue to monitor AUF’s quality of service through the end of 2010, it
24
expressly found that “preliminary results show substantial improvement in
25
AUF’s customer service.”
Furthermore, when the Commission decided to
Order No. PSC-10-0218-PAA-WS (April 6 ,
17
I
2010) (emphasis added). More recently, after reviewing AUF’s Final Phase
2
I1 Monitoring Report, Staff found that:
3
A comparison of performance data from January 2007 through
4
December 2010 indicates that AAI has improved many of its Call
5
Center performance measures, and generally maintained the
6
improved performance measurements since October 2008. Also,
7
Staff did not note any recurring negative performance trends in the
8
Phase I1 Reports.
Staff Recommendation, dated May 12, 2011, in Docket No. 100330-WS and
9
080121-WS, at 32.
10
11
12
Q.
effectively providing top quality customer service?
13
14
What steps has AUF taken to ensure that its employees are efficiently and
A.
A CSR’s demeanor and tone on a customer call are very important. Our CSRs are
15
often the first point of contact between the customer and the Company. AUF
16
management utilizes the CSR Call Quality Scores Report to evaluate performance
17
in answering customer calls at the Call Center. AUF randomly samples CSR calls
18
and evaluates them on a monthly basis. The evaluation includes the C S R s soft
19
skills such as tone and demeanor, and focuses on whether the CSR has fully
20
satisfied the customer’s inquiry.
21
22
Q.
Have you taken any steps to upgrade the training of the Company’s CSRF?
23
A.
Yes.
Since the last rate case, the Company has had thirty-five customer service
24
professionals complete the full three-course customer service training program
25
developed by the AWWA for utility company CSRs. Aqua America was the first
18
i
utility in the country to have its employees complete the full range of the
2
AWWA’s courses demonstrating again our commitment to CSR training and
3
improving customer service.
4
Q.
5
A.
Does this conclude your direct testimony?
Yes.
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
‘9
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000001 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Sunnv Hills Customer Meetins Reswnse
Overview: The Sunny Hills customer meeting was held on October 14,2010, in Sunny
Hills, Florida. Approximately 7 customers provided comments to the Commission staff
during the meeting.
The majority of the customers gave input regarding the level of the rates and bills.
Two customers provided input concerning the secondary water quality, which pertained
to cloudy water. One customer indicated that the cloudy water occurred three years
ago. The other indicated it occurred approximately six months ago, but had cleared up.
One customer provided input on service related issues pertaining to a service line
break.
One customer inquired as to his high consumption of water.
Two customers provided input on the consumption blocks and inquired as to why
customers had to pay more for increased water use.
Ms. Vitale: 1681 Ross Ct
At the meeting, Ms. Vitale raised an issue about a service line break which occurred
between the utility's meter and her residence.
Upon researching Ms. Vitale's concern, AUF found that Ms. Vitale first called on
January 11,2010 stating she had a leak. An emergency work order was issued. Ms.
Vitale called back requesting to know where her shut off valve was located on her side
of the meter. The CSR advised that the location of the shut off valve was unique to
each home and such information was not readily available to the CSR. Thereafter, Ms.
Vitale ended the call abruptly.
Ms. Vitale again called back to inform the CSR that the fire department had come by
and shut her water off. Ms. Vitale requested an adjustment. At this time the CSR
cancelled the service order, thus the technician did not receive the work order. The
customer was advised that CSR would contact the Florida operations division to
research her line break. Again Ms. Vitale hung up on the CSR.
In February 2010, Ms. Vitale called inquiring as to a leak adjustment. She was informed
that she needed to fax in the necessary receipts from her plumber showing the repairs
had been made. On February 24'h, Ms. Vitale called again and was inquiring where her
adjustment was. She stated she was never told to provide information and once again,
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-I, Page 000002 of 000051
hung up on the CSR. The CSR notes on the customer's account state that she was
advised to provide the documentation of the repair.
Ms. Vitale called back March 11, 2010 to inquire as to her leak adjustment. She was
notified that she had received an adjustment of $1 5.61, which was based on the usage
portion of the bill for the month in question $35.80. This was compared to the average
usage bill she has received in the past which was $4.58. The difference between the
incident and her normal usage was $31.22. AUFs policy is to provide a 50%
adjustment which in this case is $15.61 -which she received.
Linda Rollins; 3979 Ambassador:
Mr. Rollins raised an issue concerning high bills and that he cannot understand how he
could be using the amount of water billed. AUF representatives visited Mr. Rollins'
home after the meeting and explained how to read the meter and also found no leaks.
Mr. Rollins was informed that a meter test would be scheduled on the meter to ensure
the meter was accurately recording water usage. AUF made several calls to Mr. Rollins
with no answer and no return phone calls. Nonetheless, AUF's Area Coordinator
conducted an onsite meter test during the week of November 8, 2010.
The meter test was performed. The results were:
Flow rate
his meter
our meter
0.50 gpm
10.00
9.95
100.50%
5.00 gpm
10.00
10.13
98.72%
10.00 gpm
10.00
10.13
98.72%
Average
%
99.31%
The AUF technician tagged the customer's door with these results and indicated that
the meter passed. Further attempts will be made to contact Mr. Rollins and inform him
of the test results.
Attached is the requested billing information. You will note, the customer has only been
in this home since May of 2010.
Ms. Luria Mikutis: 1768 Quintara Ct.;
Ms. Mikutis was concerned about the rates and bills. After review of her account, there
appears to be no excessive usage. The usage patterns show some "ups and downs"
but this would relate to irrigation usage.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/customer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000003 of 000051
In 2009, she had an issue that was due to frozen water lines.
She wanted to know if our rates were going up due to a new possible development
(Spring Ridge) not going forward. As with all regulated utilities, Aqua has not made any
investments related to this speculative development.
Gary Hartman: 2150 Sunnv Hills Blvd;
Mr. Hartman expressed concern that the rates are currently too high, which in turn could
slow future growth.
Katrina Randoloh: 1717 Hemlock Circle;
After the conclusion of the meeting, Ms. Randolph indicated to the Commission staff
that she had experienced an outage due to a lightning strike and it took four days to
restore service.
After researching Ms. Randolph’s concerns, AUF concluded that there had been no
lightening strike outages in July 2009 as stated. However, this past summer, AUF
conducted work at well #4 that may have resulted in discolored water. Well # 4 was
taken out of service for repair and Well #maintained
I
pressure throughout the event.
AUF technicians worked round the clock to insure adequate pressure was maintained
throughout the distribution system. AUF did receive several calls concerning discolored
water during the work process. Directional flushing was performed to remedy this. Well
# 4 was brought back on line after repairs were completed.
Ms. Marcvan; 4050 Linwood Dr.;
After the conclusion of the meeting, Ms Marcyan expressed concerns to staff about a
secondary water quality incident involving discolored water.
The Sunny Hills system is in compliance with all state and federal standards of the
Department of Environmental Protection and Environmental Protection Agency.
Upon review of this account, it was discovered that in December 2007 there was a call
from this residence concerning discolored water. The AUF technician conducted a site
visit and flushed the water line by her house, which we believe remedied the issue.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/customer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000004 of 000051
Our records indicate that, in June 2010 there was another call concerning discolored
water. Again, the technician flushed the water line by her house and again the
discolored water cleared. The June 2010 situation was due to a line break stirring
sediments up in the line. Discolored water complaints typically arise following either line
breaks or flushing events.
This was not related to the work on Well #4, since this occurred in July 2009.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000005 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Eustis Customer MeetinQ Response
Overview: The Eustis customer meeting was held on October 29, 2010. Approximately
25 customers provided comments to the Commission staff during the meeting.
The majority of the customers gave input regarding the level of the rates and bills.
Comments were also made concerning the payment of the base facility charge and the
inclining block rate structure approved in the last rate case.
Representative Allen Haves
Representative Allen Hayes represents Scottish Highlands and cited economic
hardships in the area. He also questioned how these systems could be allowed to be
run down prior to the acquisition by Aqua.
Cynthia Irwin - 36765 Shadow Hill Drive
Ms. Irwin discussed odor issues with the water system. She indicated that she had
contacted Aqua and had someone come out and test the water outside her residence.
Response: In August 2010 AUF visited this site and determined that there was a slight
increase in chlorine level. AUF technician thoroughly flushed the main for an extended
time and took another test. The test results showed that everything was ok. This
customer is located toward the end of a line.
Bob Gruno - 34834 Haines Creek Road
Mr. Gruno discussed that he has received a bill of $200 a couple of years ago and
questions the RF meters. In addition he discussed a hole in the rear of his home that is
a hazard.
Response: In review of Mr. Gruno’s account, there was no period since October 2006
where his monthly bill was greater than $85.00. There seems to be consistent
consumption on this account. Several attempts have been made to contact Mr. Gruno
by telephone. AUF’s technician has inspected the system and residence and has not
located any “holes.” A door tag has been left to have the customer contact AUF to
determine the location of Mr. Gruno’s concern
Mr. Harold Robinson - 1205 Loch Rannoch
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-I, Page 000006 of 000051
Mr. Robinson mentioned that his May bill was for 8,700 gallons. The customer stated he
moved in June 2010; however, his move in was May 20,2010.
Response: In review of his account his consumption was in fact 8,700 gallons. He
called Aqua, but wanted to discuss the location of his meter. Mr. Robinson wanted a
Utility Tech to visit his property and show him the location of his meter pit so in the
event of a leak he had the ability to shut off water to his house. Our Utility Technician
did visit the site and showed Mr. Robinson where his meter was located. He did ask
about the rates and was informed of the new rate structure and how it impacts his
usage given there are step rates now versus in the past.
Mr. Tonv Vanderberq - 7072 Earlwood Ave.
Mr. Vanderberg raised concerns with his water which occurred in 2007. Mr. Vanderberg
is a customer in the Tangerine water system. In addition he had issue with Aqua
inadvertently cutting off the water to the church. Aqua had cut off the wrong line. In
addition he has an issue with Aqua's maintaining its water plant, which sits adjacent to
the church. He states that Aqua continually drives across the church property.
Response: Aqua previously provided Mr. Vanderberg with instructions to forward
information to Aqua to process his claim on his water softener. There are no records
that Mr. Vanderberg sent in the required information as requested. Aqua has visited Mr.
Vanderberg several times to discuss his water softener concerns. The customer's
water softener system is over 15 years old and he was told it needs replacing due to
softener pellets which have worn through the filter due to age.
AUF did inadvertently turn off the irrigation water to the church. In July 2009, AUF
inadvertently shut down a valve to repair a water line that went through the park. At the
time, AUF was unaware that this line also supplied water to the church's irrigation
system. AUF reimbursed the church for damages to the landscape.
AUF is installing water main throughout Tangerine eiiminating dead ends and
undersized water main. Because this being a residential system, the contractor did not
have anywhere to store the pipe so it was stored at the water plant. The Contractor did
drive across the Church property and at our June meeting with the customers at
Tangerine, Mr. Vanderberg mentioned the damage to the grass and he was assured
when the construction was completed our Contractor would restore the property.
Tangerine is one of the systems involved in the secondary water project. A
sequestering system has been installed and IS operational. This system binds the
naturally occurring calcium, iron and manganese in the water, which reduces the
residue customers might see on dishes and fixtures.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000007 of 000051
In a jition, AUF has recently completed replacement of old water mains and a looping
project to address the secondary water concerns. AUF and OPC have met with the
customers of Tangerine twice during the secondary water project.
Mr. Andes raised issues with his water quality. He lives at the last house on a dead end
street.
In addition he is requesting “internet payment service“
Response: Mr. Andes lives at the end of a cul-de-sac. Since moving to his residence,
AUF has been to Mr. Andes home twice. The first time was July 2009 to address Mr.
Andes’ concern on fluoride, which Aqua does not add to the water. The second time
was August 2009 to address his odor concerns.
This part of the Fairways system has been placed on a Flushing Program that is
implemented quarterly. Since the last visit in August 2009, this customer has not called
to report any additional odor issues. There appears to be no further issues with this
customer or others in the system.
As with regard to internet payment, Aqua is working on providing this service to
customers in the future.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustorner comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000008 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc
Docket No. 100330-WS
Ft. Mvers Customer Meeting Response
Overview: The Ft. Myers customer meeting was held on November 18, 2010. Three
customers provided comments to the Commission staff during the meeting.
Steve Brunner - P.O. Box 100. Sanibel
Staff Specific Request:
Mr. Brunner manages eight condo associations. The Commission has been aware for
some time of his potable water inigation and sewer billing concerns. Apparently billing
problems still exist concerning “deduct meter.” Please give an update of the billing
status situations for the associations Mr. Brunner represents.
Resuonse :
Mr. Brunner’s concerns are pnmarily due to the fact there is no “deduct meter” provision
in AUF’s tariffs. This is a wastewater only system and the water meters are owned by the
water provider. If a deduct meter exists at the property, these deduct meters were
installed and are owned by the respective associations. AUF does not own any water
meters in its South Seas wastewater system.
Mr. Brunner is a new property manager who recently took over for Mr. Randy Didier, the
previous manager. AUF has met with Mr. Didier numerous times over the past year,
beginning in March 2010 and continuing through June 2010.
AUF has also met with members of some of these associations in South Seas. Field visits
were made to these locations, and as agreed upon by the previous property manager and
associations, AUF conducted a thorough analysis of each location. During the field visits
with the previous property manager and with the associations, it was discovered that
some of the associations did not even have a deduct meter.
The majority of the properties represented by the management company were resolved as
a result of the numerous meetings held. One exception was the Beach Villas 111.
Originally, in June 2010, the representative of the BV 111, proposed a resolution and
agreed to the proposed settlement of this account by AUF. However, before this issue
was resolved, Mr. Didier left the management company.
Subsequent to the customer meeting on November 18, 2010, AUF held several
discussions with Mr. Brunner concerning the past actions which had taken place and the
Company believes a resolution has been reached.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000009 of 000051
Please see the following summaries of each association in question:
The Associations were sent letters in July and August of 201 0 outlining each question
and considerations originally raised to the PSC by the customer letters. As indicated
above, AUF has had discussions as recent as 12/15/10 with the current Island
Management representative Steve Brunner.
Bavside Condominium Association
The deduct meter had not reinstated upon initial request. However, it has since been
reinstated and this account is being re-billed with any associated deduction credits.
Beach Cottages Condominium Association
This condo association never had a deduct meter installed. It was explained to Mr. Lloyd
that AUF was prohibited to offer any “subjective” monthly credits to the account, since
the Company is required, by Florida Statute, to bill customers according to its approved
tariff. AUF offered to sell the association a water meter, at its cost for subsequent
installation. Mr. Lloyd accepted this offer and Beach Cottages installed the deduct meter
on August 5,2010. There were initial billing issues with this deduct meter. However,
this has been corrected.
SSP Beach Home Condominium Association 1 - 13
This account has continuously been on an active deduct meter.
SSP Beach Home Condominium Association 14 - 26
This account has continuously been on an active deduct meter.
SSP Beach Home Condominium Association 27 - 33
This account has continuously been on an active deduct meter.
Beach Villas 111 Condominium Association
The appmpriate deduct meter was reinstated and re-billed reflecting the agreed upon
credits. These credits were a result of the continued efforts of AUF, the previous
propertymanager, and the condo association through the complaint resolution. During
the process of the complaint resolution the bills were being held by AUF pending the
outcome of the process. Since a resolution has been obtained by all parties, the bills will
no longer.be held. As indicated above, the Condo Owners Association has agreed with
the credits offered by AUF, based on the in depth analysis of the past water consumption
on the installed deduct meters as of December 15; ,2010. Currently, this account is billing
correctly and will continue to be monitored by the AUF office in conjunction with Island
Management.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000010 of 000051
Gulf Beach Villas
The deduct meter is in the system. However, this deduct meter is currently estimating,
due in part to the fact that this meter being constantly under water and difflcult to read. It
was determined that a leak is occurring and Island Management was notified on
December 14,2010. The estimated bills will be corrected once an actual read is able to
be obtained to reflect actual deductions.
Marina Villas
Marina Villas never had a deduct Meter. However, the water meter was incorrectly sized
in the billing system as a 5/8 meter, and should be billed as a 2 inch meter. This has been
corrected.
Sunset Beach Villas
The Deduct Meter is in place and on the account. The deduct meter was previously
estimating and has been corrected.
Tennis Villas
The deduct meter was reinstated and is billing correctly as of December 2010. This
account was credited back to last year for amount recorded on the deduct meter. This
account is now up to date and is being billed correctly.
Additional PSC Staff Reauest:
Provide information concerning multiple sewage spills related to liftstation malfunctions
that occurred in September of 2009.
Response:
September 2009: There were five abnormal events that took place involving the South
Seas system: three at Lift Station #4; and, two at Lift Station #2. All events were
reported to the FDEP and cleanup activities occurred promptly.
The events involving Lift Station # 4 were due to both pumps tripping the heater overload
switches and one of the pumps ultimately failed. Both pumps have been replaced by
AUF.
The events involving Lift Station # 2 were due to a breaker tripping on both occasions.
AUF technician checked the panel and breakers for loose connections. This lift station
has not had any further issues to date.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-I, Page 000011 of 000051
During this past year there has been over $46,000 in capital investments in the South Seas
lift stations to replace pumps and control cabinets, upgrade the power supply and repair a
part of the collection line.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actiondcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000012 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Gainesville Customer Meetinq Response
Overview: The Alachua customer meeting was held on October 21,201 0,
in Gainesville, Florida. Approximately 8 customers provided comments to
the Commission staff during the meeting.
The majority of the customers’ comments related to the rate increase and
level of bills.
One customer indicated that she believed the customer service
representatives were rude. When asked by the PSC staff attorney when
this occurred, the customer indicated it was over 1 %years ago.
Vernon Beraer - 7117 SW Archer. Gainesville
Mr. Berger provided comments concerning a bill which contained
backbilling charges for wastewater service.
Response: Mr. Berger’s high bill concern was due to being back billed for
sewer charges. This customer was back billed for wastewater services for
a period of 300 days. This was a result of the customer only being set up
for water service in the billing system at the time Mr. Berger moved into
his residence and not having wastewater service established.
The amount of the back bill was in compliance with Rule 25-30.35 Florida
Administrative Code.
However, after the meeting, AUF discussed this situation with Mr. Berger.
Subsequently, the customer was called and apologized to for the error of
not properly applying sewer charges to his account at the time he
activated his service with AUF. As a result, the customer was given an
abatement on his account in the amount of $616.27.
Lola Ferquson - 7117 SW Archer, Gainesville
Ms. Ferguson provided comments concerning a water heater and interior
plumbing damage due to what she believed was sand in water. She
stated that a damage claim was pending.
ResDonse: Ms. Ferguson‘s claim was denied due to the deposits not
being “sand” but actually calcium deposits that had built up in her water
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000013 of 000051
heater over a period of time.
Shirley Crosby - 71 17 SW Archer, Gainesville
Ms. Crosby provided comments concerning water running down street
during January & February of 2010.
Response: A leaking valve was brought to the attention of the AUF Field
Supervisor in late February 2010. The late notice of this leak was due to a
change in personnel for that service area. Due to the Non Seventy of the
leak, a schedule to replace the valve was prepared so proper notification
could be provided to the customers and regulatory agencies. The valve
was replaced on March 2,2010.
Pat Comoton - Arrendondo Estates
Ms. Compton raised an issue regarding “soap suds in the water and it‘s
not drinkable”. In review of the records, there was no information found
with regards to Ms. Compton reporting this type of issue. In review and in
discussions with AUF field staff, there is no reason as to why there would
be soap suds in the water or any condition that would result in this type of
situation.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/customer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000014 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Green Acres Customer Meetincl Response
Overview: The Lake Osborne customer meeting was held on November
4, 2010, in Green Acres, Florida. Approximately 10 customers provided
comments to the Commission staff during the meeting.
The majority of the customers' comments related to the rate increase and
level of bills.
Justin Thommon
- 5386 Lake Osborne Blvd.
Mr. Thompson indicated that when he called the CSR, he was placed on
hold for 20 min. He also indicated that he had received bill 2 days before
the due date and keeps getting late fees.
Response: Mr. Thompson moved in on September 2009. Since that date,
he has had 2 late fees charged to his account, both in 2010. As of
November 23, 2010, there has been a Shut Off for Non Payment issued
for this address. Mr. Thompson has not paid his last bill in the amount of
$131.01. On 11/22/2010 he called to inform us he is moving out.
Below is a table indicating the mail date and the due date for Mr.
Thompson.
Once a customer receives a bill, they have 21 days to make payment
before being considered delinquent. Once the account is in arrears for a
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/customer comments
Exhibit SC-1. Page 000015 of 000051
period of time, a customer will receive a shut off notice advising that the
service will be turned off in 10 days. The PSC rules on shut off notices
require a 5 work day notice; however AUF's policy is to allow additional
time. Further, customers are called before any action is taken to let them
know that their service may be turned off.
Linda Bera - 1515 Shirlev Court:
Ms. Berg indicated that her bills did not make sense and stated that in
2006, she was billed for 17,000 gallons of usage.
Resoonse: A review of Ms. Berg's account shows that in June 2006, she
was billed on an estimated consumption of 8,000 gallons. In the
subsequent month, July 2006, Ms. Berg was billed based on an actual
read for a consumption amount of 17,000 gallons. This was the only time
Ms. Berg received an estimated bill.
A further review of Ms. Berg's account shows that prior to the
implementation of the increased rates, this customer historically
experienced several months each year with high consumption. A further
review of the usage on this account over a 2 year period (December 2008
- November 2010), shows there have been 3 times (August, September,
and December 2009) when usage has gone up from the monthly average
of 8,292 gallons. These usage "spikes" were for 14,400, 10,600, and
11,500 gallons respectively.
Also in August 2009 she had a leak and used 14,400 gallons.
Attached please see the consumption history from 2006
Berg.
- 2010 for Ms.
AUF tested the water meter and accuracy was confirmed. The test results
were previously provided to Staff at the PSC regarding the meter test
conducted in September 2007.
A review of Ms. Berg's account shows that there have been 3 service
orders since 2007. The first was in May 2007 to review the meter and it
was found to be in good operating order. On June 4, 2007 the address
was visited again and an on-site test was performed; high flow; 100.77%,
med flow; 101.51%, low flow; 97.99 % with an average of 100.9% thus
passing the accuracy test guidelines established by the FPSC. The last
visit was in August 28, 2009 to address a low pressure issue. It was found
that the customer had a leak in the home.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1. Page 000016 of 000051
Alfred Binner - 1507 Crest Circle:
Mr. Binner stated concerns about bill estimates.
Response: Review of this account shows that Mr. Binner did have an
issue with estimates on two occasions in 2008. AUF went out and
replaced the meter in 2008 and since that time, Mr. Binner has had no
estimated bills.
Rav Thomsen- 5438 Lake Osborne Dr.. Lk Worth
PSC Specific Request: Need explanation of procedure used for cutoffs
due to non payments. Mr. Thomsen indicated that a cut off occurred in
the evening. What time did his cut off actually occur?
Response: Mr. Thomsen is no longer a customer of AUF, and continues to
have a balance on his inactive account. A new customer moved into this
residence in March 2010, and the account is currently up to date.
Review of Mr. Thomsen's account shows that the customer had two Shut
Off for Non-Payments (SNOP) in 2009, one in November 2009 and the
other in December 2009. In January 2010, this account was Turned Off
and Blocked (TOBK) due to the fact that there had been water usage on
the account after it had been shut off. AUF addressed this situation in
January 2010 with the TOBK.
Notably service was shut off in both instances on a weekday. Upon
review, the time of the shut off was not documented, just the day the
termination occurred.
It should be noted that Rule 25-30.320(6), Florida Administrative Code
only addresses termination of service on weekends and public holidays.
Ray Thomsen- 5438 Lake Osborne Dr., Lk Worth
Additional PSC Specific Request: Mr. Thomsen noted that the Utility's
water lines are in the back of his property. In general, how does the Utility
gain access to
non-roadside lines in order to maintain them? Are there
"right of way" privileges? Are there any existing problems in any of the
Utility's systems related to this matter. Please explain.
Response: As is the case in many of the systems that AUF acquired, the
original owner installed lines in the rear of homes to take advantage of
reducing the amount of main-footage that is required. This is the case
with this system. Though not the preferred methodology of installation,
AUF has not relocated these lines due to significant relocation cost, which
would be borne by the ratepayers.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1.Page 000017 of 000051
In 2007 and 2008, AUF conducted the meter replacement project in all of
its Florida water systems, thus reducing the amount ingress and egress
from properties. Prior to this meter replacement project, AUF had
considerable challenges in several systems due to fencing, guard dogs.
and customers who would not allow access in order to get appropriate
meter reads. Since the meter project, the amount of inconvenience on the
customer and AUF has been reduced considerably.
AUF also has "blanket easements" within all applicable systems allowing
access to perform necessary repair and maintenance services. AUF staff
members contact customers via telephone andlor a personal visit when it
concerns an immediate repair. The majority of customers understand that
AUF has to maintain its lines and from time to time might have to conduct
a repair. AUF personnel work with customers if the situation is not an
emergency. In exercising its rights under the blanket easements, AUFs
policy is to minimize disruption and reduce any and all property damage to
the surrounding area.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000018 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
L
P
Overview: The Lakeland customer meeting was held on October 28,
2010.
Approximately 36 customers provided comments to the
Commission staff during the meeting
The majority of the customers gave input regarding the level of the rates
and bills. Ten customers provided input concerning the secondary water
quality in Zephyr Shores. Zephyr Shores is a community of about 500
customers and is one of the systems in the secondary water project. AUF
installed a “sequestration” treatment system in March 2010. This system
binds the naturally occurring calcium, iron and manganese in the water,
which reduces the residue customers might see on dishes and fixtures.
David Busey
Mr. Busey raised concerns about customer service, rate structure and the
level of rates. He also advocated for FGUA to take over the system. Mr.
Busey spoke previously about these same issues at the customer meeting
in New Port Richey.
Frank Reams
Mr. Reams is not a customer of AUF. However, he raised concerns about
customer service, rate structure and the level of rates. He also mentioned
three customer billing issues but did not specify the time period or names
of these customers. He further advocated for FGUA to take over the
system. Mr. Reams spoke previously about these same issues at the
customer meeting in New Port Richey.
Charles Bleam. 5502 Wvndermere:
Mr. Bleam indicated he had been a resident of Lake Gibson since 1960.
He indicated that the water is good and the wells are good. He has no
complaints with the water. However, he requested the Commission revisit
the rate structure imposed in 2008, because he asserted it punishes large
families. He expressed a desire for the county to take over the system.
Phvllis Johnson. 5918 Doe Circle W., Lake Gibson:
MS. Johnson indicated that she has no complaints with the water and that
the service is good This customer questioned the level of rates and rate
increase
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-I, Page 000019 of 000051
Commission Staff Reauests:
Please provide billing information which includes consumption and the
dollar amount billed (water and or wastewater) for the following customers
for the year 2009 to present:
Michael Griffin - 2005 Christy, Lakeland
Staff Reauest: Questions consumption. Has requested meter change
out. Provide detail.
Response: A meter test was completed on November 19,2010 with a
meter certified testing unit. The water meter test average was 98.7%
which passed test.
Below are the results of the water meter test performed on November 19,
2010:
Low: 98%
Med: 98%
High: 100%
Average of 98.7%
In reviewing Mr. Griffin's account, there are no abnormalities in his
consumption. The consumption goes up and tapers down and then back
up again. The water meter was installed in 2008 and the test on the
customer's meter was accurate.
See the attached billing history requested.
John Round - 390 Windermere Dr.. Lakeland
Staff Reouest: Suspects meter is reading wrong. Please perform field
accuracy check.
ResDonse: This customer's water meter was tested on 10/29/2010 and
had an average accuracy test of 98.7%.
Erica White - 5560 Dauclhtev Down LOOD,Lakeland
Ms. White provided comments concerning past bills.
Staff Request: Put on payment plan for high bill. Please explain.
Response: Customer was billed for zero consumption for five (5) months.
Once the situation was rectified by replacing ERT unit, AUF billed for the
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-I, Page 000020 of 000051
five (5) months based on an actual read. This situation resulted in the
customer being put on a payment arrangement plan due to the period of
time the bill was for.
Lew Carriere - 1026 Wildwood Ave.. Lakeland
Staff Reauest: Explain way fire hydrants are being removed from service
area.
ResDonse: AUF has not removed any fire hydrants in Lake Gibson. We
have currently listed 20 Fire Hydrants in the Lake Gibson service territory.
Aqua has replaced 3 existing fire hydrants over the past year due to
operational issues. They are located near 490 Piatt St., 420 Byrd St., and
5810 N. Daughtery.
Bradlev Fox - 5712 Lake Breeze Ave., Lakeland
Staff Reauest: Water tank left uninstalled on private property (Byrd St
and Plant St.) for four years. Please explain.
ResDonse: The tank in question was located on AUF's property for three
(3) years. Aqua had determined that installing a small tank would improve
system operations and water quality. The tank was purchased and prior
to installation, the engineer determined the existing concrete pad and
cradles were not sufficient to support the new tank. In order to construct
the new pad an engineer was required to evaluate the existing pad,
conduct a structural analysis, and submit the plans for permitting. Once
all permits were in issued, the tank was installed. To date this tank is
performing up to standards.
Brvan Rule - 5880 Jacolanda Ave. Lakeland
Staff Reauest: Provide reason why water service was out at the Lake
Gibson system for an extended period of time in July or August of 2010,
and why boil water notices were not issued to the customer.
Response: There was not an extended water outage. There was an
outage on July 20, 2010 due to a leaking valve. A boil water notice was
issued on the same day, and was subsequently lifted on July 22,2010.
There was another water outage which occurred on September 7, 2010
due to a contractor damaging AUF's water pipe. The repair occurred on
September 9, 2010. All customers were issued a Boil Notice Water on
September 7, 2010. The Boil Water Notice was lifted on September 10.
2010.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000021 of 000051
Wavne Miles - 6301 Doe Circle E., Lakeland
Staff Request: Please explain why insurance claim was denied by the
Utility for property damage due to a sewer backup.
Response: This incident occurred on August 30, 2009. The customer
submitted the final supporting data on September 21, 2009. Customer
signed the release on October 1, 2009, and the claim was submitted for
Payment on October 5, 2009.
Check Number 310933, dated October 15,2009 was issued to the
customer and it has been cashed.
The Original Claim was denied due to inadequate information to
substantiate the amount of the claim. As evidence by the timeline above,
all information and matters were handled in less than 35 days from time of
notice.
Jova Teter, 3865 Dauclhtew Downs
Ms. Teter indicated that she has a family of 5 people. Her bills usually run
at $200/ month. She received a bill last November 2009 for $400. She
indicated that she called CSR for 2 days. She stated that there was no
way usage could double in one month.
Response: Ms. Teter did have one month where her usage spiked to
19,000 gallons, up from her average of around 6,500 gallons. Afler this
month and up until now she has gone back to a normal usage. The AUF
technician was dispatched to review the meter and to discuss with her this
usage. However, no abnormalities were found wrong at this address.
There were no leaks detected by the technician.
Judv Dent - 5800 Jacaranda Ave, Lake Gibson
Ms. Dent indicated that in March 1989, received a $130 bill and that she
called the company to see if she had a leak. Ms. Dent indicated that she
was told had to pay the bill
Response: AUF has reviewed Ms. Dent’s account. She and/or her
husband have called a total of 4 times since 2007. Two of these calls
were to discuss when the bill was due and the amount. In May 2009, her
husband called to ask about the bill and if the amount was due to rate
increase (with step rates being introduced). One other call in 2008 was
inquiring as to why there was no water. There was a main break which
occurred during this incident.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/customer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000022 of 000051
The customer's usage has remained constant over the last two years
except for one month and then the usage went back down.
Kim Parizo - 6317 Doe Cir. East, Lake Gibson
Ms. Parizo indicated that there is no way she uses 4,000 - 5,000 a month.
She indicated that she fills her pool and that water doesn't go to
wastewater, In June, Ms. Parizo indicated that she was billed for 14,000
gallons and she wasn't there for several days. She believes that the
meter reading must be wrong. She commented that she called CSR and
was told "can't help you" and "you must pay the bill". She stated that she
never got a bill that high since.
Response: AUF reviewed Ms. Parizo's bills since 2006. The customer
has always maintained at least this usage that she states. Ms. Parizo
used this amount of waterkewer before the new meters were installed and
since. She has spikes both pre and post the new meter installation which
indicates random usage for pool and or irrigation. She had several
months prior to the new meter being installed where she used
approximately 14,000 gallons. In all instances, she has spikes at least
once or twice a year and then goes back to normal usage.
Addition Requests from the PSC staff:
Explain why customers with both residential and irrigation meters receive
two different bills; and whether a single combined bill could be sent to
those customers, if not, why not.
How many customers with residential and irrigation meters receive two
different bills per billing period?
Response: Currently, AUF has 241 customers who have this situation.
They reside in the Fairways system. AUF is currently experiencing a
migration of these customers from two meter to one meter. The
customers in Fairways have two separate water services, one for potable
and one for irrigation service. The customers currently receive a separate
bill for the irrigation service.
The current billing system does not have the capability of providing two
water accounts on one bill. If a customer does receive multiple bills they
can include both bill stubs in one envelope with one check for both
accounts.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1. Page 000023 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
New Port Richev Customer Meetina Response
Overview: The New Port Richey customer meeting was held on October 20, 2010, In
New Port Richey, Florida. Approximately 33 customers provided comments to the
Commission staff during the meeting.
The majority of the customers gave input regarding the level of the rates and bills. Ten
customers provided input concerning the secondary water quality in Zephyr Shores.
Zephyr Shores is a community of about 500 customers and is one of the systems in the
secondary water project. AUF installed a “sequestration” treatment system in March
2010. This system binds the naturally occurring calcium, iron and manganese in the
water, which reduces the residue customers might see on dishes and fixtures.
Two customers provided input on service related issues pertaining to a service line
break. One customer provided comments on a main break caused by Verizon. Several
customers provided comments as to the payment of the base facility charges while not
in residence.
Five customers provided comments on a stormwater retention pond. In review of this
situation, there is a retention pond located between AUFs effluent retention ponds and
spray field. This stormwater retention pond is owned by Pasco County and therefore, it
is the responsibility of the County to maintain this stormwater retention pond. The
County has been notified of this situation
Senator Fasano
Senator Fasano discussed economic hardship and advocated for FGUA to takeover the
systems in this county.
Representative Leqg
Representative Legg indicated that he represents Jasmine Lakes and cited economic
hardships in the area.
Representative Weatherford
Representative Weatherford represents Zyphyr Shores and expressed his opposition to
the inclining rate block structure approved by the PSC in the last AUF rate case.
Countv Commissioner Cox
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1. Page 000024 of 000051
P
County Commissioner Cox presented a letter in opposition to the rate increase
and cited economic hardship for Jasmine Lakes. He referred to the replacement of old
water meters with new RF meters and indicated this would provide more accurate billing
to the customers.
Countv Commissioner Mariano
Pasco County Commissioner Mariano expressed a variety of concerns and advocated
for FGUA to takeover the systems in this county. He further advocated that the P s c
maintain the current rates.
David Busey
Mr. Busey raised concerns about customer service, rate structure and the level of rates.
He also advocated for FGUA to take over the system.
Frank Reams
Mr. Reams is not a customer of AUF. However, he raised concerns about customer
service, rate structure and the level of rates. He also mentioned three customer billing
issues but did not specify the time period or names of these customers. He further
advocated for FGUA to take over the system.
Robert Provost - 7704 Hawthorne Dr.. - Palm Terrace
At the meeting Mr. Provost raised a queqtion about his past bills. Specifically, Mr.
Provost provided input concerning estimated bills he had received. In review of his
account history, it was discovered that this customer had called in July 2007 indicating
he had received estimated bills. Mr. Provost had indicated in 2007 that he was a
seasonal customer and should not receive any billing for usage. A service order was
issued to obtain an actual meter reading on August 1, 2007. The customer called again
in August 27,2007 for a bill explanation. In October 2007, Mr. Provost called to dispute
his bill.
In further review of this customer’s billing history from January 2009 through November
2010, there were separate two time periods where Mr. Provost had zero consumption:
once from August 2009 - October 2009 and then again July 2010 -September 2010.
With respect to the 2010 period, Mr. Provost contacted AUF in 2010 and stated that he
had been away from his property and had turned off his water.
With respect to the 2009 period, Mr. Provost received a bill in November 2009 based on
14,600 gallons. It appears that during this period of time in 2009 the water remained on
at the residence, which is different than the time period in 2010 when he called and said
he had turned off his water. There is no further explanation in the customer notes as to
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000025 of 000051
the amount of 14,600 in November 2009. However, in May 2009, Mr. Provost did
contact Aqua indicating there was water bubbling up in his back yard.
When reviewing the customer's consumption during the remaining months in 2009 and
2010, the customer's usage amounts were consistent. As requested by PSC staff,
attached is the billing history for Mr. Provost from 2009 through present.
Mr Provost also mentioned that the ponds have an odor coming from them. In review of
this situation, there is a retention pond located between Aqua's ponds and spray field.
This pond is owned by Pasco county and therefore the responsibility of the County to
maintain this stormwater retention pond. The County has been notified of this situation
Celeste Snvder (Jasmine Lakes)
Ms. Snyder provided comments on odor at the wastewater treatment treatment plant
and 18 wheelers that use the road for sludge removal. She also complained about a
boil water notice that occurred.
Please see AUFs response to the PSC staff's question on boil water notices at the
conclusion of this response.
Brian Diaz - Jasmine Lakes
Mr. Diaz provided comments concerning a water line break which occurred "before his
house" and it took 4 days to fix. There are no notes on this customer's account
concerning a main break. However, there is a note concerning his neighbor breaking
his water meter with his truck, as well as a request to temporarily turning his service off
so he could repair a leak.
He also stated he got 4 bills and they all had 4 different prices. AUF believes this was
primarily due to changes in rates for interim and final rate increases from the last rate
case, as well as the index and pass through which occurred in October 2009.
Diane Manzo - 7932 Lotus Dr.. Port Richev -Jasmine Lakes
Ms. Manzo discussed her usage variations. In review of her usage from January 2009
to November 2010 (attached), Ms. Manzo's usage has remained relatively constant with
a few months where usage went up. Please see attached spreadsheet reflecting Ms.
Manzo's billing history for the past twelve months.
In one of the months with increased consumption, November of 2009, she had a leak on
her side of the meter which resulted in the highest usage for a one month period 10,500
gallons. In 2010, her usage went up in June and July. We have received no customer
calls from Ms. Manzo concerning consumption since the leak in November of 2009.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000026 of 000051
Richard Jenninq - Jasmine Lakes
Mr. Jenning provided comments concerning the fluctuation in water usage and the
increase in rates. He further provided Comments concerning a ball valve in his yard with
a crooked valve stem.
Marla McDonnell (Lisa Barbas is customer) - 781 1 Arbordale Dr.. Port Richev - Palm
Terrace
Ms. McDonnell raised the issue of property damage (driveway pavers) that she believes
is the Utility's responsible. She also provided comments that the wastewater treatment
plant emits odor and the retention pond overflows during raining periods. In talking to
AUF field staff who were working in this system at the time, there is no recollection of
any situations with regards to a customer driveway or yard regarding pavers. The water
and wastewater lines for these customers are in the rear of the homes and AUF has no
pipes that would affect the driveways in this system.
Ms. McDonnell also made reference to wastewater odor or pond overflowing issues.
AUF notes that there is a spray field irrigation system across from her home that could
account for a sulfur like odor.
Again, the retention pond that Ms. McDonnell referred to is owned by Pasco County and
the responsibility of maintenance rests with the County. The County has been informed
of the pond's condition.
Laurie Jenss - 7400 Rhinebeck Dr., Port Richev-Palm Terrace
Ms. Jenss wanted to know about shut off notices and latekredit card fees. AUF does
not charge a credit card fee. However, if used by the customers, there is a charge for
Western Union services. AUF has no fees on their bills that have not been approved by
the FPSC. The option of utilizing Western Union is offered as a further convenience to
customers, but is not required to be used. There are various options offered to
customers for payment of bills.
In review of Ms.Jenss's account, she was questioning the activation fee, or Turn On
Fee. This is a fee that has been approved by the FPSC and the charge was $22.00 as
provided in AUFs tariff. In addition, Ms. Jenss was properly charged a late fee in
November 2010.
Peaav Masruder - 11231 Yew Tree Ave., Port Richey
Ms. Magruder claimed that she was cut off and it took 2 days to restore service. In
review or this account, AUF has no record of a shut off for non-payment occurring at
this residence, however, there have been a significant amount of late fee charges.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustorner comments
Exhibit SC-1. Page 000027 of 000051
Michael Rock - 7430 Rhinebeck Dr., Port-Palm Terrace
Mr. Rock was inquiring as to damage caused due to flooding. On September 13,2010,
Pasco County struck and broke one of AUFs 2 line at this address. The County
notified Aqua and our technician was dispatched. The County fixed the leak and made
restoration based on this leak in all areas that were appropriate.
Additionally, the County started work prior to Aqua providing locates to this project as
outlined in the locate request. Please see the attached Sunshine State One Call
document concerning this line break received on September 15, 2010. The County
commenced the storm water pipe replacement on September 13,2010, which was two
days before AUF received the request for line locate. As the AUF service technician
arrived to locate and mark the water lines, Pasco County was already in the process of
digging the ground for the storm pipe replacement.
Sadie Dve - 1814 Stanford Dr.. Port Richey
Ms. Dye’s concern was that the lift station across from her was unprotected and there
were inoperative valves plus the meters are covered with grass. AUF notes that the lift
station is protected and there are locks on the electrical panel, as well as the on the
grates to prevent unauthorized access. The bypass valve is operational and as of
November 16,2010, the meter box has been replaced.
Meter boxes are located on customer property. Aqua has replaced all aging water
meters with new RF meters throughout the state. It is not necessary to have access to
meters and/or meter boxes in order to read these RF meters.
Mike Paone - 11235
- Palm Terrace
Mr Paone provided comments indicating the water was “awful” and that he had put in a
water softener. Mr. Paone also indicated that the water system was “old” and the water
pipes had been placed into service in the 1970’s. He also indicated that he believed
that kids in the area were causing damage to the utility‘s facilities throughout the
subdivision.
It should be noted that in the Palm Terrace system, AUF purchases its water from
Pasco County. The water quality provided is therefore maintained by the county. Mr.
Paone also commented on boil water notices. Please see explanation on the boil water
notices at the end of AUFs response.
John Manzione - 7604 Hawthorne Dr. Port Richev- Palm Terrace
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000028 of 000051
Mr. Manzione stated he did not get a pool credit on his sewer bill back in 2008. At that
time (2008), AUF did not provide such credits given there is a cap on sewer charges.
However, beginning in May 2009, AUF developed and implemented a pool credit policy.
FPSC Staff Specific Reauests:
1, Explain the processes as to how and why boil water notices are issued. Please
provide a list of all boil water notices issued by the Utility, the water systems that
were affected, the reason why they were issued, and the length of time before
they were rescinded, during 2009 to the present.
Response: When a water system experiences a drop in water pressure below 20 PSI
due to a break or some other event, a Boil Water Notice will be issued. All Boil Water
Notices are delivered and hung on the customer's door via door tag notice. In addition,
the field technician assigned to the system in which the notice will be issued is
responsible for contacting the state customer service personnel (CSR) and operations
management alerting them of the outage or pressure problem that requires a Boil Water
Notice to be issued. The state customer service personnel will then post all relevant
information including the cause of the Boil Water Notice to Aqua's internal intranet site.
This site is used by customer representatives to relay important information to
customers who call in.
All Boil Water Notices will remain in effect until a sample is taking and tested by an
independent lab and found to be safe and satisfactory. Once the results are received
and reviewed, AUF field staff will hand delivery a rescind notice to all effected
customers. The rescind notice wiil be hung on the customers door.
In addition, Aqua has begun using a telephonic relay system called SwiftReach to
contact affected customers.
Attached is the listing of boil water notices requested by staff.
Additional Information Concernina Aaua's billina procedures: Once a customer
receives a bill, they have 21 days to make payment before being considered delinquent.
Once the account is in arrears for a period of time, they receive a shut off notice of 10
days. The PSC rules on shut off notices require a 5 work day notice; however AUF we
gives additional time. Further, customers are called before any action is taken to let
them know that their service may be turned off. We do offer payment plans to our
customers. The company's policy is to offer two payment plans per account.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/custornercomments
Exhibit SC-I. Page 000029 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Palatka Customer Meetinq Response
Overview: The Palatka customer meeting was held on October 22, 2010.
Approximately 11 customers provided comments to the Commission staff during
the meeting.
The majority of the customers provided comments related to the rates and rate
increase.
Rov Ooten - 230 N. Hwv 17, Palatka
Mr. Ooten questioned his billed consumption. He stated that he has parked his
vehicle over the water meter for 3 months and no one came out to examine it.
Response: This customer claims that AUF could not read his meter in 2008 but
continuously charged at least 3,100 gallons per month. After further reviewing
this customer's readings and consumption, it was determined that the
consumption amounts were correct and consistent with the exception of one
estimated read in October 2009.
The customer's notes on his account indicate there have been two calls
concerning high usage. The first occurred in December 2006 and the other in
October 2009. AUF reviewed and found no issues at this property. Aqua
contacted the customer and attempted to explain the bill; however, the customer
was not interested in any explanation.
As previously stated, AUF replaced all its old water meters with new RF water
meters. With these replacements, it is no longer necessary to have access to the
customers' individual meters and/or boxes to read the meters.
As requested by PSC staff, attached is the account history for Mr. Ooten from
2009 through present.
Larrv Mathews - 124 Palm Trail, East Palatka
Mr. Mathews provided comments concerning how the new meters are read and
the boil water notice which occurred. He indicated that no door hangers were
provided. Mr. Mathews also commented that he was "thrilled that AUF had
installed new water meters.
Response: In review of Mr. Mathews' account and any and all service orders for
Mr. Mathews, AUF found no issues with his meter or with his billing. In addition
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000030 of 000051
AUF reviewed the account for any information regarding his claim of nonissuance of boil water notices. The AUF technicians were also questioned as to
the practice. It was determined that in this system we provide notice to the
affected customers via door hangers.
Mr. William Jordan - 104 Oranqe Dr.
Mr. Jordan provided comments concerning erosion issues into the canal
originating on the utility’s property.
Response: Subsequent to the customer meeting, Jack Lihvarcik and Harry
Householder met with the original complainant, Bill Jordan on November 12,
2010. Inspecting the property, AUF has an inlet which drains into the canal and
in areas along the path of the pipe to the canal are depressions. This could be a
result of the pipe rotting and soil washing into the pipe. AUF plans on video
inspecting the pipe to determine if dirt is washing into the pipe. Based on the
findings we will determine if the pipe will need to be replaced or repaired. Once
the pipe is determined to be working properly, the depressions will be filled and
sod installed to eliminate erosion. The top of the property will need to be
restored back to original design, recreating a swale so water will drain properly to
the inlet, as concrete pad placed around the inlet so water will naturally run into
the basin. The bulkhead will need to be raised to complement Mr. Jordon’s
existing bulkhead elevations and a concrete cap poured on top of the bulkhead.
To eliminate a wash into the canal during peak rainstorms a small retaining wall
needs to be constructed at the same location as Mr. Jordon’s wall and connect
into the neighbors wood retaining wall such as not to damage or cause any
erosion during rain storms.
The Majority of the problem is due to the natural flow of water and sediment
down the canal.
Mr. Charles Davis - 102 Oranqe Dr.
Mr. Davis also brought up concerns on the sea wall. Further, Mr. Davis
expressed concerns on the level of his bills.
Response: See response above concerning the seawall.
Patricia Davis - 102 Oranqe Drive
Ms. Davis provided comments that Aqua has not been maintaining our facility for
over 10 years. She stated that in the past a customer mowed this property in
exchange for being able to park his boat on Aqua property.
Response: In the past 10 years AUF has utilized a contract service provider and
has maintained the property in question. There is no nor have there been any
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000031 of 000051
arrangements under AUF's ownership allowing anyone to park their personal
property at its locations.
In response to a PSC staff question at the meeting regarding when Ms. Davis
contacted AUF concerning the mowing of the grass, the customer responded that
it was in 2007. She indicated that the property is now being maintained.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustorner comments
Exhibit SC-I, Page 000032 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Sebrina Customer Meetina ResDonse
Overview: The Sebring customer meeting was held on October 27, 2010, in
Sebring, Florida. This meeting primarily covered both the Highlands and Hardee
County systems.
Approximately 21 customers provided comments to the Commission staff during
the meeting.
The majority of the customers provided comments on the level of rates
The Highlands county systems, Lake Josephine, Sebring Lakes, and Leisure
Lakes systems are part of AUFs secondary aesthetics water project. AUF and
OPC have met with the customers of these systems to discuss the efforts being
made to address the aesthetic water concerns. AUF has explained that these
issues revolve around the level of sulfur in the water supply. AUF has proposed
and is actively pursuing the installation of an AdEdge filtering system to remove
the sulfer content. These treatment systems are included in the rate case as pro
forma plant additions.
Jonathan Patton - 122 Leona Dr., Sebring
Mr. Patton provided comments concerning consumption fluctuations. The
customer believed that the customer service was unhelpful. PSC staff has
requested that AUF provide records of customer contact.
ResDonse:
Mr. Patton's usage was high during the months of:
July 2009 - 10,200 gallons
August 2009 - 15,300 gallons
September 2009 - 10,900 gallons
However, his usage went back down in the months of:
October 2009 - 5,700 gallons
November 2009 - 5,400 gallons
The customer's wife, Nancy, called in August 2009 in regards to high bill and was
advised to check the property for leaks.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000033 of 000051
The wife, Nancy, called back on October 14, 2009 in regards to her past due balance
and to see if AUF had received payment in the amount of $100. She was advised that
payment had not been recieved. She was also advised that a payment of $100 was not
sufficient to stop the shut off, since the past due balance was $220.76 at that time.
Mr. Patton called on October 15,2009 and asked if AUF had received the payment for
$100. He was advised that the payment had not been received, and again that $100
was not enough to stop the shut off. He was further advised that he was not eligible for
any further monthly payment arrangements. Aqua did offer to place a courtesy hold on
the account to allow a couple more days for his payment to be received and for him to
pay the difference. Mr. Patton then requested to speak to a supervisor, and in turn the
call was transferred to the senior representative.
The senior representative spoke to Mr. Patton, who for the first time mentioned that he
was not receiving his bills. He was then advised that AUF had no records showing that
the bills had been returned back to the company. The senior representative advised
him that $220.76 needed to be paid by October 19th in order to guarantee service.
Again he was informed that he was not eligible for any further arrangements because
he had been offered two previous payment plans in July 2009 and September 2009 and
had defaulted on both.
Mr. Patton called on again on October 18,2009 and made a payment in the amount of
$120.76. In addition, his mailed payment of $100, which was subsequently posted on
October 20, 2009, thus satisfying the shut off amount. Mr. Patton stated he will
continue to make payments on the account.
Concerning the late payment charges, in reviewing the timing of Mr. Patton's
payment history, this customer is late on payments each month. This account
has not been at a zero balance since the account was opened back in March
2009, which has resulted in late fees. Further, Shut Off for Non-Payment
(SNOP) notices have been sent 6 out of the 20 months that Aqua has provided
service to the customer.
Cefie Metayer - 802 Sallv Place, Wauchula
Ms. Metayer provided comments concerning high water consumption and
questioned her meter accuracy.
Resoonse:
Summarv of customer account - Cefie Metayer
Ms. Matayer apparently owns two houses in the Peace River system.
Prior to Ms. Metayer moving into and receiving service at 802 Sally Place, this
customer occupied and received service at 833 Chamberlain on the same
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustorner comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000034 of 000051
system. Below is a summary of Ms. Metayer's account while a customer at 833
Chamberlain Drive:
Customer took financial responsibility of the property at 833 Chamberlain on
March 15, 2007. The first bill was estimated, and each bill thereafter was based
on actual consumption.
9 Customer did not make first payment until November 29, 2007.
9 Termination notices were sent on:
08/27/2007
10/13/2007
09/20/2008
10/17/2008
11/17/2008
9 Customer's account was moved out for non payment on December I O , 2008.
9 Turn off and block was issued on January 21,2009 for this customer and water
turned off
9 Turn off and block was issued on March 20,2009 for this customer and water
turned off
9 Customer's account was turned on and moved back into service on July 7,2009
P Meter was exchanged in December 2008
P Customer received bill in July 2009 for the seven month period (December
through June) due to the move out for non payment noted above and for the
services used by customer without consent.
9 Apparently, during the period that the water service was turned off by AUF, the
customer had been turning back on her service without utility permission or
knowledge.
9 Further Call reviews:
a. 07/06/09
i. Customer claims to have never received bill.
ii. Discussed balance and history with customer
iii. Explained the seven month period of her account being inactive
due to being turned off with consumption being used. Also
explained that the past due amount was being pursued by
Collections agency
b. 07/24/09
i. Discussed account balance with customer including the seven
months of services used by customer without authorization or
contract
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000035 of 000051
ii. Explainel that $ 50 was due on the account and needed to be paid
immediately
c. 07/21/09
i. Customer wanted to know if bill was mailed out -Aqua confirmed it
was
d. 8/12/09
i. Customer claims to not be receiving bills, but customer appears to
have the bill in front of them during the call
ii. Customer does not understand why the $1,OOO+ balance on the bill
is so high. Sent $400 payment, confirmed by representative
iii. CSR confirmed the address and the post office box is correct.
Customer then claimed she had only received one bill in the last
year
> Customer was moved out for non payment.
P Additional notes
a. Florida Division contact:
i. Customer claims a “major leak on customer side”. Called left
messages several times for customer. Customer never returned
calls.
Ms. Metayer, through a family member, was discussing her large bill. The bill
was apparently due to a large leak on the customer side. AUF assisted the
customer in locating the leak with the customer and offered an adjustment if she
got it repaired and could provide documentation.
This customer subsequently moved to another location (802 Sally Place) and the
balance she owed on her account was applied to the new account at her new
location. This occurred in January 2010 and she was advised of this balance
transfer. Over $5,000 was transferred from her previous account to the
customer‘s new address, also on Sally Place The customer has since paid her
bill in full and is current on her account.
PSC staff has inquired whether a field accuracy check had been performed on
this customer‘s meter? In so what were the results? If not please do so.
Response: As requested by the PSC staff, a water meter test was conducted on
November 19, 2010.
Below are the results of the water meter test:
LowFlow: 98%
Med Flow: 98%
High Flow: 100%
Average: 98.7%
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000036 of 000051
The test kit used for the meter test was a Sensus Unit.
Marilia Cimeus - 752 Chamberlain Blvd.. Wauchula
Ms. Cimeus provided comments on past bills and a shut off notice.
PSC Staff Request: Provide possible disconnect activity for non payment
information.
Response: Ms. Cimeus had 2 shut off notices for non-payment in 2009 (January
and November). In 2010. she has had 4 notices (January, March, May, and
August 2010 - Attached).
Over the course of these noticies, Ms. Cimeus’ service was turned off once. In
more than one case, Ms. Cimeus had sent her payments to various other
addresses, other than the one that accompanies Aqua’s bills. She has sent bills
to Leesburg and Winter Haven. According to the notes, Aqua’s CSRs have
repeatedly provided the correct address over the phone to both Ms. Cimeus and
her designated family member.
Peter Maceri -- 2304 Oak Beach Blvd, Sebrinq
Mr. Maceri provided comments concerning billing adjustments. Mr. Maceri also
commented that since the meter was read during a leak incident, AUF should
have notified him that he had an ongoing leak.
PSC Staff Reauest: Explain the Utility’s procedure of notifying customers of
problems on their side of the meter.
Response: On December 7,2009, Mr. Maceri called and advised that when he
returned home from vacation, he detected a leak on his side of the meter. Mr.
Maceri was informed of AUF’s leak adjustment policy, which is 50% of the bill for
that event, provided that data is submitted showing the leak was repaired.
(Examples of such documentation include a plumber’s bill or an invoice showing
that the customer bought parts to repair the leak.)
Mr. Maceri disputed AUF’s leak adjustment policy and wanted a further
adjustment.
On December 16,2009, AUF visited the property to gather a meter read based
on Mr. Maceri disputing the consumption. The customer told the AUF technician
he had a leak; however, at this time there was no leak visible. Mr. Maceri
continued to object the way AUF calculates leak adjustments.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000037 of 000051
Mr. Maceri's account was revisited in billing and with local senior management
and Mr. Maceri received additional adjustments on his account for this leak,
bringing the total of adiustments to $2,158.21.
Bernestine McLeod -- P.0 Box 174, Wauchula
Ms. McLeod provided comments concerning improper service cut off in early
2010, due to non-payment.
Response: Ms. McLeod was disconnected on January 5,2010. AUF provided a
letter notice that was mailed December 18, 2009 with a follow up phone call on
December 28,2009. Customer called January 5,2010, made a payment, and
was reconnected on the same day - January 5,2010.
Tamra Mathy - 1934 Canary Way, Sebrinq
Ms. Mathey lives near the water plant and provided comments concerning
chlorine levels in the water, possible sewer, and road damage due to
construction traffic at the water treatment plant near to her residence.
ResDonse: On several times, the technician has discussed the chlorine levels
with the customer regarding and has tested the chlorine levels several times.
Each time, the chlorine levels were within limits established by DEP. The
customer stated that she had called the EPA and they came out.
This system has high sulfur content which requires both the use of chlorine and
continued flushing to maintain the water quality and keep the sulfur bacteria in
check. In the meantime, as part of AUFs secondary aesthetic water quality
project, AUF has proposed pro-forma plant to install an AdEdge filtering system
that will remove the sulfur. AUF is currently working on getting this filtering
system designed and installed. This system should be operational in the first
quarter of 2010, and will reduce the necessity to use elevated levels of chlorine
and limit the amount of flushing.
Dawle Cook: 690 Chamberlain Blvd;
Mr. Cook discussed that AUF might have charged a connection fee in mistake.
ResDonse: In review of the notes and the history of the account, there are no
fees associated with connection since she has been with AUF.
Ms. Susan Yates: 722 Chamberlain Blvd
Ms. Yates provided comments concerning the level of rates and quality of water.
She indicated that she had discussions with Ms. Laura King at the PSC
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/customer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000038 of 000051
concerning payment plans and turning water service off. Ms. Yates indicated
that AUF does not bill on a 30 day billing cycle, but bills on a 45 day billing cycle.
Response: In review of Ms. Yates' account, AUF notes that since February
2008, the customer's billing dates have ranged between 28 and 33 days. AUF's
bill cycle goallparameters are 26 - 35 days. Review of this customer's account
shows that there have been many issues with payments, backed up sewer lines
on the customer's side of the connection, and other billing payment issues.
Further, during the PSC monitoring in 2009, AUF provided updates and
responses to Ms. King in reference to specific issues on billing and consumption.
Adeline Hudson, 1204 David Ct: Peace River
Ms. Hudson provided comments concerning bills she had previously received
from AUF. She disagreed with the rate increase and indicated that her water
service was turned off.
Response: After review of Ms. Hudson's account, it was discovered that her
account is turned off and "inactive" in the system. Ms. Hudson has been sent to
collections for an outstanding sum of $980. She has called in periodically to
determine her balance and has been offered payment arrangements in the past.
On October 28, 2009, this customer called and stated that there was a leak in her
home. She told the CSR that she tried to turn the water off herself, but the valve
was broken. AUF had a contractor fix the broken valve on October 30, 2009.
The customer called Aqua on March 31,2009 to see if payment arrangements
could be made, the customer was advised that the account could not be placed
on hold until the next day. On May 21, 2009, the customer called to see if the
Shut Off for Non-Payment (SONP) could be extended. The customer was told
she would need to pay $63.91; however the customer never sent payment. The
customer called again on November 6 , 2009 to receive a payment arrangement.
She was told that she would need to pay $93.91, but never did The customer
was shut off in December 2009.
As indicated in the SONP history below, the customer repeatedly provided the
service technician an excuse and was not shut off until the last time in December
2009.
>
1/09 - 3 Day notice left
P 2/09 - Door tag left, per tech customer states she mailed in payment.
> 3/09 - Per tech -the customer states she made payment arrangement, door tag left.
This was not an accurate statement and the customer was not on any payment
arrangements.
P 5/09 - Per tech - the customer stated she paid bill, left door tag.
P 6/09- Per tech -the customer stated she paid bill per money order, left door tag.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/customer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000039 of 000051
>
7/09 - SONP canceled due to a High Consumption complaint.
P 12/09 - Customer’s account shut off for non payment.
Several attempts have been made to contact the customer by telephone with no
success. In a further attempt to contact the customer, on November 29, 2010, a letter
was sent to Ms. Hudson concerning her account. Aqua has indicated that in an effort to
get her service restored, the utility would be willing to place the customer on a payment
plant. This is conditioned on the customer receiving financial assistance from a
community organization in making a payment on your behalf.
Further, concerning the leak at her residence, Aqua advised the customer to contact an
outside plumber to repair. Upon providing documentation of any repairs, the customer
may then be eligible for a leak adjustment to the account.
Commission Staff Reauests:
1. Multiple customers from the Peace River system complained about a boil water
notice which appears to be ongoing. Is there an ongoing boil water situation?
Please explain the situation.
Response:
From January 2009 to November 15, 2010, there were a total of five (5) boil
water notice events in the Peace River system:
August 2009: 1 day in duration due to a broken pipe at the plant being
repaired
March 2010: 1 day in duration due to flushing being conducted
April 2010: 1 day in duration due to detection of Coliform Bacteria in the
water exceeding FDEP standards. Retesting of the water took place and
showed to be in compliance
May 2010: 1 day in duration due to water main line being repaired
August 2010: 1 day in duration due to well pump failure
2:
Explain the processes as to how and why boil water notices are issued.
Please provide a list of all boil water notices issued by the Utility, the water
systems that were affected, the reason why they were issued, and the length of
time before they were rescinded, during 2009 to the present.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustorner comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000040 of 000051
Response: When a system experiences a drop in water pressure below 20 PSI
due to a break or some other event, a Boil Water Notice will be issued. All Boil
Water Notices are delivered and hung on the customer's door via door tag notice.
The field Technician assigned to the system in which the notice will be issued is
responsible for contacting the State customer service personnel and operations
management and alerting them of the Outage or problem that requires a Boil
Water Notice to be issued. The State customer service personnel will then post
all relevant information including the cause of the Boil Water Notice to Aqua's
internal intranet site. This site is used by customer representatives to relay
important information to customers who call in.
All Boil Water Notices will remain in effect until a sample is taking and tested by
an independent lab and found to be safe and satisfactory. Once the results are
received and reviewed, field staff will hand deliver a rescind notice to all affected
customers. The rescind notice will be hung on the customers door. In addition,
Aqua has begun using a telephonic relay system called SwiftReach to contact
affected customers in a more expeditious manner when boil water advisories are
necessary.
See listing of Boil Water Notices provided in response to the New Port Richey
customer meeting dated November 23, 2010.
Additional tnformation Concernina Aaua's billina procedures: Once a customer
receives a bill, they have 21 days to make payment before being considered
delinquent. Once the account is in arrears for a period of time, a customer will
receive a shut off notice advising that the service will be turned off in 10 days.
The PSC rules on shut off notices require a 5 work day notice; however AUF's
policy is to allow additional time. Further, customers are called before any action
is taken to let them know that their service may be turned off. We do offer
payment plans to our customers. The company policy is to offer two payment
plans per account.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-I, Page 000041 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
SuDplemental Green Acres Customer Meetinq Response
Steve Brunner - P.O. Box 100, Sanibel
Staff Soecific Request:
Provide information concerning multiple sewage spills related to liftstation
malfunctions that occurred in September of 2009.
Response:
September 2009: There were five abnormal events that took place
involving the South Seas system: three at Lift Station #4; and, two at Lift
Station #2. All events were reported to the FDEP and cleanup activities
occurred promptly.
The events involving Lift Station # 4 were due to both pumps tripping the
heater overload switches and one of the pumps ultimately failed. Both
pumps have been replaced by AUF.
The events involving Lift Station # 2 were due to a breaker tripping on both
occasions. AUF technician checked the panel and breakers for loose
connections. This lift station has not had any further issues to date.
During this past year there has been over $46,000 in capital investments
in the South Seas lift stations to replace pumps and control cabinets,
upgrade the power supply and repair a part of the collection line.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/customer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000042 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Supplemental Eustis Customer Meetinq ResDonse
Bob Gruno - 34834 Haines Creek Road
Mr. Gruno asserted that there was a hole in the rear of his home that is a hazard
Response: On December 1,2010,the AUF technician was able to contact Mr. Gruno
regarding his concern about the hole. This “hole” was actually located on his sister‘s
premises at 11747 Hickory Lane, and not Mr. Gruno’s residence.
Mr. Gruno’s sister is not in residence at this time and appears to be a seasonal
customer.
In respect to this issue, it appears that someone had removed the meter box from the
unit and placed it in the bushes. This had created a slight indent where the box was
previously located. The AUF technician addressed Mr. Guno’s concern by cleaning out
the area and resetting the meter box. Further the area was filed and smoothed out.
In doing so, the AUF technician observed that there were cables that were ran next to
the meter, just outside or around where the box was previously located. It appears that
the cable company may have removed the meter box and failed to put it back to its
original state.
In review of this account, Mr. Gruno has not called since July 2009 and that was
concerning billing information.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionstcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-I, Page 000043 of 000051
Holland 8c Knight
315 South Calhoun Street. Suite 600 I Tdlnhassee. FL 32301
Holhnd B Knight LLP I w.hkJnw.com
I T 850.224 7000 I F 850.224.8832
0.Bruce m y . Jr.
(850) 425-5607
bNce.may@hklaw w m
July 5,201 1
Via Hand-Delivery
Ann Cole
Commission Clerk
Florida Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Betty Easley Conference Center, Room 1 IO
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850
Re:
Docket No. PSC-100330-WS
Dear Ms. Cole:
On behalf of our clienf Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. (“AUF”), attiiched are AUF’s
responses to customers who attended the Agenda Conference on May 24,201 1, and spoke on
billing and water quality issues.
Please acknowledge receipt of this filing by stamping the extra copy of this letter “filed”
and returning the copy to me. Thank you for your consideration and assistance.
Sincerely,
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
wq
. Br e May, Jr.
DBM:kjg
Enclosure
cc:
Caroline Klancke
Ralph Jaeger
Patricia Christensen
Kenneth Curtin
Auanw Betnesda, Boslon Cn.cag0 I Fort -auderda e ’ Jacrsonv le I Lakelam I LOEAngeles I Mlarn, New Yom
hornern V rg.n a I Orlando I Pon ana San franc sco I Tal ahassee I Tampa Washington. D.C. I Wet! Palm e a c h
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/customer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000044 of 000051
Ann Cole
July 5,201 1
Page 2
Kelly Sullivan
Troy Rendell
Kim Joyce
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000045 of 000051
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
PSC Agenda Conference - Mav 24.201 1
Overview: The PSC Agenda Conference was held on May 24,201 1 and approximately
37 customers provided comments prior to the PSC’s consideration of AUF’s PAA rate
request. AUF’s responses to those customers who spoke regarding billing and water
quality issues at the Agenda Conference are set forth below.’
Beniamin Anderson - 71 17 SW Archer Road, Lot 2629, Gainesville, FL - Arredondo
Farms
Mr. Anderson raised questions concerning the hardness of the water and his belief that
there is calcium in the water. Review of his account shows that Mr. Anderson contacted
AUF twice -- on March 28,201 1, and again on April 21,201 1. Mr. Anderson stated that
there were deposits in the water and the water was murky.
Mr. Anderson was informed that indigenous constituents in the ground water cause hard
water, and that hard water does not pose health issues. Since AUF acquired the
Arredondo Farms Water System in 2003, the system has provided water meeting all
primary and secondary federal and state drinking water standards. Nonetheless, AUF is
evaluating system-level alternatives to address the hardness issue at h e d o n d o Farms
and these alternatives will be presented as soon as the first phase projects of AUF’s
Aesthetic Water Quality Project have been completed. Some of the options being
evaluated at this time include adding a sequestering agent similar to that recently added to
the Tangerine and Zephyr Shores water systems. AUF’s ultimate goal is to find a
balanced solution that will maximize benefits to customers and minimize upward
pressure on rates.
Gerald Novak - 4912 Bobby Avenue, Zephyrhills, FL Mr. Novak asserted that rates impact property values. A review of AUF records indicates
that Mr. Novak is no longer an AUF customer at this address. The account at this address
is an inactive account that was turned off in October 2008 when it was discovered water
was being used at the property but there was no customer of record.
’
AUF has not provided responses to those customers who limited their remarks to the amount ofthe
proposed rate increase.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actions/customer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000046 of 000051
Julie Knox- 35303 Condo Boulevard, Zephyrhills, FL Ms. Knox raised a question about two bills that were both due in May, 201 1. Ms. b o x
receives bills for water and sewer on a monthly basis. Ms. Knox's meter is read at the
beginning of each month and payment is due twenty-one days after the bill is issued.
Review of Ms. Knox's account shows that her bill was issued on April 7,201 1 for 27
days of service, which bill was due on May 2,201 1. Her next bill was issued on May 5,
201 1 for 29 days of service and was due on May 30,201 1, Although Ms. Knox
received two bills with due dates in May, she was not double billed for service.
At the hearing Ms. Knox also mentioned an issue with damaged clothing. An AUF
representative spoke with Ms. Knox and explained that she could contact the Company to
submit a claim for any damaged items.
Please note that Ms. Knox recently filed a complaint with the PSC about her concerns
with the water quality. An AUF representative spoke with Ms. Knox on June 15,201 1 to
discuss her concerns. She stated that AUF had not yet installed an auto flusher that had
been previously discussed. However, it was explained to her that the flusher was still
scheduled to be installed and that the installation would be completed on June 21,201 1.
Prior to the installation of the auto flusher, AUF was scheduled to flush the line in her
area on June 16,201 1. An AUF area coordinator met again with Ms. Knox on June 17,
201 1, and the auto flusher has now been installed.
At the meeting on June 15,2011, Ms. Knox was also informed that AUF would be
performing directional flushing for the entire system on July 7,201 1. The homeowner
association has requested that the AUF representative attend its next meeting on July 7,
201 1, which coincides with the date of the directional flushing to explain the event to the
residents. Pursuant to that request, an AUF representative will attend the meeting and
will fully explain the flushing program which has been implemented in the Zephyr
Shores system.
Janice Ellis - 4600 Clarice Avenue, Zephyrhills, FL
Ms. Ellis discussed an issue that she previously had with AUF in 2009 regarding her
claim that water had stained her clothing. After receiving the claim in 2009, AUF
provided the customer with Iron Out for the clothing. The customer later advised that the
Iron Out did not resolve the issue and AUF paid Ms. Ellis' claim to her for the damaged
clothing. The customer has not called AUF since 2009.
Lou Vellei - 7741 Graybirch Terrace, Port Richey, FL
Mr. Vellei asserted that AUF has had IO rate increases since 2004 and 5 since 2008.
Although there have been increases for indexes and pass throughs, AUF has not had 10
rate increases since 2004. AUF's last full rate case in Docket No. 080121-WS was the
2
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000047 of 000051
first full base rate increase granted by the PSC since 1996. Mr. Vellei mentioned a
broken sewer pipe but a review of his account does not indicate any service orders for a
broken pipe.
Linda Gadd - 61 10 Doe Circle East, Lakeland, FL
Ms. Gadd raised an issue regarding her monthly consumption. She stated that she read
her meter on April 2gthand again on May 23'' and calculated that she used 495 gallons.
Subsequently, AUF has informed Ms. Gadd that she actually uses 5,000 gallons.
A review of Ms. Gadd's account confirms that her monthly usage fluctuates between
4,500 and 6,000 gallons each month. In reading her meter, Ms. Gadd did not account for
fact that there is a 0 on the meter dial. Therefore, her usage between April 291hand May
23rdwould be 4,950 which is in line with her average monthly consumption.
Ms. Gadd also raised an issue relating to service termination at her property on two
occasions and claims that she was not given notice prior to the termination and that AUF
took four days to restore her service. A review of Ms. Gadd's account indicates that she
was placed into collections for past due balances on two occasions -- once in May 201 0
and again in October 2010.
Her service was terminated on May 24,2010 after she was given written notice on May
7,2010 that her account was past due. On May 26,2010, she contacted AUF for the
restoration requirements. She was given the restoration requirement of $ 1 97.25 and
provided locations at which payments could be made. She stated she would call with the
confirmation number once it was paid. On May 27,2010 she called and said she would
make a payment at a payment location. She called later the same day and said that she
mailed the payment and would call the next day to see if the payment posted. On May
28,2010 she called to see if the payment she mailed posted to the account. The payment
was posted on the account on May 28,2010 and service was restored that day.
It should be noted that Ms. Gadd filed a complaint with the FPSC concerning the
October, 2010 service termination. AUF provided the following information to the PSC
on Ms. Gadd's complaint. On October 8,2010, Ms. Gadd was given a 10 day written
notice oftermination service for the balance due on her account of $121.60.
Subsequently, on October 15,2010, Ms.Gadd received a call reminding her of her that
she needed to make the payment or service would be turned off. On October 22,2010,
the customer's service was terminated for nonpayment. On October 27,2010, Ms. Gadd
telephoned the business office stating her service was terminated. The AUF
representative attempted to share steps to have service restored: however, Ms. Gadd was
noticeably upset and disconnected the call by hanging up.
On November 3,2010 Ms. Gadd contacted AUF for the restoration requirements. On
November 4,201 0 she called to state that she had paid her past due bill at a payment
location and provided the appropriate confirmation information. Her service was restored
on November 5,2010, within 24 hours of notifying AUF of the payment. AUF notes that
3
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustorner comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000048 of 000051
there is no requirement in the current PSC rules relating to the timing of' restoration of
service after a disconnect for nonpayment.
AUF attempted to contact Ms. Gadd via telephone on November 23'* and November 29'h
to discuss her complaint with the PSC. However, both times voice messages were left.
Therefore, a letter was mailed. The PSC closed the complaint on December 10,2010.
Phvllis Johnson - 591 8 Doe Circle West, Lakeland, FL
Ms. Johnson stated that high water bills caused her to stop watering her lawn and that she
requested a separate meter for irrigation. However, a review of her account does not
show any contact with AUF regarding a high bill or any inquiry regarding an irrigation
meter. On June 15,201 1, an AUF representative spoke with Ms. Johnson and discussed
the option of an irrigation meter. The customer declined the option of installing an
irrigation meter due to the cost.
Gus Alexakos - 4625 Windy Lane, Zephyrhills, FL
On June 14,20 11, an AUF representative spoke with Mr. Alexakos concerning water
quality issues and explained that AUF would like to assist with the water issues in his
area. AUF notes that it has spoken to Mr. Alexakos numerous times over the past years
and has worked closely with him to address any issue he has previously raised. Mr.
Alexakos was informed that AUF would be performing directional flushing on July 7,
201 I . The AUF representative scheduled a meeting for June 17,201 1 to further discuss
Ms. Alexakos concerns.
On June 17,201 1, an AUF area coordinator met with Mr. Alexakos and gave Mr.
Alexakos sample water testing bottles in case he experienced discolored water in the
future so that AUF could test the samples. In addition, Mr. Alexakos and the AUF
representative arranged for AUF to meet with the homeowner's association to discuss the
flushing schedule for the upcoming year and any other customer concerns.
The association has requested that the AUF representative attend its next meeting on July
7,201 I , which coincides with the date of the directional flushing to explain the event to
their residents. As stated above, an AUF representative will attend that meeting and will
explain the flushing program which has been implemented in the Zephyr Shores system.
At the May 241hhearing, Mr. Alexakos mentioned an issue with his neighbor's meter
which he said was locked but still registering usage. AUF has investigated the issue and
determined that one of AUF's valves was broken at the neighbor's property causing
water usage to register. AUF has repaired the valve and subsequently spoke to the
neighbor to ensure that the account is credited appropriately.
4
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1. Page. 000049 of 000051
Deborah DiBona - 1033 1 Willow Drive, Port Richey, FL
Ms. DiBona stated that she has a pool and raised an issue regarding sewer rates. Ms.
DiBona is a water and sewer customer. It should be noted that while residential
wastewater bills are based on water usage, there is a 6,000-gallon cap on the amount of
water used to calculate the wastewater bills for all rate bands. For customers whose
typical monthly water usage is below the cap, their water usage sometimes exceeds the
cap in those months when their pools are filled, but those customers are not charged for
more than the capped amount.
Nancv Jane Kraft - 7905 Mimosa Drive, Port Richey, FL
Ms. Krafi stated that she paid $1,039 for water in 2009. Throughout 201 0 her annual bills
totaled $1,077 and she has paid $342 so far in 201 I . It should be noted these costs are for
both water and sewer service, not just water.
Christopher Ruiz - I1 124 Tamarix Avenue, Port Richey, FL
Mr. Ruiz raised an issue regarding AUF’s boil water notices. A review of his account
shows that calls were made to AUF in November 2010 and on May 19,2011. In
November 2010, boil water notices issued to customers and a Swift Reach phone
campaign was also initiated for a planned outage for valve replacementa. On May 19,
201 1, boil water notices were distributed to all customers and rescinded on May 21,
2011.
Lvnda Wittkonn - 10531 Azalea Drive, Port Richey, FL
Ms. Wittkopp commented on the water rates and that she uses bottled water. A review of
her account shows that her average bill is approximately $56 per month and there have
been no water quality or service calls since 2009.
Mike Rock - 7430 Rhineback Driye, Port Richey, FL
Mr. Rock attended the October 20,201 0 customer meeting that was held in New Port
Richey. At that time, and again at the PSC Agenda Conference, Mr. Rock inquired as to
damage caused due to flooding.
As reported to the PSC after the October customer meeting, on September 13,2010,
Pasco County Utilities hit and broke AUF’s 2” line at this address. The County notified
AUF and AUF’s technician was dispatched. The County fixed the leak and made
restoration based on this leak in all areas that were appropriate.
AUF received a Sunshine State One Call document concerning this line break on
September 15,2010. The County commenced the storm water pipe replacement on
September 13, 2010, which was two days before AUF received the request for the line
5
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actiondcustorner comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000050 of 000051
locate. When the AUF service technician arrived to locate and mark the water lines,
Pasco County was already in the process of digging the ground for the storm pipe
replacement. Again, this was two days prior to AUF receiving the One Call request to
locate the line.
Harold Todd - 783 1 Judith Crescent, Port Richey, FL
Mr. Todd commented on an issue relating to his granddaughter’s service. At the heating,
however, he did not mention the customer’s name or address. On June 15,2010, AUF
contacted Mr. Todd’s granddaughter and she did not have any current water quality
concerns. AUF also asked the granddaughter about the incident referenced by Mr. Todd
and the granddaughter did not have details and expressed no concern about past water
quality problems.
Marie Skelton - 9438 US 19 #235, Port Richey, FL
Ms. Skelton raised an issue concerning a 2010 backbill as a result of zero usage on the
account beginning in May 2009. There was a meter exchange in October 2009 and Ms.
Skelton did receive a backbill. However, in accordance with Florida law, Ms. Skelton
was not billed for more than 365 days of service. It should be noted that the balance on
the account after the revised bill was $200.05.
Ms. Skelton did write to AUF regarding complaints with her Zipcheck bill payments and
AUF responded to Ms.Skelton’s letter and resolved the issue. The account was abated
$3.20 for the Zipcheck fee. After the customer contacted AUF, AUF reviewed her bill
and confirmed that Ms. Skelton was billed at the appropriate rates. AUF does not have a
record of Ms. Skelton contacting the Company in 2009 about the meter readings.
Diane Manzo - 7932 Lotus Drive, Port Richey, FL
Ms. Manzo attended the October 20,2010 customer meeting in New Port Richey. At
that time, and again at the PSC Agenda Conference, Ms. Manzo discussed her usage
variations. As reported to the PSC after the October customer meeting, a review of her
usage from January 2009 through November 2010 confirms that her usage has remained
relatively constant except for a few months when usage went up. Ms. Manzo asserted
that AUF bills in 1,000 gallon increments and stated that she should not be charged for
2,000 gallons if she only uses 1,010 gallons. Ms. Manzo is incorrect. AUF bills in 100
(@ 1,000) gallon increments.
6
Docket No. 100330-WS
Compilation of AUF actionslcustomer comments
Exhibit SC-1, Page 000051 of 000051
Lesley Marano - 7915 Foxbloom, Port Richey, FL
Ms. Marano raised a question regarding a collection issue and claimed that she was told
that it would be okay to pay the balance on Friday but her service was terminated on
Wednesday. She also discussed a broken pipe in the backyard that she asserts that it
took four days to repair Ms. Marano did not provide an address, but AUF believes that it
has identified her account. On November 15,201 0 a notice was sent concerning a past
due balance. The customer did call for payment requirements and did make a payment
on Wednesday, November 17,2010, and another payment on Friday, November 19,
201 0. A review of the account, however, does not indicate that service was shut off for
non-payment on Wednesday, November 17,2010. Records do show that the customer
called about no water on Wednesday, November 17,2010. On November 17,2010 there
was an outage on the Palm Terrace system due to a broken valve. This was an
emergency shut down and water was restored the same day. Although Ms.Marano was
without service for a portion of the day on November 17,2010, it was not due to
termination for nonpayment; rather, it was due to an outage in the area at the time.
In May, 20 10 there was a broken pipe at the address and a claim was paid to the customer
for a broken water heater.
I
7
Docket No. 100330-WS
responses/issues from AF System customers
AUF
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000001 of 000027
Holland & Knight
315 swm Calhoun Street, S u b 600 ] Tallahassee. FL 32301
Holland B Knight U P I WWW M B W CCm
REcEIVED--FpSC
1 T 850 2247000 I F 850 224 8832
11 Rf‘R 28
PR
33
COMMISSION
D. BNat May, Jr.
(850)425-5607
bruat.may@hklaw.com
CLERK
April 28,2011
Via Hand Delivery
Ann Cole
Commission Clerk
Florida Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Betty Easley Conference Center, Room 110
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850
Re:
In Re: Applicationfor increase in water and wastewater rates in Aluchua,
Brevard, DeSoto, Highlands, Lake, Lee, Marion, Orange, Palm Beach, Pasco,
Polk Putnam, Seminole, Sumter, Volusia, and Washington Counties by Aqua
Utilities Florida, Inc., Docket No. 100330-WS
Dear Ms. Cole:
On behalf of Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. (“AUF”), enclosed for filing are the original and
seven (7) copies of A m ’ s Response to YES Companies, LLC d/b/a Arredondo Fanns’
Memorandum in Opposition to Rate Increase Application.
Please acknowledge receipt of this filing by stamping the extra copy of this letter “filed”
and returning the copy to me. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
DBM:kjg
Enclosures
Arlanla j Bethesda I Boston I Chicago I FORLauderdale 1 Jacksonville Lakeland I Los Angeles I Miami 1 Naw York
Nonhern Virginia I Orlando I Portland I San Francisco I Tallahassee [Tampa 1 Washington, D.C.I West Palm Beach
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issuesfrom AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2,Page 000002 of 000027
Ann Cole
April 28,201 1
Page 2
cc:
Caroline Klancke
Ralph Jaeger
Patricia Christensen
Kenneth Curtin
Kelly Sullivan
Kim Joyce
Troy Rendell
I 10306234-v I
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000003 of 000027
BEFORE THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
In Re: Application for increase in water and
wastewater rates in Alachua, Brevard, DeSoto,
Highlands, Lake, Lee, Marion, Orange,
Palm Beach, Pasco, Polk, Putnam,
Seminole, Sumter, Volusia, and Washington
Counties by Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
)
)
DOCKETNO. 100330-WS
1
DATED: April 28,201 1
AQUA UTILITIES FLORIDA, INC.’S RESPONSE TO YES
COMPANIES, LLC D/B/A ARREDOIWO FARMS’ MEMORANDUM
IN OPPOSITION TO RATE INCREASE APPLICATION
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. (“AUF”), by and through undersigned counsel, files its
Response to the Memorandum In Opposition to AUF‘s Rate Increase Application filed by YES
Companies, LLC D/B/A Arredondo Farms (“YES”) on April 11,201 1. YES’ memorandum is a
compilation of sensationalized allegations that overlook the facts and the law and obscure the
good quality of service at AUF’s Arredondo Farms Water and Wastewater Systems (“Systems”).
YES’ arguments to deny or carve itself out of the rate case are without merit. To set the record
straight, AUF states:
I.
Overview of the Arredondo Farms Water and Wastewater Systems.
The Systems are located in Alachua County, Florida and currently serve approximately
343 water customers and 328 wastewater customers. Water is provided from two 6-inch wells
that were drilled approximately 150 feet deep and have a casing length of 66 feet. Wastewater
service is provided by a 60,000 gallon per day extended aeration wastewater treatment plant.
All 343 water and 328 wastewater customers served by the Arredondo Farms water and
wastewater systems reside in mobile homes located in the Arredondo Farms mobile home park
owned by YES. YES acquired the mobile home park on or about January 18,2008.
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000004of 000027
The Arredondo Farms water and wastewater systems were originally owned by
Arredondo Utility Corporation (“AUC”).
After the Commission gained jurisdiction over
investor-owned water and wastewater systems in Alachua County in June of 1992, AUC was
granted a grandfather certificate. See Order No. PSC-92-1454-FOF-WS (Dec. 15, 1992). AUC
thereafter applied for and received a staff-assisted rate case wherein rates were set. See Order
No. PSC-93-0509-FOF-WS (Apr. 5 , 1993). In 1996, AUC applied for and received another
staff-assisted rate case wherein new rates were set. See Order No. PSC-96-0728-FOF-WS
(May 30, 1996).
In March of 1999, the Commission approved the transfer of majority organizational
control of AUC to AquaSaurce Utility, Inc. Order No. PSC-01-0631-FOF-WU (Mar. 14,2001).
AUF’s parent acquired the Arredondo Farms Systems in 2003 when it acquired the stock of
AquaSource Utility, Inc.’ In 2006, the Commission authorized AUC to operate under the
fictitious name of Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. In 2008, AUF applied for and received a water and
wastewater rate increase from the Commission which included the Arredondo Farms Systems.
See Order No. PSC-09-0385-FOF-WS (May 29,2009).
11.
The Legal Standard for Rate Increases.
YES’ memorandum misrepresents the legal standard for rate increases by ignoring
Florida’s extensive jurisprudence on a public utility’s entitlement ”to an opportunity to earn a
fair or reasonable rate of return on its invested capital.” United Tel. Co. of Flu. v. Mum, 403 So.
2d 962, 966 (Fla. 1981) (citing Gulfpower Co v. Bevis, 289 So. 2d 401 (Fla. 1974)). Indeed,
“[tlhe cases universally hold that utility rates, when adopted, must be adequate to produce a
reasonable return on capital investment and to meet operating expenses.” ViIluge of Vu. Gurdenr
’ The Commission’s approval ofthe acquisition is addressed in Order No. PSC-03-0163-FOF-WSweb. 3,2003).
2
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responseslissues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000005 of 000027
v. Haven Water Co., 91 So. 2d, 181, 183 (Fla. 1956) (collecting cases). As m e r explained by
the Florida Supreme Court:
A fair rate of return is for the benefit of the utility’s investors. GulfPaver Co. v.
Bevis, 296 So.2d 482 (Fla.1974). This amount “should be sufficient to assure
confidence in the financial integrity of the enterprise, so as to maintain credit and
to attract capital.” Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co., 320 U S .
591, 603.64 S . Ct. 281,288,88 L.Ed.333 (1944); see also Bluefield Waterworks
& Improvement Co. v. Public Service Commission, 262 U S . 679, 43 S. Ct. 675,
67 L.Ed. 1176 (1923). Therefore the purpose of establishing a fair or reasonable
rate of return is to “fairly compensate investors for the risks they have
assumed....” Permian Basin Area Rate Cases, 390 US. 747, 792, 88 S. Ct. 1344,
1373,20 L.Ed.2d 312 (1968).
e
Mann, 403 So. 2d at 966. Therefore, refusal to grant a public utility a reasonable rate of return
on its investment would be “confiscatory.” Keysfone Water Co., Inc. v. Eevis, 278 So. 2d 606,
609 (Fla. 1973); see also, N.Flu. Water Co. v. City of Marianna, 235 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 1970).
YES also fails to mention the due process protections that are afforded to a utility in a
proceeding where compensatory rates are to be set. See City of Miami v Flu. Pub. S e n .
Comm‘n, 226 So. 2d 217, 224 (Fla. 1969) (The determination of whether a public utility is
receiving fair and reasonable returns “should be made in accordance with due process of law and
in keeping with recognized rules of trial or administrative hearing procedure and practice. In
such cases, neither the Commission nor the courts should countenance any harassment of the
public utility or the making of it a ‘whipping boy’ for political or other extraneous purposes.”).
As YES acknowledges, in fixing rates that are ”just, reasonable, compensatory, and not
unfairly discriminatory,” the Commission is to consider among other things the “value and
quality of the service and the cost of providing the service.”
9 367.081(2)(a)(l), Fla. Stat.
However, Y E S attempts to heighten this standard by reference to unique utility cases involving
3
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000006 of 000027
instances of criminal mismanagement or gross neglect which are not remotely at issue here?
YES suggests that because rates were reduced or not increased due to the extreme and inapposite
facts in those unique cases, the Commission should exercise that same authority here. YES’ logic
is flawed. A review of the cases cited by YES demonstrates their inapplicability.
For instance, in Guy Power Company v. Wilson, 597 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 1992), the
Commission temporarily reduced an electric utility’s return on equity (“ROE”) after fmding
criminally cormpt practices and gross mismanagement which “reflect[ed] a disregard for the
ratepayers and public service.” fd. at 272 (quoting Commission’s fmdmgs). These practices
included “theft of company property, use of company employees on company time to perform
services for management personnel, utility executives accepting appliances without payment, and
political contributions made by third parties and charged back to” the utility. Id. Accordingly,
the Commission penalized the utility by imposing a penalty of 50 basis points on its ROE “as a
message to management” to stop its misconduct. Id. Notably, even under these extreme
circumstances (which are certainly not present here), the Commission still approved a rate
increase and only imposed the ROE penalty for a temporary two-year period.’
* To be sure, “[ilf the commission fmds that a utility has failed to provide its customen with water or wastewater
service that meets the standards promulgated by the Depamnent of Environmental Protection or the water
management districts, the commission may reduce the.utility’s return on equity until the standards are met.” $
367.111(2), Fla. Stat. But those are not the facts here.
In implementing its authority to reduce a utility’s return on equity the Commission has been careful to limit such
reductions to situatioy where the utility has flagrantly disregarded. the Commission’s rules and charged
unauthorized rates, see Order No. PSC-03-0699-SU (lune 9,2003); ignored Staffs request for information, see id.;
or repeatedly violated FDEP regulations, see Order No. PSC-98-0763-FOF-SU (June 3, 1998) (ROEreduced by 100
basis points for poor qualify of service and mismanagement, where the utility had not had a single satisfactory field
inspection by either FDEP or the Health Department, had received numerous warning letters, failed to perform
timely after entering into consent agreements with FDEP, and incurred fmes and possible penalties in excess of the
value of the utilities planned). There is no evidence in this case, and indeed no claim, that AUF has flagrantly
disregarded the Commission’s rules, charged unauthorized rates, ignored staffs requests for information, or
repeatedly violated FDEP requirements. Indeed, AUF has shown a commitment to taking actions beyond that
required by law as described below.
4
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000007 of 000027
Similarly, in North Florida Water Company v Bevis, 302 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1974), the
Court affirmed the Commission’s denial of a rate increase where the Commission had
determined that (i) the utility’s system was plagued by “insufficient past maintenance,” (ii) the
utility’s system “leak[ed] like a sieve,” and (iii) the utility’s meter program was “virtually nonexisten[t].” See Order No. 5853 (Sept. 14, 1973). In so ruling, the Court agreed that the public
should not be compelled to pay increased rates due to egregious inefficiencies resulting from the
utility’s total neglect of the system. 302 So. 2d at 129-130. None of those extreme facts are
present here.
Likewise, the adminisuative order in Island Services Inc. v. Florida Public Service
Commission, DOAH Case No. 80-1 176 (Aug. 6, 1980), involved other issues far beyond what is
presented here. See also, Order No. 9773 (Jan. 29, 1981) (adopting administrative order). In
Island Services, it was found that the system was not properly maintained, there were frequent
periods of very low water pressure, customers were unable to contact the utility when outages
occurred after business hours because no emergency phone number was provided, and that tests
by the Department of Environmental Regulation demonstrated inadequate chlorine residuals
which would require further monitoring. Id. at 15. The request for the rate increase was further
complicated by the fact that there was no basis on which to determine the utility’s investment.
Id. at 16.
YES’ citation to the Commission order in In Re‘ Applicafion of Palm Cops? Utiliry
Corporation, Order No. 10463 (Dec. 18, 1981), is no more helpful. In that instance, the
Commission granted a rate increase for all customers except for eight single-family residences
and one duplex where, for those limited customers, water was found to have an “excessive
chlorine taste, offensive odor, and high sodium content.” Id at 30. In so ruling, the Commission
5
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2. Page 000008 of 000027
found that it was “undisputed” that the quality of water provided to the eight single family
residences and the duplex was “of a lesser quality than that received by the main body of
customers
. . . , especially
when the factors of taste and odor are considered.” id. This
notwithstanding, the Commission conditionally granted a rate increase to that small group of
customers once their quality of water was elevated to the quality received by the utility’s main
body of customers. There is nothing here to suggest that AUF is failing to meet the minimal
water quality standards which were not being met in that case. In fact, as is explained below,
empirical water quality test results demonstrate that the quality of water supplied at the
Arredondo Farms System is good. Moreover, the aesthetic quality of the water at Arredondo
Farms actually exceeds the aesthetic standards of other systems that are included as part of the
first phase of AUF’s secondarylaesthetic water quality initiative.
For these reasons, and for all the reasons set forth below, the cases cited by YES are in no
way comparable to the facts at issue here.
111.
The Value and Quality of AUF’s Water Service are Good.
As prescribed by rule, when determining the quality of service provided by a utility, the
Commission shall make this determination based on an evaluation of three separate components
of water and wastewater utility operations:
(i)
Quality of the utility’s product (water and wastewater);
(ii)
Operational condition of the utility’s plant and facilities; and
(iii)
The utility’s attemot to address customer satisfaction.
Rule 25-30.433(1), Fla. Admin. Code. As demonstrated below, the quality of AUF’s water and
wastewater product at the Arredondo Farms Systems is good, as is the operational condition of
those Systems. Furthermore, AUF has made, and continues to make, concerted attempts to
address customer satisfaction at the Arredondo Farms Systems.
6
Docket No. 100330-WS
responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2. Page 000009 of 000027
AUF
A. The Quality of Water Service is Good.
YES’ memorandum is conspicuously silent as to the facts that the Arredondo Farms
Water System is current in all of the required chemical analyses and that there are no outstanding
enforcement issues. Indeed, YES’ memorandum completely ignores empirical test results which
demonstrate that the quality of water supplied at the k e d o n d o Farms system is good.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations set enforceable Maximum Contaminant Levels (“MCLs”) for drinking water to
protect the public fiom contaminants that might present some risk to human health. An MCL is
the maximum allowable amount of a contaminant in drinking water which is delivered to the
consumer. EPA National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations set non-mandatory Secondary
Maximum Contaminant Levels (“SMCLs”) for 15 other contaminants based on aesthetic
considerations such as taste, color and odor. EPA does not enforce these SMCLs. They are
established as guidelines to assist public water suppliers in managing their drinking water
systems. These contaminants are not considered to present a risk to human health at or below the
SMCL. There is no SMCL for hardness. There is a SMCL for total dissolved solids (TDS) at 500
m g L based largely on taste when the TDS is comprised mainly of salt (sodium and chloride).
AUF is required to regularly monitor for primary and secondary standards. Since AUF
acquired the Arredondo Farms Water System in 2003, the System has provided water meeting J
d
primary and secondary federal and state drinking water standards. See, e g.,AUF’s Responses to
YES’ First Request for Production of Documents Nos. 1, 2 and 8. The TDS of the water at
Arredondo Farms is 306 mgL, well below the SMCL. Neither sodium nor chloride are
significant components of the TDS in the water at Arredondo Farms. The hardness of the water
7
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000010 of 000027
in Arredondo Farms is around 320 mg/L as calcium carbonate. This is hard water, but not
exceptionally hard for Florida Contrary to the claims by YES, hard water does not contribute to
corrosion and, in fact, protects against corrosion of household plumbing. For example, the most
common indicator of corrosivity of water is the Langelier Index (or Saturation Index, SI). Water
with a positive SI (like the water at the Arredondo Farms System) has a tendency to deposit a
protective layer of calcium carbonate and other minerals that inhibit corrosion of metal pipe and
plumbing fixtures. Water with a negative SI has a tendency to dissolve calcium carbonate and
other metallic oxides and complexes that form on the metal surfaces, exposing the metal surface
to corrosion!
The Commission has consistently recognized that it is not unusual for Florida water
utilities to experience water “hardness” issues, and the Commission has
actions against utilities that
not taken punitive
Indeed, in the 1996 rate case involving the Arredondo Farms
Systems (which were then owned by AUC), the Commission expressly found that, while the
water at the system was hard, it did
present a health hazard. See Order No. PSC-96-0728-
FOF-WS at 2-3. The Commission went on to conclude that the “treated water provided by
Arredondo meets or exceeds all requirements for safe drinking water” and that the utility had
satisfactory water quality. Id. The Commission also warned that a system-level solution to the
“hard” water issue at Arredondo would
be cost-effective or prudent:
Those customers who attended the customer meeting were
primarily concerned about mineral deposits on their kitchen and
bath fixtures. This situation is generally treatable by lime
softening. However, the cost to install lime softening equipment is
from approximately $80,000 to $140,000 for each of the two water
treatment plants. This cost would be passed on to the customers
through their rates. We find that this solution would not be cost
‘Vernon Snoeyink & David Jenkins, WaferCbemrstry 289 (1980).
’See, e.g. Order No. PSC-00-2054-PAA-WS (Oct. 27,2000), Order No. PSC-96-0728-FOF-WS (May 30, 1996),
Order No. PSC-93-0027-FOF-WS (Jan. 5, 1993).
8
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000011 of 000027
effective or prudent for this customer base. We note that
customers who find the scaling problem to be intolerable have
other options. They could either have a local water softening
company install a water softening unit at a variable price, or they
could purchase a whole house filter system for less than $50.00.
Filter cartridges are replaced as necessary and can be purchased to
screen for a variance of compounds, including excessive minerals.
. . . All thinas considered. we find that the utility’s auality of
service is satisfactory.
Id at 3 (emphasis added)
Although the Commission has previously warned that a system-level solution to the
“hard” water issue would not be cost-effective or prudent, the record should be made clear that
that AUF continues to try to actively address its customers’ concerns regarding hard water.
AUF’s service technicians are trained to routinely advise customers that the effects of hard water
can be mitigated by a variety of household products or by homeowners softening their water.
Furthermore, for customers who consider obtaining water softeners, AUF recommends softening
only the hot water to maximize benefits and minimize the cost of softening. AUF also regularly
includes written materials in customers’ bills that explain how to mitigate the effects of hard
water. As described below, AUF’s efforts to address hard water concerns have not stopped
there.
Hard water is an aesthetic water quality issue, and AUF is proud of its proactive
programs in Florida to address aesthetic quality. As the Commission knows, in early 2009, AUF
evaluated several of its water systems as candidates for investigation for improvements to
address
secondary (aesthetic) water quality parameters. The Arredondo Farms Water System
was one of the systems considered based solely on the relative hardness of the water. There was
no other primary or secondary water quality issue with the water at Arredondo Farms. AUF
worked with the Commission and the Office of Public Counsel (“OPC”) to determine which
9
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000012 of 000027
systems would be targeted in the first phase of the secondary water quality projects and which
would be targeted for subsequent phases. Ultimately, priority was given to systems with SMCL
exceedances for taste and odor (due mainly to hydrogen sulfide), iron or manganese, especially
where a system could have issues with primary drinking water standards. Because the
Arredondo Farms Water System had no SMCL exceedances and no issues related to primary
standards, it was placed in the next tier of systems to be addressed in the second phase of AUF’s
aesthetic water quality program.6 System-level alternatives to address the hardness at Arrcdondo
Farms are being evaluated and will be presented as soon as the first phase projects have been
completed.
Some of the options being internally evaluated at this time include adding a
sequestering agent, similar to those recently added to the Tangerine and Zephyr Shores water
systems during the first phase of the secondary water quality project. AUF’s ultimate goal is to
find a balanced solution that will maximize benefits to customers and minimize upward pressure
on rates.
B. The Quality of Wastewater Service is Good.
YES’ memorandum completely ignores undisputed facts showing that AUF provides
good quality of wastewater service at Arredondo Farms. First, YES completely ignores the fact
that the Arredondo Farms Wastewater Treatment Facility (“WWTF”) is currently operating in
accordance with all applicable environmental standards, and there are no outstanding
enforcement issues. Second, YES fails to mention that, subsequent to AUF’s last rate case, AUF
has made significant upgrades to the WWTF which were completed and placed into service in
August 2010 at a cost of $291,870.’ (In addition, it should be noted that during the construction
In addition to the Arredondo Farms Water System, AUF has also preliminarily included Hermit’s Cove, River
Grove and Arredondo Estates in the second phase of its aesthetic water quality program.
The factual details and the costs associated with the WWTF upgrade are set forth in AUF’s Sixth Supplemental
Response to StafPs Second Data Request dated February 28,2011.
’
10
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responseslissues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000013 of 000027
of the WWTF upgrade, AUF’s contractor advised the potential development of a sinkhole, AUF
hired Devoe Engineering to perform a site assessment and the sinkhole was stabilized. However,
another sinkhole developed, which AUF stabilized at a cost of $47,137,)FDEP issued a
clearance letter regarding this project on August 27, 2010. Third, YES ignores that AUF has
completed a pond rehabilitation project at the Arredondo WWTF to improve percolation rates.
This project was completed inNovember 2010 at a cost of $127,765.
Finally, AUF continues to incur substantial operational costs at the Arredondo
Wastewater System because of fats, oils, grease and other materials disposed of in the sewer
system by customers who are tenants of YES. AUF has been working with YES to address
some of these wastewater issues, and AUF appreciates YES’ cooperation in taking these steps to
mitigate the wastewater rate increase.
Clearly, AUF’s actions demonstrate that it offers good quality wastewater service at
Arredondo Farms and is committed to maintaining that good quality of service going forward.
C.
The Quality of A m ’ s Billing Services is Good.
YES claims that AUF has poor billing practices, which YES blames on AUF’s water
meters. See YES’ memorandum at 13. AUF strongly disagrees with YES’ claims about billing
errors. There simply is. no evidence to suggest that A m ’ s meters are causing billing errors.
Such claims ring particularly hollow when one reflects on the fact that the Commission recently
affirmed the accuracy of AUF’s meters based on an independent meter audit conducted by staff,
which audit included random sampling of meters at Arredondo Farms. The Commission
expressly found that:
Our staff has randomly sampled 358 meter readings taken by AUF
and compared those readings to a corresponding set of meter
readings taken by Commission staff. Of these 358 meter readings
taken by AUF, none were found to be significantly different from
11
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000014 of 000027
the meter readings taken by our staff. Therefore, we find that no
further testing of AUF’s meter reading accuracy is necessary.
Order No. PSC-10-0297-PAA-WS (May 10,2010).
Furthermore, YES’ unfounded claims of metering deficiencies ignore AUF’s proactive
efforts to address the metering issues in the Arredondo Farms area that existed prior to AUF
acquiring the Systems. For example, in the 1996 rate case involving the Arredondo Farms
Systems, customers had expressed concern that the prior owner
- AUC - had an inconsistent
policy of meter reading. At that time, AUC explained that when meters were not read it was
“because those meters are within fenced yards where the gate is locked, or the yards contained
unrestrained dogs, or there is too much debris covering the meter.” Order No. PSC-96-0728-
FOF-WS at 4. AUF has proactively addressed this issue by installing radio frequency (“RF”)
meters as a consistent, cost-effective, and accurate means to measure and bill for water service.
On page 14 of its memorandum, YES makes reference to seven customers who have
received backbills, and erroneously claims that those isolated instances reflect systemic billing
problems. That simply is not true. As will be explained in detail below, YES overlooks the fact
that AUF’s backbilling practices comport with the Commission’s rules and its Commissionapproved Tariff. Furthermore, the customer scenarios which YES cites are not indicative of
chronic billing problems, but rather reflect routine billing challenges that can arise where there is
damage to metering equipment, repeated “move4ndmove-outs” and customer billing address
changes. Each of the seven customer scenarios referenced in YES’ memorandum is addressed
and explained in Exhibit “A”.
1. AUF’s Policy for Billing for Past Usage Complies with Commission Rules,
The Commission’s rules expressly authorize AUF to backbill customers:
12
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responseslissues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000015 of 000027
A utility may not backbill customers for any period greater than 12
months for any undercharge in billing which is the result of the
utility’s mistake. The utility shall allow the customer to pay for the
unbilled service over the same time period as the time period
during which the underbilling occurred or some other mutually
agreeable time period. The utility shall not recover in a ratemaking
proceeding, any lost revenues which inure to the utility’s detriment
on account of this provision.
Rule 25-30.350, Fla. Admin. Code. Rule 25-30.350 is virtually identical to the Commission’s
rules that authorize backbilling by electric utilities
Code:
and by natural gas utilities
- Rule 25-6.106, Florida Administrative
- Rule 25-7.0851, Florida
Administrative Code. AUF’s
backbilling practices also comply with Rule 25-30.350 and with Sections 23, 24 and 30 of its
Commission-approved Tariff.
Both Rule 25-30.350 and AUF’s approved Tariff allow AUF to backbill for up to 365
days. Thus, when AUF revises a bill to send to a customer to account for services used but not
previously billed, the bill will be calculated based on the total amount of usage measured through
the meter for the total time that service was received. If this time frame is longer than 365 days,
AUF’s policy is to include an adjustment on the bill that will credit the customer for usage
beyond the 365 day look-back period. AUF’s practice is designed to ensure that the backbilled
period does not exceed 12 months. Furthermore, A m ’ s policy is to allow the customer to pay
the backbill over the same time period in which the underbilling occivred or some other mutually
agreeable time.
While AUF strives for perfection in its billing processes, it would be disingenuous to
suggest that mechanical and human errors do not occur. The Commission has recognized this
potential for billing mistakes as so have the courts. As set forth above, the Commission’s rules
The Commission’s rules concerning backbilling by electric utilities also authorize a utility to backbill for “up to
four (4) years if the backbilling is necessary due to errors of an electrical contractor.’’ See, R. 25-6.103(7), Fla.
Admin. Code.
13
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000016 of 000027
clearly recognize that, from time to time, billing mistakes will be made which will require the
utility to backbill customers for service that was provided and used but was not captured in the
normal monthly bill. The rationale for backbilling was clearly set forth in Corporation de
Gesrion Ste-Foy, Inc. v. Fla. Power & Light, 385 SO. 2d 124 (Fla. 31d DCA 1980). There the
court found that a public utility “is not only permitted but is required to collect undercharges
from established rates, whether they result from its own negligence, or even from a specific
contractual undertaking to charge a lower amount.” Id at 126.
The court explained that it
would be improper for a utility to give preferential treatment or to charge one customer less than
another customer for the same service. Id
The Florida Supreme Court later endorsed this
principle when it expressly upheld the right of a water utility to backbill for water undercharges.
Jacksonville Elec. Auth. v. Draper‘s Egg & Poultry Co., 5-57 So. 2d 1357 (Fla. 1990).
In similar fashion, the Commission has expressly recognized the right of a water and
wastewater utility to backbill customers pursuant to Rule 25-30.350. See, e.g., Order No. PSC94-0210-FOF-WS (Feb. 24, 1994); Order No. PSC-94-0501-FOF-WU (Apr. 27, 1994).
Furthermore, the Commission has clearly explained the reason why a utility is entitled to
backbill as follows: “regardless of whether the utility was aware of the connection or not, the
customer has received service for which it has not paid.” Order No. PSC-94-0210-FOF-WS.
In the water and wastewater industry the need to backbill is not uncommon and can
happen for a variety of reasons. Some examples of these circumstances are as follows:
The Damaged ERT
Where the electronic radio transmitter (“ERT’) component of an RF meter is damaged
(e.g., by weather event or vandalism) the meter reads will be captured but not transmitted, and
thus the customer will be billed only for the relevant base facility charge. When this “no
14
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responseshssues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000017 of 000027
consumption” issue’ is detected and the ERT is repaired, AUF’s billing system will retrieve the
actual read for the consumption and will backbill the customer for the full services provided over
the period that the customer was undercharged but not longer than 365 days. This is in strict
accordance with the Commission’s backbilling rule - Rule 25-30.350. Under AUF’s policy, the
new bill should spread the total usage over the period of months that the customer was
undercharged based on the appropriate rate tier. Furthermore, AUF’s policy is to allow the
customer to pay the backbill over the same time period in which the underbilling occurred or
over some other mutually agreeable time.
Repetitive Billing Address Changes and Move-InsMove-Outs
A customer’s repetitive changes in his or her billing address can also result in the
customer “missing” bills which, in turn, requires the utility to backbill for services rendered but
not paid for by the customer. In addition, the potential for billing issues may increase where a
customer rmeatedly moves in and out of AUF’s billing system which causes constant changes in
the customer account database. If an underbilling is detected in these scenarios, AUF’s policy is
to backbill the customer for the services provided over the period that the customer was
undercharged but not longer than 365 days. Under AUF’s policy the new bill should spread the
total usage over the period of months that the customer was undercharged based on the
appropriate rate tier. Furthermore, AUF’s policy is to allow the customer to pay the backbill
over the same time period in which the underbilling occurred or over some other mutually
agreeable time.
’YES insinuates that AUF should automatically hear a bill with “no consumption” as problem needing immediate
ancnrron ‘Char simply is not the case. YES fails to understand that. due to the seasonal nature of many ofFlorida’s
resident,, if is not unusu3I during many months ofthe year for a bill to have only a basc facility charge, and no usage
charges (i e., “no consumption”)
15
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000018 of 000027
2. YES’ Cherry Picking Argument Should be Rejected.
Since AUF’s last rate case in Docket No. 080121-WS, AUF has issued over 12,300 bills
to customers in Arredondo Farms. YES lists 7 of those customer bills and attempts to argue that
those bills show systemic billing problems. YES’ argument is classic ‘‘cherry picking” and
reflects the fallacy of incomplete evidence. As the Commission and the Courts have recognized,
billing mistakes will occur in the ordinary course of a utility’s business, and those mistakes may
require the utility to backbill customers for service that was provided and used but was not
captured in the normal monthly bill. As discussed above, such billing mistakes sometimes occur
where there is damage to an ERT or a meter, where customers repeatedly move in and out of the
billing system, and where the customer repeatedly changes his or her billing address. Of those 7
customer bills listed by YES: 4 involved backbills because of a damaged ERT or a replaced
meter; 2 involved backbills because of move-indmove-outs; and 1 involved a backbill because
of repeated changes in the customer’s billing address. Simply put, the 7 customer scenarios
listed in YES’ memorandum all involved isolated billing mistakes that, despite AUF’s best
practices, occur in the ordinary course of a utility’s business. None reflect chronic or systemic
billing problems. Each of the 7 customer billing scenarios listed by YES are addressed and
explained in Exhibit “By’.’’
Furthermore, as shown in Exhibit “A”, AUF has made a concerted
effort to address each of these customer’s concerns.
D.
AUF Has Designed Rates Specifically to Address Affordability.
YES claims that AUF’s proposed rates are unjust, unreasonable and unaffordable. Those
claims are without merit.
As explained above, AUF is entitled to rates that allow it the
lo The exhibits to YES’ memorandum make passing reference to five (5) other customers who have expressed
concerns with respect to the level of bills that did not relate to backbilling. Each of those customer scenarios
addressed and explained in Exhibit “B”. Furthermore, as shown in Exhibit “B”, AUF has made a concerted effort
to address each ofthese customer’sconcerns.
16
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000019 of 000027
opportunity to earn a reasonable return on its prudent capital investment and to recover its
reasonable operating expenses. To ensure that its rates are affordable, AUF has requested that
the Commission approve a statewide uniform rate structure which, if approved, would actually
decrease water rates for customers in Arredondo Farms. While those customers would see a
modest increase in wastewater rates, that increase is directly attributable to the substantial
investments made by AUF to upgrade the Arredondo Farms WWTF. See Section 1II.C. above.
The Commission has already allowed electric and natural gas utilities to implement uniform rates
to address affordability concerns. Moreover, the Florida First District Court of Appeal (“1”
DCA”) has made it clear that there are no legal impediments to the Commission adopting a
similar uniform rate structure for multi-system water and wastewater utilities like AUF. See S.
Stares Urils. Y. Fla. Pub. Sew. Cornrn’n., 714 So. 2d 1046 @la. 1“DCA 1998). In fact, the court
recognized that uniform rates for water and wastewater utilities can enhance affordability for all
customers by providing bona fide cost savings “due to a reduction in accounting, data processing
and administrative expenses.” Id, at 1052 (quoting Order NO. PSC-93-1480-FOF-WS (Oct. 11,
1993)).”
Finally, YES’ attempt to compare A m ’ s proposed rates to rates of Gainesville Regional
Utilities is baseless and contrary to Commission precedent. The Commission has expressly
rejected a similar attempt by OPC to compare an investor-owned water utility’s rates to rates of a
municipally-owned utility:
A valid comparison would take into account all differences and
similarities of the utilities whose rates were being compared. One
example of a major consideration is the type of ownership. The
rates of a municipally-owned utility may vary greatly from those of
’I The 1“ DCA also recognized that the Commission has set uniform rates in several other cases involving multiple
water and wastewater systems. 714 So. 2d at 1052 (citing Order No. PSC-93-1092-FOF-WU(July 27, 1993); Order
No. 23592 (Oct. 9, 1990); Order No. 14506 (June 26, 1985): Order No I1507 (Jan. 13, 1983)).
17
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2. Page 000020 of 000027
an investor-owned utility. For instance, municipally-owned utilities
generally have lower costs of debt and often subsidize their water
and sewer systems through taxation. On the other hand, investorowned utilities are required to pay property and income taxes.
These utilities usually have a much higher cost of debt because
they do not have the same access to federal and state funds as do
municipalities. Other components that may impact on the cost and
pricing of water and sewer service include the number of
customers served and the age of the plant.
The Commission has previously addressed this issue. For example,
by Order No. 4137, the Commission found that rate comparisons
are without value as a measure of reasonableness in fixing
telephone rates within a specific area and for a particular utility.
The Commission observed in that case that if such comparisons
were a valid test of reasonableness, there would be only one rate
for a given service throughout the jurisdictioa, regardless of the
utility involved or the operating conditions encountered. We
therefore find that, based on the record, the rate comparison
proposed by Public Counsel is irrelevant to our disposition of this
rate case.
Order No. 20066 (Sept. 26,1988).
IV.
Conclusion.
The Commission should not be misled by YES’ sensationalized allegations, which
overlook key facts and legal precedent. The Commission has previously found the quality of
service at the Arredondo Farms Water and Wastewater Systems to be satisfactory. Order No.
PSC-96-0728-FOF-WS, supra. Since that time, the facts show that the service quality has
improved. With respect to Arredondo Farms Water System, the undisputed facts show that since
AUF acquired the system in 2003, the water has met all primary and secondary federal and state
drinking water standards, and there are no outstanding environmental enforcement issues.
Similarly, AUF has made substantial improvements to the Arredondo Farms Wastewater System,
which is currently operating in accordance with all applicable environmental standards and there
are no outstanding enforcement issues. Furthermore, there is nothing wrong with the quality of
AUF’s billing services. The Commission has recently affirmed the accuracy of AUF‘s meters
18
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responseslissues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000021 of 000027
based upon an independent meter audit conducted by staff. Moreover, AUF’s backbilling
practices are entirely consistent with its approved Tariff, the Commission’s rules, and the
backbilling policies previously upheld by the Courts and the Commission. Finally, AUF has
made and continues to make concerted efforts to address customer satisfaction. Although the
Commission has previously determined that water hardness at Arredondo Farms is an aesthetic
issue and not a health compliance issue, and has warned that system-level improvements to
address hard water would not be cost-effective or prudent, AUF has not ignored the issue. AUF
continues to try to actively address its customers’ concerns by including written materials in
customers’ bills and by training its service technicians to routinely advise customers on how to
mitigate the effects of hard water. In addition, AUF has proactively included the Arredondo
Farms Water System in the next phase of its aesthetic water quality program and continues to
evaluate cost-effective solutions to address hard water
In summary, the overall quality of service provided by AUF at the Arredondo Farms
Systems is good. YES’ arguments to deny or carve itself out of the rate case are without merit.
Respectfully submitted this 281h day of April, 201 1.
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
ccr
h,?
D b u c e May, Jr.
Fla. Bar No. 354473
Gigi Rollini
Fla. Bar No. 684491
Holland & Knight LLP
Post Ofice Drawer 8 10
Tallahassee, Florida 32302-0810
Phone: (850) 224-7000
Fax: (850) 224-8832
E-Mail:
g&i.rolliniohklaw.com
19
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000022 of 000027
-and-
Kimberly A. Joyce, Esquire
Aqua America, Inc.
762 West Lancaster Avenue
Bryn Maw, PA 19010
(610) 645-1077 (Telephone)
(610) 519-0989 (Facsimile)
Attorneys for Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was h i s h e d by hand
delivery or overnight mail** this 28th day of April, 201 1 to:
Ralph Jaeger
Caroline Klancke
Office of General Counsel
Florida Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0850
J.R. Kelly
Patricia Christensen
Office of Public Counsel
c/o The Florida Legislature
11 1 W Madison St, Room 812
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1400
Kelly Sullivan**
570 Osprey Lakes Circle
Chuluota, FL 32667-6658
Kenneth M. Curtin**
Adam and Reese LLP
150 Second Avenue North, Suite 1700
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701
20
1110288394-vI I
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responseslissues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000023 of 000027
EXHIBIT A
Monica Thomas
Ms. Thomas’ scenario involved a backbill due to a move-in issue. The customer contacted AUF
on March, 18,2008 to have service put in her name. At the time of this move-in notification, the
property was not identified as a wastewater account in A m ’ s billing system. Consequently the
customer began receiving water and wastewater service in March of 2008, but was billed only
for water service. Upon leaming of the undercharge in October 2010, AUF backbilled the
customer for wastewater service back to September 2009, consistent with Rule 25-30.350.
Although Ms. Thomas had received wastewater service since March 2008, AUF did not charge
her for such service she received for the period March 2008 to September 2009.
Ms. Thomas’ bill for the prior wastewater service specifically notified her that the bill was for a
long period and that payment arrangements could be made on the account. AUF’s policy is to
encourage and allow payment plans, and Ms. Thomas was notified that a payment plan was
available to her.
Eugene Davis
Mr. Davis’ scenario involved a backbill due to a move-in issue. The customer contacted AUF on
August 28, 2007 to activate service. At the time of move-in notification, the propetty was not
identified as a wastewater account in AUF’s billing system. Consequently Mr. Davis began
receiving water and wastewater service in late August 2007, but was billed only for water
service. Upon leaming of the undercharge in September 2010, AUF backbilled the customer for
wastewater service back to September 2009, consistent with Rule 25-30.350. Although Mr.
Davis received wastewater service since late August 2007, AUF did not charge him for such
service he received for the period August 2007 through September 2009. Mr. Davis’ bill for the
prior wastewater service notified him that the bill was for a long period and that payment
arrangements could be made on the account. This customer continues to make payments on his
prior usage pursuant to a payment arrangement plan.
Katherine Smith
Ms. Smith’s scenario involved a backbill due to a damaged ERT issue. As explained in Section
111 of the Response, where the ERT component of an RF meter is damaged (e.g., by weather
event or vandalism) meter reads will be captured but not transmitted, and thus the customer will
be billed only for the relevant base facility charge. When this issue is detected and the ERT is
repaired, AUF will retrieve the actual read for the consumption and will backbill the customer
for the full services provided over the period that the customer was undercharged but not longer
than 365 days. This is in strict accordance with the Commission’s backbilliig rules.
Furthermore, the bill should show the recalculated usage by month based on the appropriate
tiered block rate structure. In Ms. Smith’s case, when AUF detected that the ERT had been
damaged and the customer had not been billed for usage for 361 days, it attempted to manually
address the billing issue. As a result ofhuman error, the manual override caused the customers’
usage over the 361 day period (33,800 gallons) to be billed in a 28 day period. The customer’s
Docket No. 100330-WS
responseslissues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000024 of 000027
AUF
revised bill, which was issued February 201 1, thus reflected usage at the highest tier rate. Upon
learning of this mistake, a corrected bill has been issued for the unbilled gallonage which has
been spread over the 361 day period with the appropriate rate tier applied. ALT has also notified
the customer that a payment plan is available to her.
Justin Houker
MI. Houlker’s scenario involved a backbill due to a damaged ERT issue. Because of a damaged
ERT, Mr. Houlker was not billed for water and wastewater services used from November 2009
to November 2010. A service technician discovered that the ERT was damaged and promptly
repaired the ERT on November 24, 2010. In December 2010, the customer was backbilled for
the unbilled service in accordance with the Commission’s rules. The bill reflected usage
calculations for the total time period that service was received but not billed (378 days).
However, because the Commission’s rule limits the backbill period to not more than 365 days,
AUF’s bill reflected a credit which credited Mr. Houlker’s bill for usage beyond the 365 day
period. AUF has notified the customer that a payment plan is available to him.
William Wright
Mr. Wright’s scenario involved a backbill which was due to a damaged ERT issue. Mr. Wright
has been a customer since 2001. In 2009, he began receiving a bill which contained only water
and sewer base facility charges (with no usage charges) due to a damaged ERT.
The account was corrected and the customer was billed for 99,300 gallons of usage for 567 days
of service. Because Florida’s regulations state that Aqua can only back bill for 365 days of
service, a credit was posted to the customer’s account for the usage over 365 days. AUF has
also notified the customer that a payment plan is available to him.
Jovce Helm
Ms.Helm’s scenario involved a backbill due to repeated billing address changes requested by the
customer. Records indicated that Ms.Helm called AUF on February 2, 2010 to activate her
account, stating that she moved into the property on January 28, 2010. Between March 2,2010
and April 22, 2010, the customer contacted AUF and stated that she had not received her bills.
AUF sent the customer duplicates of the prior bills. Thereafter, at the customer’s request, AUF
changed the customer’s billing address. On May 18, 2010 Ms. Helm called AUF and claimed
that she was not a customer (Note that AUF’s records show the Company received 2 credit card
payments both in April 2010 showing Joyce Helm as the customer of record). Ms. Helm said
that she did not live in Gainesville, that she lived in Titusville, Florida and that service should be
taken out of her name. Pursuant to Ms. Helm’s request, AUF took the service out of Ms. Helm’s
name at this property.
On June 28,2010, after AUF‘s records indicated that there was consumption at the property but
no customer of record, a service order was created to turn off and block service to this property.
Ms. Helm then called in August 2010, asserting that she was not receiving bills for the 7171
Southwest Archer Road, Gainesville, Florida property.
2
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responseslissues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000025 of 000027
The AUF representative advised Ms. Helms that she had previously stated that she did not live at
the property and AUF’s records indicated that there was no active customer at the property at
that time. After speaking with Ms. Helm, the customer service representative put the service
back into Ms. Helm’s name. Because records indicated that she or someone authorized by her
was using water and wastewater services at the property since she initially called and stated she
had moved into the property, she was billed for the service used at this address as of January 28,
2010. Specifically, Ms. Helm was billed for 196 days of service. Ms. Helm raised this billing
concern at the customer meeting in Gainesville on October 21, 2010 and spoke to a local AUF
representative. As a one-time courtesy, a credit of $3 18.56 was issued on the customer’s account
on October 22,2010.
MawAnn Walker
MaryAnn Walker’s scenario involved a backbill due to a damaged meter issue. A brief history
of Ms. Walker’s account is as follows: Ms. Walker became an AUF customer at this address in
March 2008. While she was a customer, this customer had numerous collection and payment
issues which led to her service being discontinued in April 2009 for non-payment. In May 2009
AUF noticed that there was consumption but no customer of record at this property. On
September 4,2009, service was put back into Ms. Walker’s name and a backbill was issued back
to April 8, 2009 for services used but not paid for by the customer. Thereafter, Ms. Walker
agreed to a payment plan to pay for the services she used but did not pay for.
On October 22, 2010, AUF determined that the meter at Ms. Walker’s property was damaged,
and thereafter the Company took prompt steps to exchange the meter. It was further determined
that Ms. Walker had not been billed for usage from October 2009 through October 2010. The
meter exchange was completed on October 22, 2010. As a one time courtesy, Ms. Walker was
not billed for water and wastewater consumption from October 2009 to October 2010.
However, during the meter exchange on October 22, 2010, the service technician did not
synchronize the new meter with the existing ERT. The technician’s failure to synchronize the
new meter with the ERT, which was contrary to AUF’s training protocol, resulted in meter
reading errors which were reflected in Ms. Walker’s November and December bills. On January
5, 2011, an AUF field technician spoke with Ms. Walker, who inquired about her bill. AUF
immediately reviewed the bill and issued a new bill on Janumy 6, 2010 correcting the mistake.
AUF also offered Ms. Walker a payment arrangement which was never accepted. Ms. Walker is
no longer an active customer.
3
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responses/issues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000026 of 000027
EXHIBIT B
Beverlv Jane Turner
Ms. Turner asserts that she current pays $1 18 - $128 per month. She states that several months
ago, she had an unexplained charge on her bill. Upon a review of her bills, she has recently
been charged a late payment fee and a deposit and reconnection fee in February 201 1 due to a
shut off for non payment in January. The current balance is $104.07. Her typical monthly bill,
without late fees, averages less than a $100 for both water and wastewater service.
Lola Fereuson
Ms. Ferguson incorrectly asserts that AUF improperly shut off her water. The facts of this
account are as follows: The customer had a history of delinquent payments. A shut off notice
was sent to the customer on February 11,2010, requiring payment of $416. When the customer
failed to make the required payment in full, the service was discontinued and the account was
closed on March 4, 2010. In April 2010, AUF’s records showed consumption at the property,
which indicated that someone had broken the lock and turned the water back on. In April of
2010, the customer made partial payments but did not make payments sufficient to reinstate
service. Ultimately, the customer paid the required charges and service was reinitiated on May
3,2010. Over the past 2 years, there have been approximately 25 service orders generated to this
account, virtually all involving collections issues, move-idmove-out activities, and indications
of consumption when the property was supposed to be ‘‘inactive.”
It should be noted, that when the customer states she called in April 2010 regarding sand in her
line, it was during the time period when she was “inactive with consumption” and receiving
service but was not an active customer.
Teresa Jarvis
Ms. Jarvis’ bills for monthly water and wastewater service average approximately $90 per
month. Review of her bill history shows that her payments tend to run a month behind, resulting
in late charges and past due amounts which are reflected on the bill in accordance with AUF’s
Commission-approved Tariff.
Michelle Einmo
This billing issue arose in 2007 and has already been addressed in AUF’s last rate case in Docket
No. 080121-WS. Since that time, the customer’s bills are correct. Recent collections notices and
calls are not at all connected to the 2007 issue, but instead relate to her current balance which has
been past due.
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF responseslissues from AF System customers
Exhibit SC-2, Page 000027 of 000027
Virginia Wia
Ms.Win is complaining about her June 2010 bill with 4,600 gallons of usage. Review of Ms.
Witt’s billing history shows that Ms.Witt’s usage fluctuates. For example, in June of 2008 she
used 7100 gallons. On August 17, 2010 an AUF service technician went to the property and
verified the meter information and confirmed that there were no leaks. Ms. Kurz’sassertion that
she checked Ms. Witt’s meter and “it was not moving” is to be expected where there are no leaks
at the property.
Kathleen Delano
Ms.Delano initiated service in July 2010. Her average consumption is 5,600 gallons per month
and her monthly bills average approximately $150 per month. Her last bill was for $136.17,
though she is carrying a prior balance which makes her total bill $231.45. Her average bill
without any prior balance or late fees is g@ $180-200 per month.
2
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000001 of 000183
Holland8cKnight
315 Soufh Whwn Street, Suite 600 1 Tdlahassee, FL 32301
Holland 8 Knight LLP I w.hk!aw.com
I T 850.2247000 I F 850.224.8832
0. BNCB May. Jr.
(aS0)425-5607
bwat.may@hklaw.com
February 28,201 1
Via Hand Delivery
Ms. Ann Cole
Florida Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Betty Easley Conference Center, Room 110
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850
Re:
In Re: Applicationfor increme in water and wastewater rates in Alachua, Brevard
DeSoro, Highlands, Lake, Lee, Marion, Orange, Palm Beach, Pasco, Polk Putnam,
Seminole, Sumter, Yolusia?and Washington Counties by Aqua Utilities Floriab,
Inc., Docket No. 080121-WS
Dear Ms. Cole:
Pursuant to Order No. PSC-lO-O;!97-PAA-WS, enclosed for filing are the original and
four (4) copies of Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.'s Final Phase I1 Quality of Service Monitoring
Report ("Final Report"). Also included for your convenience is a CD containing the electronic
Word version of the Final Report without attachments.
Please acknowledge receipt of this filing by stamping the extra copy of this letter "filed"
and returning the copy to me. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
=-
DBM:kjg
-Encls.
Atlanta I Bethesda 1 Boston I Chicago I FOR Lauderdalc I JacLIonviPe I Lakeland 1 Lo$ Angala, I Mlaml I Now York
Northem Virginia I Orlando I Portland I San Franciaw IT.Bllahassee I Tampa I Waahington. D.C. IWest Palm Eaach
Ann Cole
February 28,201 1
Page 2
cc:
Ralph Jaeger, Esq. (w/enclosure)
Patricia Christensen, Esq. (w/enclosure)
Cecilia Bradley, Esq.(w/enclosure)
Kimberly A. Joyce, Esq.
Troy Rendell
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000002 of 000183
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000003 of 000183
BEFORE THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
I
I1
In Re: Application for increase in water and
DOCKET NO. 080121-WS
wastemi& rates in Alachua, Brevard, DeSoto,
FILED: February 28,201 1
Highlands, Lake,Lee, Marion, Orange. Palm
Beach, P&co, Polk, ktnam, Seminole;
Sumter, Volusia. and Washinmn Counties bv
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
-
I
I
1
FINAL PHASE I1 QUALITY OF SERVICE MONITORING REPORT
OF
AQUA UTILITIES FLORIDA, INC.
;JOCL'HEYT PiCHRER-OATE
0 I326 FEB28=
FPSC-COMMISSION CLERK
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3.Page 000004 of 000183
Table of Contents
I. Background ......................................................................................................................
1
A. The Prior Rate Case ..................................................................................................
1
B . Initial Monitoring Plan (May 2009 through October 2009) ....................................
1
C. Phase I1 Monitoring (May 2010 through December 2010).......................................
6
I1. Summary of Phase I1 Monitoring Rc:ports ....................................................................
9
A . Management Quality Performance Report ...............................................................
9
B. Florida Complaint Support Infomiation Report .....................................................
10
C. Florida Score Card ..................................................................................................
12
D. Call Center Monitoring Statistics Report ................................................................
13
E. Customer Service Representative (“CSR) Call Quality Scores Report ................. 14
F. Service Order Rep0rt ..............................................................................................
15
G . Estimated Read Report ...........................................................................................
16
AUF‘S Secondary Water Quality :Project................................................................
17
A. Background .............................................................................................................
17
B . Aesthetic Monitoring ..............................................................................................
18
C. Joint Secondary Water Quality Task Force Meetings ............................................
18
Quarterly Environmental Compliance Reports .......................................................
27
111.
IV .
A . Background ..............................................................................................................
27
B . Overview of Quarterly Environmental Compliance Updates ..................................
29
V . Conclusion ...................................................................................................................
30
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000005 of 000183
I. Backeround
A. The Prior Rate Case
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. ("AUF") is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Aqua
America, Inc., one of the largest publicly traded water and wastewater utilities in the
United States with operations in 13 states. AUF began doing business in Florida in 2003
and, since that time, has acquired a number of water and wastewater utilities throughout
the state. AUF currently operates 109 water and wastewater utility systems in Florida,
101 of which are under the jurisdiction of the Florida Public Service Commission
("FPSC" or "Commission"). Currentky, AUF has FPSC jurisdictional systems in the
following Florida counties: Alachua, Brevard, Desoto, Highlands, Lake, Lee, Marion,
Orange, Palm Beach, Pasco, Polk, Putnam, Seminole, Sumter, Volusia, and Washington.
At the time AUF acquired these systems, the vast majority had not had a rate case or
undergone system improvements for many years. Therefore, in order to continue to make
needed system improvements and to maintain its financial integrity, AUF sought rate
relief from the Commission in 2008. See FPSC Docket No. 080121-WS.
After conducting a formal hearing, the Commission ultimately granted rate relief
for all of AUF's systems, except for thc Chuluota water and wastewater systems. Order
No. PSC-09-0385-FOF-WS issued May 29,2009 ("Final Order").
B. Initial Monitoring Plan (May 2009 through October 2009)
In addition to granting rate relief, the Final Order established a monitoring plan
("Initial Monitoring Plan") to enable the: Commission to monitor AUF's customer service
1
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000006 of 000183
in three areas: the general handling of customer complaints, the specific handling of
complaints at AUF’s call centers, and the accuracy of AUF’s metering readings and
resulting bills. The Commission’s Initial Monitoring Plan required AUF to file the
following information for the six-month period fiom May 2009 through October 2009:
1.
AUF shall submit a monthly report to this Commission for the fmt
six months after this order is issued. The report will list all customer
complaints for each system for the month. The report shall include the
customer name, address, phone number, account number, a description of
the complaint, and how the complaint was resolved. We will audit a
sample (sample will be chosen to determine with a 90 percent confidence
level and a maximum error rate of 5 percent) of the reported customer
complaints to determine whether the complaints were resolved
appropriately (“appropriately” will be defined as any errors made by AUF
are corrected and all issues in the complaint are addressed).
2.
AUF shall submit to this Commission on a monthly basis all sound
recordings of customer complairits fiom customers to this Commission for
the first six months after this order is issued. Our staff will listen to a
sample of these to determine if the customer complaints are handled in a
professional and courteous manner.
3.
AUF will provide our stafrwith route schedules that identify the day
that meters will be read for ALF’s regulated systems for the six months
after this order is issued. The route schedules will be due to our staff by
May 1, 2009. AUF shall also provide staff with the meter reading logs for
the same six-month period. Based on the meter reading schedule, our staff
will manually read a sample of AUF’s meters on the same day that the
Utility is scheduled to read them to verify the accuracy of the meter
readings and resulting customer bills.
Upon the completion of these reporting requirements, our staff will present
their conclusions regarding AUF’s performance to us. If AUF is not
performing adequately, we may initiate show cause proceedings, or take
such other action as we may deem appropriate.
Final Order at p. 22.
2
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1 QSM Reporl
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000007 of 000183
AUF complied with the Commission’s Initial Monitoring Plan in all respects.
During that six month monitoring period, AUF timely submitted extensive complaint logs
for each month. ”he logs listed all curitomer complaints for each system for the month
and, in accordance with the Commission’s directives, set forth (i) the customer name,
address, phone number, account number;’ (ii) described the nature of the complaint; and
(iii) reported on how the complaint was resolved. In addition, AUF recorded each and
every customer call it received at its call centers from Florida customers and provided
those sound recordings to Commission staff on a monthly basis during the entire
monitoring period. In this way, the Commission staff was able to objectively review
first-hand all customer calls to determine the quality of service provided by Am’s
customer service representatives (“CSF!s”). AUF also provided Commission staff with
all of its meter reading route schedules for the entire six month monitoring period along
with the actual meter reading logs for all of those systems for each month during the
monitoring period. Commission staff, in turn,personally visited AUF systems soon after
Am’s meter readers had completed their reads and documented the usage on the meter.
Commission staff compared its volumetric reads to the AUF meter reading log to
independently test for meter accuracy. Commission staff M e r audited AUF customer
bills with the meter reading information to test for billing accuracy.
‘Because the Commission directed AUF to provide proprietary customer specific information, AUF was required to
request confidential classificationof that information to prevent identity theft and other harm to tho customer.
3
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000008 of 000183
Although the above reporting requirements were extensive and required many
hours of the utility's time, not once did .AUF miss a reporting deadline or request that any
reporting deadline be extended.
During the course of Initial Monitoring Plan, Commission staff thoroughly
evaluated all of the monthly reports and data provided by AUF, and conducted its own
independent analysis of AUF's quality of service.
At the end of that intensive
independent review process, Commission staff filed a nineteen page recommendation on
March 4,20 IO, which concluded:
Based on staffs review of AUF's processes for handling customer
complaints, meter reading, and customer billing, as well as its
environmental compliance, staff recommends that AUF's performance as
specified in the Monitoring Plan detailed in the Final Order is adeaunte.
Staff Recommendation at p. 13 (emphasis added).
On March 16, 2010, the Commission considered staffs recommendation at its
regularly-scheduled Agenda Conference, and heard &om staff, the parties and several
customers. The Commission observed that its staff had spent an extraordinary amount of
time objectively reviewing the quality of A m ' s customer service and had independently
evaluated of sound recordings for "635 randomly selected customer calls" to A m ' s call
centers, as well as 103 specific recordings, for a total of 738 recordings. Order No. PSC-
10-0218-PAA-WSat p. 4. The Commi:uion further found that:
the most reasonable means at our disposal for determining if AUF is
performing adequately are the actual sound recordings of interactions
between consumer and AUF's CSR. Unlike the logs, which captured only
complaints and certain inquiries, the sound recordings captured all Florida
calls made to AUF call centers. By having all types of Florida calls
available for review, our staff evaluated not only customers calling with a
4
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1 QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000009 of 000183
complaint, but also customers that were calling for more routine issues,
such as making a payment by telephone.
Id. at p. 5. The Commission went on to a f f m that, "[olut of the 738 total sound
recordings reviewed, our staff thought i.hat the majority were handled in a courteous and
professional manner and the representatives were taking the appropriate action to resolve
all issues in the call." Id. at p. 6.
The Commission also acknowledged that AUF had implemented measures to improve
its customer service including:
Forming a "Complaint Analysis and Remediation Team" (CART). The
CART consists of all call center supervisors and their managers, as well
as the Supervisor of Compliance. This team addresses all executive
escalations and meets biweekly to review all accounts where further
coaching and training issues me identified for follow-up.
Implementing a Call Escalation Process. The process was developed in
April 2009 and was reviewed with all supervisors and the Compliance
Team. This escalation process was then communicated to all CSRs in
each of AUF's three call centers.
Developing a detailed Supervisor Audit. This involves the Training
Team pulling all supervisor callbacks from the three call centers. These
are placed in a folder on AUF"s internal network and are reviewed by all
management in the call centers. The data is used for coaching and
feedback to the CSRs to reduce the number of customer call backs.
Auditing all its replaced meters in Florida. AUF found that there were
some transitional issues that occurred with this change and has audited
nearly every meter replaced t o ensure that the meter is coded properly to
its billing system.
Standardizing its service order processing system for its field
technicians. This change was implemented to improve the
communication between the field technicians and the call centers.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000010 of 000183
0
0
Refining the tracking of customer on-site meter and bench test
procedures, since this is a common request.
Providing an informational brochure to remind customers about
contacting the call center when they leave or return to their Florida
home. Many of AUF's customers use their Florida home as second
residence, and the mailer was designed to encourage customers to
contact the call center when they leave for the summer so that their
account is properly noted.
Id. at pp. 6-7.
The Commission ultimately ctmcluded that "while preliminary results show
substantial imwovement in Am's customer service, additional monitoring was
required to ultimately render a determination as to the adequacy of AUF's quality of
service". Id. at p. 12 (emphasis added). In so ruling, the Commission recognized that its
Initial Monitoring Plan had imposed substantial cost on AUF and required many hours of
both utility staff and Commission staff time. Thus, the Commission directed staff to
continue to monitor AUF's customer service through the end of 2010 on a more limited
basis and ordered AUF to collaborate with the OPC and other parties to "develop a costeffective, efficient, and meaningful monitoring plan, and to bring the supplemental
monitoring plan to us within 45 days." Id. at p. 13.
C. Phase I1 Monitoring (May ;!010 through December 2010)
Pursuant to the directives of the Commission, AUF, OPC and the parties
ultimately agreed to a proposed Phase I1 Monitoring Plan which eliminated the
requirements that AUF produce sound recordings, meter reading information, and
complaint logs, but continued more limited monitoring of customer service and certain
6
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000011 of 000183
aesthetic water quality issues. To ensure that this Phase I1 Monitoring Plan was costeffective and efficient, the reporting requirements agreed upon by OPC and AUF were
structured around (i) non-proprietary xports that AUF was already using internally to
monitor and ensure quality of service, and (ii) an aesthetic water quality improvement
program that AUF already had underway.
Specifically, the Phase I1 Monitoring Plan required AUF to provide on a monthly
basis the following customer service-related reports:
0
A Management Quality Performance ("MQP") Report which tracks on a
monthly basis the reasons for customer calls. This report is used by AUF
management to
understand recent performance and identify any adverse
wends.
0
A Florida Complaint Support Information Report which provides nonproprietary information for each of the complaint-related calls that underlies
the MQP Report for each month.
0
A Florida Scorecard which includes quality of service metrics for each month.
0
A Call Center Monitoring Statistics Report which tracks the key performance
indicators of AUF's call centers on a monthly basis, and is used by AUF to
ascertain whether it is meeting its targeted service performance levels.
0
A Call Quality Report for all call centers formatted such that monthly data can
be tracked for each of the call centers separately.
7
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000012 of 000183
0
A Service Order Status Report which tracks Am's service order log and the
timeliness of closing service order requests.
0
An Estimated Read Report which allows staff and the parties to track the
number of estimated reads and investigate any adverse trends.
With respect to aesthetic water quality, the Phase I1 Monitoring Plan agreed upon
by OPC and AUF required that AUF to monitor the aesthetic (secondary) drinking water
constituents for seven of its water systems: Lake Josephine, Leisure Lakes, Sebring
Lakes, Rosalie Oaks, Tangerine, Tom0 ka View, and Zephyr Shores. OPC and AUF also
agreed that AUF would conduct a series of meetings with customer representatives from
the seven systems to provide updates on the monitoring, discuss aesthetic water quality
concerns, and identify possible solutions and associated costs.
By Order No. PSC-10-0297-PA%-WSdated May 10, 2010 ("Phase I1 Monitoring
Order"), the Commission approved the Phase I1 Monitoring Plan agreed to by the OPC
and AUF. In so ruling, the Commissioii acknowledged that many of its concerns that led
to the Initial Monitoring Plan had been addressed. For example, the Commission noted
that during the Initial Monitoring Plan, its staff had
. . randomly sampled 358 meter readings taken
by AUF and
compared those readings to a corresponding set of meter readings
taken by Commission staff. Of these 358 meter readings taken by
AUF, none were found to be significantly different from the meter
readings taken by our staff. Therefore, we find that no further
testing of Am's meter rezding accuracy is necessary.
,
Phase I1 Monitoring Order at p. 6. T h e Phase I1 Monitoring Order also recognized that
staff had randomly sampled 50 customer bills which showed that all of those bills were
8
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1 QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000013 of 000183
appropriately based upon the usage indicated by the meter readings taken by AUF. Id.
However, at the March 16 Agenda Conference, a former Commissioner insisted that the
sample size of 50 may not be sufficient to provide adequate assurance that all customer
bills are appropriately based on actual meter readings. The Commission therefore
instructed staff to expand this sample to the same sample size of 358 used to determine
the accuracy of A m ’ s meter reading. Id. at p. 7.
In addition to the monitoring requirements agreed upon by OPC and AUF, the
Commission required AUF to provide quarterly reports on environmental compliance and
directed staff to review enforcement actions taken by the FDEP, the County Health
Departments, and the Water Management Districts (“WMDs”)through the end of 2010
for each of Am’s jurisdictional water and wastewater systems. The Commission also
directed AUF to report on capital projects designed to improve the water quality at the
Chuluota system. Finally, the Phase Ilr Monitoring Order instructed AUF to file a final
report by the end of February, 20 11, summarizing the results of AUF’s Phase I1 reporting
requirements. AUF is filing this fmal report pursuant to the Commission’s instruction.
11. Summarv of Phase I1 Monitoriun ReDorts
A. Management Quality Performance Report
The Management Quality Performance Report is a high level report used by AUF
to track the reasons for customer calls to the call centers. AUF management relies on the
information contained in this report to identify customer service trends from month to
month and prepare responsive actions where needed. A sample report is provided in
9
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000014 of 000183
Exhibit "A". Data derived from Management Quality Performance Reports shows that
the vast majority of the calls received by AUF's CSRs during the Phase I1 monitoring
period involved routine day-to-day issues such as move idmove out requests, payment
questions, requests to pay over the phone, and requests to verify account balances.
The data gathered in these reports during the Phase I1 monitoring period was
consistent with A m ' s expectations and there does not appear to be abnormal variances or
trends for Florida calls. Of course, any call related to a water quality complaint, a boil
water notice or an emergency repair is immediately addressed by a customer service
technician through the issuance of a service order.
B. Florida Complaint Support Information Report
The Florida Complaint Support Information Report consists of more granular nonproprietary information for each of the complaint-related calls identified in the
Management Quality Performance Report. This report provides AUF management with
additional call information by system and thus enhances AUFs ability to identify
customer service trends and to more effectively tailor responsive actions where needed.
The report also enables AUF management to investigate unexplained increases in call
volume. For example, these reports reveal that call volumes increased:
0
from
the
Jasmine Lakes system in August 2010 when one of Am's water
mains was damaged by Verizon and a boil water notice was sent out to
customers.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000015 of 000183
a
from the Jasmine Lakes system in September 2010 when Pasco County
damaged one of AUF's water mains and a boil water notice was sent out to
customers.
0
from the Lake Gibson Estates system in September 2010 when the system was
shut down during a tank replacement project.
0
from the Lake Gibson Estate$.system In November 2010 when a well went off
line and a boil water notice was issued.
from the Lake Osborne Estates system in November when there was an
unexpected main break.
a
from the Palm Terrace system in November 2010 when a broken valve caused
system outages.
Unlike the Initial Monitoring Plan, the Phase I1 Monitoring Order did not require AUF to
file extensive complaint logs with the Commission. Instead, the Commission staff was
directed to produce monthly reports that track complaints filed at the Commission Call
Center. AUF has closely reviewed thr: complaint reports filed by Commission staff in
this docket. On average, approximately thirteen complaints were registered with the
Commission Call Center each month during the Phase I1 monitoring period. Based on
AUF's analysis, it appears that the overwhelming majority of complaints listed in the staff
reports relate directly to customer concerns about the utility's approved rates and bills.
Furthermore, sta@s reports show that AUF acts promptly and properly to resolve
* It is also noteworthy that a group advocating government takeover of private water utilities like AUF has
aggressively encouraged AUF customers to file complaints and mite letters to the Commission and other public
officials. See Exhibit "8".
11
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000016 of 000183
complaints filed at the Commission's Call Center. Indeed, AUF has a Customer Field
Service Manager dedicated to investigating and responding to all Florida customer
complaints in accordance with Commisriion regulations.
C. Florida Score Card
The Florida Score Card is a performance-based report structured around AUF's
own quality of service metrics. Management meets with AUF employees on a weekly
basis to review this data. This report applies to all jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional
systems in Florida. Notably, while thi: Commission has not adopted customer service
metrics for water and wastewater utilities, AUF has been proactive in this area and has
adopted its own aggressive service quality metrics. See Exhibit "C".
AUF's customer service metric&address service-related issues including: meter
read rates; percentage of meter reading cycles completed by a scheduled date; overall
estimation rates; accounts estimated for over 90 days; and percentage of active accounts
not billed. The Florida Score Card reports filed during the Phase I1 monitoring period
show that AUF is committed to good customer s m k e and has done an excellent job in
meeting its service quality goals with sc,melimited and expected exceptions.
AUF met its targeted goals in all but the following instances over the eight month
Phase I1 monitoring period, In June 2010, AUF was slightly below its targeted meter
read rate due to a downloading glitch which required AUF to "re-read'' 1 15 meters. This
"re-read'' of the 115 meters also caused AUF to be slightly below its targeted goal for
Percentage of Cycles Completed in June. In July, AUF was slightly over its target of
12
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000017 of 000183
.15% for Accounts Estimated > 90 days
The achieved metric was slightly higher in July
(.16%) because of a meter change out in AUF's Sarasota County system which resulted in
customers receiving estimated bills. AlJF's Sarasota County system is not regulated by
the Commission.
AUF was slightly outside of its target goal for Percentage of Active Accounts Not
Billed target in July, September, October, and November. This is an expected result for
these months when there are higher volumes of "move ins" by seasonal customers. For
example, when a seasonal customer moves back in, the report will reflect that the last
time the account was billed was when the customer moved out several months prior. The
extended period of time between bills is to be expected under this scenario.
In summary, the Florida Scorecard Reports show that AUF has been proactive in
adopting aggressive quality control metrics, and has done an excellent job in meeting
those service quality goals.
D. CaU Center Monitoring Statistics Report
The Call Center Monitoring Statistics Report was provided to Commission staff
and the OPC on a monthly basis during the Phase I1 monitoring period. Please see
Exhibit "D".This report is based on Call Center performance indicators which provide
AUF management with insights into:
0
proper staffing of the call center;
0
how quickly customers are connecting to a CSR ("calls answered in < 90
seconds");
13
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000018 of 000183
0
how many calls are coming into the call centers each day ("average callslday");
and,
0
the time a customer waits on the phone before speaking with a CSR ("average
speed to answer").
AUF has established aggressive: performance goals for its call centers. With
respect to answer time, AUF's goal is to have 80% of all calls answered in less than 90
seconds, AUF has consistently met thi:; goal with the minor exceptions in June (74%),
July (73%) and October (79%) when there was an unexpected increase in the number of
calls into the call center. AUF also hai a goal to achieve an average answer time of 60
seconds. AUF met this goal every mointh with the exception of July where the average
answer time was 61 seconds.
Another of AUF's goals is to limit the number of abandoned calls to 5%. AUF
met this goal every month during the Phase I1 monitoring period with minor exceptions
in June (5.4%) and July (5.6%).
E. Customer Service Representative ("CSR")Call Quality Scores Report
AUF provided its CSR Call Quality Reports on a historical basis (2007 through
2010), as well as on a monthly basis thughout the monitoring period. See Exhibit "E"'.
This report is utilized by AUF management to evaluate performance of CSRs in
answering customer calls at the call centers. AUF call center managers randomly sample
CSR calls and evaluate them on a monthly basis. The evaluation addresses the CSR's
14
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000019 of 000183
soft skills such as tone and demeanor and focuses on whether the CSR has fully satisfied
the customer’s inquiry.
The reports supplied for the months of May through December 2010 shows that
the call center performance has improved dramatically when compared to the period
January 2008 through November 2008.
The reports also demonstrate that from
December 2008 through December 2010, the Call Centers have consistently exceeded
AUF’s targeted service performance goals.
F. Service Order Report
The Service Order Reports are designed and used by AUF management to track
pending service order requests and to ensure that those requests are properly addressed
as soon as practicable. The service order reports were provided to Commission staff,
OPC and the parties on a monthly basis throughout the Phase I1 monitoring period. In
reviewing these reports it is important to understand that service orders are created by
CSRs for a myriad of different reasons, including but not limited to: requests for bench
tests to evaluate meter accuracy; requests to repair a broken meter, and requests to
investigate a water main break.
These service orders may involve issues that can be
resolved in one visit or may require several visits to achieve final resolution. For
purposes of the tracking reports, a service order is not closed until there is complete and
final resolution. AUF strives to address customer concerns within 14 days of the service
order, with 7 days being the goal. The service order reports show that the overwhelming
majority of service order requests are addressed within these timelines. However, despite
15
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,
Page 000020 of 000183
AUF's best efforts, there are anomalies and some customer issues are not completely
resolved within 14 days.
During the Phase I1 monitoring period, AUF processed 510 service orders, 460 of
which were closed within 14 days. There were no service orders open over 14 days in
May or August. Only three service orders were open over 14 days in June, one over 14
days in July, one over 14 days in Selptember, and two over 14 days in October. In
November, there was an anomalous incident which resulted in an abnormally high
number of open service orders. This was due to a computer interface malfunction which
temporarily interrupted the transmission of CSR generated service orders to field service
representatives. The delay resulting from this computer interface interruption caused
service orders to remain open beyond AUF's timeline targets. This incident was an
anomaly and accounted for almost all of the November service orders that were closed
beyond the 14 day goal. When AUF discovered the issue, AUF moved promptly to
rectify the problem. Indeed, reports show that in December there was only 1 service order
open over 14 days.
In summary, the Service Order Reports show that AUF vigilantly tracks, and
consistently follows through on, service order requests.
G. Estimated Read Report
Unlike the Florida Score Card (which is Florida specific), this report provides the
estimated read rates for all states where Aqua America subsidiaries operate.
The
Estimated Read Reports show that the estimation rate for Florida has been consistently
16
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000021 of 000183
below the target goal of I% for some time now. During the Phase I1 Monitoring Period,
the Florida estimation rate has improved even more. In fact, the estimated reads have
been consistently at or below OS%, with the past 6 months being between 0.1% to 0.3%.
The results of this report confirm the benefits of the new radio fkequency meters
which have now been installed at all of AUF's systems in Florida.
111.
AUF'S Secondarv Water Oualitv Proiect
A, Background
Aesthetic water quality involves non-health related characteristics of water such as
taste, color, odor, hardness and turbidity. The United States Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA") has developed secondary drinking water standards that pertain to
aesthetic water quality, which standards have been adopted by the FDEP. Unlike primary
drinking water standards, typically secondary standards are not enforced by EPA and
FDEP, but simply function as guidelines.
The Phase I1 Monitoring Plan approved by the Commission includes an aesthetic
water quality component, which was based on a aesthetic water quality improvement
program that AUF already initiated ("Original Aesthetic Program"). AUF initiated its
Original Aesthetic Program in 2008 tci address customer comments related to aesthetic
water quality made during the last rate case. While aesthetic water quality standards are
not typically enforced by environmcmtal agencies, AUF proactively developed its
Original Aesthetic Program as a plan to effectively address its customers' aesthetic water
quality concerns. As part of its Original Aesthetic Program, AUF reviewed: comments
17
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000022 of 000183
&om customers at the public hearings; complahts dealing with aesthetic water quality
issues; aesthetic water quality sampling data; and, feedback from area coordinators. AUF
also surveyed customers on aesthetic water quality. As a result of this process, AUF
identified seven (7) water systems whiere customers had expressed the most concern
regarding aesthetic water quality issues: Lake Josephine, Leisure Lakes, Sebring Lakes,
Rosalie Oaks,Tangerine, Tomoka View, and Zephyr Shores. OPC and AUF agreed that
these same seven (7) systems would be the focus of the Phase I1 Monitoring Plan's
aesthetic water quality component.
B. Aesthetic Monitoring
Pursuant to the Phase I1 Monitoring Plan, AUF monitored the secondary
(aesthetic) drinking water constituents for the seven water systems listed above. The
results of that monitoring are appended :as Exhibit "F".
C. Joint Secondary Water Quality Task Force Meetings
During the summer of 2010, in accordance with the Joint Monitoring Plan, AUF
met twice at each of the seven system locations with OPC and designated customer
representatives to discuss aesthetic concerns, possible solutions to those concerns, and
associated costs. AUF also participated in a mid-point meeting on January 20, 201 1 with
Commission staff, the OPC, and other interested persons to discuss the status of the
customer meetings on aesthetic issues. Handouts distributed at the customer meeting are
attached as Composite Exhibit "G". The results of those meetings are summarized
below.
18
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000023 of 000183
Lake Josephine I Sebring Lakes
Through its Original Aesthetic Program, AUF had identified the Lake Josephine
and Sebring Lakes systems as having experienced aesthetic water issues concerning taste
and odor which stem from naturally occurring hydrogen sulfide in the water.
Because these two systems are interconnected, the customer meetings for Lake
Josephine and Sebring Lakes were combined and took place on July 7,2010 and again on
September 21, 2010. Representatives from Lake Josephine were invited but did not
attend.
At the meeting on July 7, 2010, AUF representatives and Sebring customer
representatives discussed the water having a s u l k taste and odor.
The Sebring
representatives expressed the desire to address the aesthetic water quality issues. AUF
shared its water quality test results and discussed treatment options for these facilities.
AUF then explained its experience with the AdEdge treatment system and the positive
impacts it had on sulfur issues in AUF's other pilot programs. AUF informed the
customers that an RFPRFQ was being prepared to design and pennit the AdEdge
treatment system, and explained that this bid process allowed for bidding f m s to
recommend alternative treatment for these facilities.
At this meeting, Sebring customer representatives suggested that would it be a
better alternative to loop the distribution lines within the system to help address the water
quality issues rather than installing treatment at what may be a higher cost. The
customers asked AUF to consider this alternative. AUF representatives stated that they
would do so and report back at the follow-up meeting.
19
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1 QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000024 of 000183
At the follow-up meeting on September 21,2010, AUF representatives presented a
costhenefit analysis regarding the customers' looping suggestion. This analysis showed
that the cost of looping was considerably more expensive that the AdEdge alternative and
that "looping" would not effectively address the sulfur issue. At this meeting, the
customer representatives appeared to be satisfied with the improvements AUF was
making in the system. Currently, Adlzdge is constructing the filters for the treatment
system, and AUF and its engineers have had a pre-submittal meeting with FDEP to
inform the agency that a permit filing is forthcoming.
Leisure Lakes
Through its Original Aesthetic Program, AUF had identified the Leisure Lakes
system as experiencing aesthetic water issues concerning odor and taste which stem from
naturally occurring hydrogen sulfide, ccdcium, and sediment in the water. AUF and OPC
representatives met with Leisure. Lakes representatives on July 7, 2010 and again on
September 21, 2010.3
At the first meeting on July 7,2010, AUF representatives and customers discussed
that, despite the flushing plan implemented in 2009, customers were still experiencing
odor issues related to sulfur in the water. After sharing the water quality testing results
with the Leisure Lake representative& AUF discussed treatment options needed to
address the sulfur related odor issues. Specifically, AUF representatives discussed the
AdEdge treatment system with the customer representatives, who expressed a particular
'AUF representatives had previously met with the homeowner's association (HOA) in April 2009 to discuss
aesthetic water quality issues. At that time, AUF dweloped a flushing plan that continues to this day.
20
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000025 of 000183
interest in the design and inquired if any buildings needed to be constructed. The
customer representatives indicated that they would like to review the design and wanted
information about the colors of the storage tank and building. The customer
representatives shared that they wanted AUF to address the odor issues. Furthermore, the
customer representatives advised AUI’ that the HOA board had conducted its own
independent survey of the residents coiicming the water quality, and the results of that
survey indicate that residents want AUF to resolve the sulfur issue.
At the follow-up meeting on September 21, 2010, AUF representatives provided
an update on the status, design and permitting of the A m g e system. AUF also provided
an overview of the additional capital costs related to the project. The customers generally
seemed satisfied with this plan. Currently, AdEdge is constructing the filters and AUF
and its engineers have had a pre-submittal meeting with FDEP to inform the agency of
the forthcoming permit filing.
Rosalie Oaks
Through its Original Aesthetic Program, AUF had identified the Rosalie Oaks
system as experiencing aesthetic water issues concerning taste, odor and clarity which
stem from sporadic flows and naturally occurring sediment in the water. AUF and OPC
representatives met with Rosalie representatives on July 8,2010 and again on September
22.2010.
The Rosalie Oaks system is a weekend and holiday get-away for the residents;
thus, system usage is intermittent and sporadic. This intermittent and sporadic usage
21
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,
Page 000026 of 000183
pattern presents challenges for AUF to maintain aesthetic water quality for the system.
Therefore, as part of its Original Aesthetic Program, AUF had evaluated the water
quality, the distribution system and frequency in which the system was flushed.
Prior to being included in Original Aesthetic Program, the Rosalie Oaks system
lacked critical valves and flushing hydrants. Thus, AUF devised a directional flushing
program for Rosalie Oaks by installing i3 short water main extension and flushing hydrant
to flush the system properly. A flushin$ protocol was developed to address the weekend
and holiday customers' usage patterns. The protocol calls for the operator to flush the
water mains before a weekend or holiday to assure that customers have quality water.
At the first meeting on July 8, 2010, AUF representatives shared the water quality
test results and discussed water quality in the system. Two customers represented the
system. One was satisfied with the water quality and stated she never had issues with the
water quality. The other expressed issues with the water quality and was unaware of the
flushing program that AUF had already put in place. Based on the feedback, AUF
representatives stated they would continue address aesthetic water quality by flushing
prior to weekends and holidays.
At the follow up meeting on September 22, 2010, the customer representative
present was unaware when flushing occurred. AUF representatives agreed to keep this
customer apprised when flushing occurred.
AUF has since followed up with this
customer who has indicated that personal notification is no longer needed when flushing
activities occur. Currently, AUF has continued with its systematic flushing plan. Based
on the customer base and intermittent use of this system, AUF determined that systematic
22
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000027 of 000183
flushing was the most appropriate and cost effective solution to address the aesthetic
water quality issues.
Tangerine
Through its Original Aesthetic Program, AUF had identified the Tangerine system
as experiencing aesthetic water issues concerning color, odor, and turbidity, which stem
from naturally occurring iron, hydrogen sulfide, calcium and sediment in the water.
AUF and OPC representatives met with customers of this system on July 9, 2010 and
again on September 23,2010.
At the July 9, 2010 meeting, AUF representatives and Tangerine customer
representatives discussed discolored water concerns. The customers generally expressed
their desire for the Company to address the aesthetic water quality issues. AUF discussed
the sequestering process and the looping initiative in the system, which it had previously
designed, permitted and installed to address the iron and hardness issue in the water. The
sequestering system was operational in the summer of 2010.
At the follow up meeting on September 23,2010, the Company reviewed the costs
of the sequestration and looping projects with the customers who seemed satisfied with
the course of action AUF was taking to address the aesthetic water quality concerns.
In addition, a customer raised thl: issue concerning a fire she previously had at her
home. She stated that there was not
ti
fire hydrant in the vicinity. After the meeting,
AUF representatives met with the customer to determine where she lived in relationship
23
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,
Page 000028 of 000183
to the nearest fire hydrant. As a result of this meeting, AUF had a contractor install the
fire hydrant in the customer's vicinity.
Currently, a sequestering treatment system is in place and operating in Tangerine.
Furthermore, AUF has installed various water main extensions in order to connect dead
ends. These initiatives have improved pressure problems, given the water a "softer" taste,
removed sediment ftom the system.
Tomoka View
Through its Original Aesthetic Program, AUF had identified the Tomoka View
system as experiencing aesthetic water issues concerning taste and odor, which stem from
naturally occurring hydrogen sulfide, calcium and sediment in the water. The system
also experienced a primary water quality issue involving Trihalomethanes ("ITHMs").~
AUF signed a consent order on December 18,2009, which was discussed in AUF's last
rate case. In accordance with that consent order, AUF completed construction of the
chloramination system, which was placed in service in December 2009. The results from
the quarterly samples taken from December 2009 to June 2010 and the rolling annual
average ("R4A") for the second quarter of 2010 were all well below the TTHM
standards. AUF has received notification from the Volusia County Health Department
that the system has been put on reduced monitoring for "HMs. The consent order is
now closed.
'
Trihalomethanes are disinfection by-products CDBPs") created when water containing even trace amounts of
natural organic carbon is disinfected with chlorhe. Water souxes with relatively higher levels of total organic
carbon or high chlorine demand can generate elevaied levels of TWMs when disinfectedwith chlorine.
24
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000029 of 000183
The first meeting with Tomoka 'View took place on July 9, 2010 with a follow up
meeting on September 23, 2010. At the July 9* meeting, AUF representatives discussed
the chloramination system. Tomoka View representatives were very satisfied that the
TTHM issue was resolved and the wata quality had improved since additional treatment
and flushing programs were initiated. The customers were also informed of the storage
tank project to install a new liner preventing leakage through the deteriorating concrete
block walls of a storage tank. AUF representatives explained that the project has been
delayed due to Volusia County requiring engineering documents detailing the installation
of the temporary hydropneumatic tank the contactor will be installing. The current
estimated date of completion is March 30,201 1.
Customer representatives also discussed the issue of dark rings in the toilet bowl
and pink film in shower stalls or bath tubs. AUF representatives provided the customers
with information on these issues and made customers aware that the cause was related to
airborne bacteria. The customers had previously attributed this occurrence to poor water
quality.
At the follow-up meeting on September 23, 2010, AUF representatives primarily
discussed a temporary nitrification issue that had arisen in July of 2010. (The American
Water Works Association estimates that nitrification occurs to some degree in two-thirds
of the public drinking water systems !hat use chloramines as a means of disinfection.)
AUF explained that it has a vigorous nitrification surveillance protocol and when
nitrification was detected, it moved pramptly to remedy the situation. After public notice
was issued, the system was converted to free chlorine for disinfection and directionally
25
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000030 of 000183
flushed. The system remained on free chlorine for approximately 30 days. After public
notice, the disinfection process was converted back to chloramines. The distribution
system has not had any nitrification issues since then, and AUF is planning to convert to
free chlorine again in June 201 1 for 30 clays as a preventative measure.
Zephyr Shores
Through its Original Aesthetic Program, AUF had identified the Zephyr Shores
system as experiencing aesthetic water issues concerning color, hardness and turbidity,
which stem from naturally occurring manganese, calcium, iron and sediment in the water.
AUF designed, pexmitted and installed a sequestering agent to address these aesthetic
issue and that sequestering system was operational in March of 2010.
AUF representatives and the OPC met with Zephyr Shores representatives on July
9, 2010 and again on September 22, 2010.
Both meetings were attended by many
customers who expressed concern about rates and the desire for AUF to be taken over by
either the FGUA or Pasco County.
At the July 9 meeting, AUF representatives discussed the status of utilizing a
sequestering agent to address the aesthi:tic water quality issues, and further reported that
to properly flush this system, critical valves needed to be installed and additional flushing
hydrants were needed. AUF explained that a contractor was hired and the valves and
flushing hydrants had been installed. Furthermore, a written flushing plan was developed
to instruct the operator how to flush the system.
26
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,
Page 000031 of 000183
During the meeting some customers raised concerns about low water pressure in a
specific area of the development. Am-' committed to analyze the system and present
solutions for the next meeting.
At the follow-up meeting on September 22, 20 10, AUF's engineer presented two
solutions to the pressure issue. The first involved installing a water main through an
easement between 2 properties. This option was objected to by a customer that owned the
intervening property impacted by the easement. The second option involved installing the
water main alongside the roadway. This option would involve a longer route than the
first option but would accomplish the same results. Currently, the main is being designed
along the roadway and AUF is preparing to meet with the HOA board to discuss the
location and obtain any necessary utility easements.
IV. Ouarterlv Environmental Comdiance ReDorts
A. Background
The Phase I1 Monitoring Order required AUF to file quarterly "environmental
compliance" updates describing the status of outstanding warning letters, consent orders
and notices of violation. See Phase I1 Monitoring Order at p. 6. The updates were to
include information concerning enforcement actions identified in the Final Order,
additional warning letters, consent oniers, and notices of violation issued during the
period, and AUF's plan to resolve each alleged violation. In accordance with those
requirements, AUF filed quarterly updates with the Commission on July 10, 2010 and
27
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000032 of 000183
again on October 11,2OlO.' AUF's final quarterly update for the fourth quarter of 2010
is attached as Exhibit "H". Before addressing the quarterly compliance updates that
AUF provided, it is important to understand the terminology used by the Commission
with respect to environmental Compliance. As the Commission explained in this docket:
DEP conducts periodic inspectims of all water and wastewater facilities
and, if environmental compliance violations are found, a "noncompliance
letter" is sent describing the violation. The utility is given time to respond
and correct the violation. If the utility fails to respond or if the response is
insufficient, the utility is sent a ''warning letter" which describes the
outstanding violation and DEP's recourse if the violation is not resolved. If
the utility and DEP agree on a resolution, a "consent order" is issued
describing the resolution. If an agreement is not reached, DEP issues a
"notice of violation" which may result in a hearing.
Order No. PSC-10-0281-PAA-WS at 10.
It is also important to note that, when the Commission instructed OPC and AUF to
agree upon a Phase I1 Monitoring Plan, the Commission and its staff had thoroughly
evaluated AUF's environmental compliance up to that point. The Commission expressly
found that:
It appears that AUF bas been responsive to DEP and the County Health
Departments in attempting to resolve compliance issues. In some cases,
compliance involves complicated and difficult issues which can take
significant time to resolve. To date, five of the nine outstanding consent
orders and warning letters referred to in the Final Order have been resolved.
No notices of violation have been issued. Although two new consent
orders and three warning letters have been issued, we note that AUF is
responsible for more than 80 waler and wastewater systems regulated by us.
Id. at p. 12.
'In its quarterly update filed on October 1 I, 2010:
AUF explained that because the previous quarterly update was
filed on July IO, 2010, the next quarlerly update would have to have been due in October not September as
indicated in the Phase 11 Monitoring Order.
28
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000033 of 000163
B. Overview of Quarterly Environmental Compliance Updates
The quarterly environmental compliance updates which AUF has submitted show
that AUF continues to be extremely responsive to FDEP and County Health Departments
concerning environmental compliance. Indeed, the information and activities described
in those reports confirm that AUF's top priority is to ensure that all of AUF's systems
comply with applicable water and wastewater standards and regulations.
Furthermore,
as of the date of this report, AUF has no notices of violation from FDEP or the
Department of Health. Moreover, as shown in the attached Exhibit "I", AUF has taken
aggressive steps to resolve all of the environmental compliance issues which had been
identified in the Final Order during the last rate case.
While AUF is proud of its environmental compliance for all of its systems, it is
particularly pleased to report that it has made significant improvements to the Chuluota
water system. The Commission removed the Chuluota water and wastewater system
from the last rate case primarily because it found that the quality of service for that
particular system was unsatisfactory. That finding with respect to A m ' s Chuluota
system was based primarily on water quality issues involving disinfection byproducts
(TTHMs), which were the subject of an open consent order with the FDEP at the time of
the last rate case.
Since the last rate case, AUF has made significant improvements to the Chuluota
system and has invested over $2.3 million dollars in a state-of-the-art ion exchange
system to address the TTHM issue. ,4s a result of those improvements, the Chuluota
29
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000034 of 000183
system has been in compliance with 'ITHM standards for all of 2010,
FDEP has
closed out the consent order.
V. Conclusion
For almost two years now, A I P s customer service has been the focus of a
rigorous and unprecedented review by the Commission, its staff, the OPC, and other
parties. AUF has timely complied in all respects with the monitoring and reporting
requirements imposed by the Commission and, in so doing, has incurred significant costs.
During the course of this intensive monitoring, AUF has supplied the Commission, the
OPC and the parties with thousands of pages of data, documents, audio tapes, and reports.
That information clearly shows that A.UF has good customer service and consistently
complies with environmental requirements. The infomation in this report m e r shows
that AUF has been proactive in estatilishing quality of service performance goals to
ensure that its good customer service will be maintained into the future.
30
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000035 of 000183
EXHIBIT A
Docket No. 100330-WS,
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000036 of 000183
Exhibit A
Aqua Florida
Quality Performance Report
June 2010
Y
O
Total
Move in o r Move out
Pay by Phone Speedpay
VeriQ Account Balance
Customer Account Changes
Shut-Off Notice
Explain Bill
Payment Arrangement
Restore Service
Payment Confirmation Number
H
i
g
h Bill Complaint
No Water
Verify Receipt of Payment
Mspute Bill
Turn O n or Turn Off Service
Service Line Leak
Zip Cbeck Sign Up
Meter Problem
Leak Adjustment
Payment Location Inquiry
Boil Water Notice Inquiry
All Other Calls
-
18
14
11
9
5
5
5
4
4
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
8
1051
803
632
504
285
279
263
236
23 0
174
140
132
107
96
90
64
57
54
45
45
453
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000037 of 000183
EXHIBIT B
k lowFlonda.com
Agenda Conference Mav 24 Tallahassee
Docket No. 100330-WS
Page 2 of6
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page&&&~O00183
N o comrnentsEventsFebruary22nd, 201 lFReams
We are planning to repeat our Bus trip to Tallahassee and to attend and hopefully speak at this hearing
which will be held on Aqua’s latest request for an increase in rates end Single TariffPricing. Also,
discussed will be Aqua’s level of customer service based on the order issued a t the last Agenda conference
March 16,2010 at that conference the commission ordered Aqua to continue submitting monthly reports
on Customer Contacts as well as delays in service requests by system and percent of customers billed in the
normal cycles.
If you would like to attend this upcoming meeting in Tallahassee please submit your requests via the
website, we will be emailing updated informalion to all who are signed up for our Newsletter sent each
week. As we receive requests we will he determining boarding locations for the busses.
Click tu h a i l . Share or Bookmark This
Feb
16
Charolette Observer Aaua NC rate case
No ~ O m i i i ~ n t s L I n ~ ~ t e ~ o n ~ e16th,
d F e201
b ~ IFReams
a~
Aqua North Carolina, the state’s largest private water utility, is asking s
the second time in three years.
reguli rs for a hefty n
increase for
The move has riled homeowners who already pay Aqua about $1 00 for typical monthly usage, twice as much as
residents of Raleigh, Charlotte and other municipal utility departments. Aqua is asking for 20.4 percent more for
water service and 16.4 percent more for sewer service, which would add $13 to monthly bills. In 2009 those fees
went up 12.5 percent and 29.7 percent.
This time, homeowners are organizing and plan I:O stage a rally outside the N.C. Utilities Commission office in
Raleigh the day of the public hearing on the rate::. The hearing date has not yet been set but could draw protesters
from much of the state.
For the rest of the story copy and paste link below
Click to Email. Share or Bookmark This
Feb
15
Send AUF Complaints to:
Bo ccimnienrsUncareu,orizedFebruary 15th, 201 IDbussey
Office of Governor Rick Scott
State of Florida
http://www.flowflorida.codpage/2/
2/27/2011
Docket No. 100330-WS
Page 3 of6
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000039 of 000183
blowh londa.com
The Capital
400 S. Monroe St.
Tallahassee, F1 32399-0001
Rick.Scott~u!eos.mvLlorida.com
Kurt S. Browning
Florida Secretary of State
500 S. Bronough St.
R.A. Gray Building
Tallahassee, F1 32399-0250
sr.cretarvors~te(a7dos.slute.t1.w
Click to Ilinail. Share or Bookmark This
Feb
15
Comalain! ComDlain! Complain!
No CommentslJncategorizedFebruary 15th, 201 lDbussey
Our voices are getting stronger., ,,.keep filing complaints with the PSC., .....write your senator and
representative.. ... don’t forget to let our new governor h o w about our problems with Aqua Utilities
Florida., ....._let the Secretary of State know about it, too.
Let everyone know how upset you are with the F’SC and AUF.
Are your rates too high? Tell them!
Should AUF be allowed to acquire more utilities? Tell them!
Is your Customer Service lousy? Tell them!
Do you want AUF kicked out of Florida? Tell them!
Do you want the I’SC to do what’s right, instead of “business as usual”? Tell them! And keep on telling them
until they do something about it!!!!!
Dave Bussey
Click to Email. Share or Bookinark This
Feb
11
http://ww.flowflorida.com/page/U
__
2/27/2011
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000040 of 000183
EXHIBIT C
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000041 of 000183
Exhibit C
t
t m r r Icrvlce
Actual
Read Rate of Metered lmDUntS
% o f c v d r m m ~ l e t e onvheduleddate
d
(+or- 1my)
100.00%
I
100.m
I
99.10%
_
.
Overall ktlmilte Rate
~
h w n k Estimatedm dam
0.50%
0.10%
-
Pcmntage of Active A w n S Not B l l k d
0.06%
0.04%
0.03%
_
.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000042 of 000183
EXHIBIT D
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000043 of 000183
Exhibit D
throueh me toll-free numberthatwent into
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Page 000044 of 000183
Exhibit SC-3,
EXHIBIT E
Docket No.1 00330-WS
Final Phase II aSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000045 of 000183
Exhibit E
100
95
90
•••• • •• • ••• • • ••• • • •• • • •
85
-
80
ACO Goal
-b- East CS
East Call
•
75
Owrall
•
_
70
NorthCS
- - North Call
- t - - South CS
65
- - South Coil
60
55
50
co
a
"c
...,
III
co
a"\..
III
~
co
a
>.
00
00
~
~ ..., Jl
9
"5
00
Cl
Cl
Cl
">
0
·c
"\..
>.
a
Z
a
...,
C1I
a
III
~
a
~
Cl
Cl
a
a
">
0
~
~
..., Jl"c.
"c
"\..
Cl
9
"5
a
a
Z
...,
III
C1I
~
a
~
C1I
~
a
a
b.
...,"5 Jl
a
~
0
Z
a
;:;
~
Docket ho 100330-WS
Fina. P h a s II QSM Repon
Exh bit SC-3, Page 000046 of 000183
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC3, Pag&&bi@f
000183
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Repart
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000048 of OW183
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Repod
Exhibit SC-3, Page O O W 9 of 000183
Lake Rosalie Oaks
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000050 of 000183
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000051 of 000183
Dccket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000052 of 000183
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000053 of 000183
COMPOSITE
EXHIBIT G
Docket NO.100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
I
I
I
I
I
of 000183
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000055 of 000163
AQJA.
Aqua Utilities Florida
IiecondawWater Quality Project Report
July mo
lake Josephine & kbdng lakes
Aqua Utilities Florida (Aqua) owns and operates dozens of separate small water and
wastewater systems throughout the state that are not interconnected. When Aqua acquired
these systems, we focused first on full environmentalcompliance, now nearly completed. IN an
effort t o further improve our customer Semite, Aqua has been assessingways to enhance the
“secondaw oc aesthetic characterlsticsof our water.
Lake Josephine and Sebring Lakes is a community of about 553 and 76 wstomer respectively in
Highlands County. Aqua surveyed customen; in Lake Josephine and Sebring Lakes in December
2009.
Aqua determined that the aesthetic water quality issue in Lake Josephine and Sebring Lakes
primarily involved a sulfur odor. Aqua plans to install an AdEdge treatment system at Lake
Josephine and Sebring Lakes to eliminate the naturally occurring sulfur in the water. We expect
that this project will be operational by December 31*.
Aqua also received customer complaintsfrom lake Josephine RV Park and Camp Ground of low water
pressure. Aqua’s field personnel and engineerirq: conducted a review of the distribution system and
determine an Interconnectionbetween%bring Lakes with Lake Josephine was necessary to imprare
water pressure. Aqua permittedthe interconnectionwith DEP and the Water Management District and
the interconnectionwas opened permanently acid water pressure complaints have been eliminated.
Docket No.
-~~
. 100330-WS
. ~ .
~
Repon Date :
UZllZW9
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 0 0 0 0 5 ~ 8 R ~ b ~ 1 ~ 3
Laboratory Report
SEBRING LAKES W E L W
AndyskQmup:
Sme
ANOMS
N.D.
An4pbOmup:
YCTLld
kon
IrnwDmohmd
ManOwle
M a n g a n e s e ~ ~
Andysla Omup:
namrms
T0t.l OrgWc Calbon
AndyskOWp:
mon
mon
mon
mon
4RuoB
10
EF'A 3000
4122109
4mm
0.10
0.10
4122109
4122109
0.01
0.01
EPA ZW.8
€PA ZWB
EPA200.8
EPA 200.8
upne
5.0
uplw
IWOROINIC-COYPOUNDS
A
*
S
w
T&t DUMusd SCW8
Tow sdld.
0.18
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
mon
108
113
1
WL
WL
4RuoB
10
1.o
122
M
u2u)8
20
138
mon
UPlDg
20
.z
mon
swz32oB
SM ZMOG
SM 531CC
SCUDS
SM w4oc
SM2J408
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,
Page 00005i%?Jb&b3
Laboratory Report
LAKE JOSEPHINE WELL*
COllctknDm: mom
ColrnonTinu: 1 0 5 5
MID:
MllyRX:
S.mhID : AC17017
Aqua UbTi(ies Flocida. IW.
1616 Wendel Kent Rosd
Ssnsota. Fl. 34240
P b m I : 941-377-9456
C a n p r Addma:
AaayshGmup:
PYNRBpm
TuMy.hGmup:
sr*ala
1.2
N N
4 n l ~
ND.
moll
m
0.10
SM 21308
10
EPA 300.0
AHOMS
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3.Page 000058of 000183
,,
. . . ....I. . :.. . .
. .. .. . .
..
..,....I ,., / ,. .., : .. : .
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000059 of 000183
Repon Cover Page
Sholt Utility Service, Inc.
P.O. Box 1088
C g . SI.Zip
Anmion.
--
Sebring. Fl33871-1088
Wendell Fi~rcloul
Inaguricr, Secadvia. VoCr. S K I . Radiologic&
s-lr4.rS.mp.sh I"
April 13. ZOW
311699
- -.
~. - . . . . .
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Repart
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000060of 000183
.
m
Y
.J
Y
J
.
2
n
Docket No. lW33O.WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page OW061 of 000183
3 d 7
?
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000065 of 000183
AQJU A.
Aqua UtiWtkr Florida
soeacwkry Wator Qu8lity Project Report
July 2010
R o u l k Oaks Water System
Rosalie Oaks is a COmmuDity of about 89 Aqua CltilitieS Florida customw in Polk County.
In the past year,Aqua has worked to tackle the atsthetic qualities-the look smell end taste.-of tap
watm in tbc system. Although thac aesthetic qualities arc considcreed "saxwater quality
star&&
and AW has not exceeded thcsacondary standards for iron, mangamsc, dkalinity, and
hardness. Aqua has r n d folward with initiatives to addmss astomm coocam.
Minaalsendatdimcnts in the RosalieOaks water sornetimescaacausca black ring to form in toile.
lkSesalimcnls canaccumulatcwheawaterrcsts m pipes - a particular problemwhen weckmd and
seasonal crrrtomcrs
away for kmg paiods oftime. Aqua d.terminad that m atroJivc new wata main
flushing program should keep the water moving t ~ o r c w & ~ y a n d i m p r o v eits smell andapprmcc.
Aqua'scoetrador ~
c d ~ ~ f llast ~
fh& andthelocal
~ l l opcratorhrmchedan
m
aggrcssivc new flushing schedule in October. At Grst, Aqua flushed the system weekly to clean the pipes
thoroughly.Currently, -tors
flush the systun monthly and before holidays.
htauy R o d e Oaks redents art"seas0oll custolmas"
aod rehanto Florida far the wintcr. a
-they live elsewhue during the summer months
t means v r a t a can sit m their wvioc l i a household plumbing
for months, crcatiog odors and d$colored water. Customers might need to flush warn through thcir
fixturesand housebold plumbiiaftawata has Imstading in the pips for an ateDacdpaiod of
timc.
Docket No 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Florida Department of Environmental Prote&&hlt SC-3, P a w 000066 of 000183
Safe DrinkingWater Program Laboratory Reporting Format
WBLlC WATER SYSTEN NFORMATWN (to bemnplew by .Mlpler -hasetypm n p b r t w
sy&m Name: Rosale Oak8
-Type
(h.a-)
D CotnmuW
P w s 1.0.#:
0 NontranslenfNonmmmunity
IJLlLlmmFlI
Transiem NmammulrtY
. .-..-- -a.,
envlronmantalPr&ctlon
Safe DrinkingWater program Laboretory RepoMng
UUWL
VI
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final PhaSe It QSM Report
Page
Of
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000068 of000183
Safe Drinking Water Program Laboratory Reporting Format
INORGANlC CONTAMINANTS
szswaio(i)
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phass II QSM Report
Exhibe SC-3. Page ~00069
Of 000183
Florlda Departmentof Envlronmental Protection
Safe Drlnklng Watar Program Laboratory Reporting Format
Dock01No 104330-WS
Final Phase II QSM R0port
Exhibit SC3. Page WOO70 of WO183
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Safe DrinkingWater Program Laboratory Reporting Format
RspotNmtar/Job
mOl3WBw)l
PwSlD~rnPq.1~~154R
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Florida Depattment of EnvironmentalProtection
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000071 of 000183
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000073 of 000183
AQ!UA.
Aqua Utilities Florida
Secondary Water QuaW Proiect Report
July M i 0
Tangerine IMter System
Tangerine is a canmunlty of about 278 Aqua UtiliileiFtorida custome(s in Orange county.
In the past year, Aqua has worked to tadtle the aesthetic qualities-the look, smdl and taste
-
of the tap water in the Tagmine system. Although these aesthetic qualitiesare considered "secondary"water
quality standards, and Aqua has not exceededthe secondary standards for iron and manganese. Aqua has mwed
forward with lnltlatlves to address wstomer co(Icerrs.
Aqua will be installing 2,000 feet of new water main inJuly to connect dead ends and areas that now experience
low water pressure, primarily along Huron Street Scott Avenw, sectlon Street, Pine Street,and Orange Blosscm
Traln. We also replaced 1,100 feet d d d main along Orange B-l
Train and Pine Street
Aqua also applied for a state permit to install a "sequestration" treatment system In Tangerine, and contra*On
installed the system in Marchawaiting DEP Issuanceof the dearancet o operate the sy~ttem.TMswill bind
the naturaltyoccuningcaldum and manganesein t h e qstem's well water, whkh should reduce the residue
customers might see on their dishes and fixhres.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000074 of 000183
H E L . Inc.
SECONDARY CONTAMINANTS
62 5.50.320
-
Client
AquautlitlesFlorida,Inc.
Wakadec
Sample Location:
Taweiine W E Grab
SampkNmber:
Sarnpliog Date:
711-
PWS ID (Fmm Page 1):
Date Received:
7115109 1 2 s
IO:=
I002
1017
1022
1025
1om
TanQeheTrbnrual
2135285001
1055
1085
7.3
QMlzoU
EPA 200.7
€PA 300.0
EPA 200.7
EPA 300.0
EPA200.7
EPA200.7
EPA200.7
EPA3w.O
EPA200.7
1805
4.0
SM2l2OB
1.8
EPA 150.1
SM254OC
S M W C
0.200
16
0.0038
18
OAo090
0.11
0.017
0.00060 u
1032
1050
1925
1830
2905
0.wosOu
(8.5-a.q su
mgn
man
8-16
180
0.023
Q
OM)24
5.0
0.00070
OD11
OM)50
O.wOS0
0.00050
1A
0.WZO
7/31/0812:06
Egs080
7/21/081T:lS eeeoBD
71311081206 E9BoBo
71161097n6199 EP6080
713110912m EQBoBo
7I311091208 Ege080
7 l 3 1 ~ 1 2 EgsoBo
~
7/21109113S eaaOa0
71311091206
rS6080
7/181091&30
0.022
z?:.n
a b m h TO
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000075 of 000183
HBEL, Inc.
INORGANIC CONTAMINANTS
62 550.310 (1)
-
client:
sample Location:
Sampling Date:
Date Received:
1040
1041
1005
rndL 0.0081
6 0.ooPu
1010
1015
msn
msn
men.
1020
Ill@-
0.00040U
1024
1025
1030
IO35
1036
1045
1052
1074
I075
1085
mSn
rnsn
0.0047U
0.11
0.00070U
0.000060U
o.aao5ou
m&
0.0022U
msn
rn&
0.WlOU
0.020
0.OOOJOU
13
m@L o.m&?u
In& o.oO0bou
mgh 0.oMou
P A 300.0
€PA m.0
EPA 200.9
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
O.Oo30
0.ooZZ
0.0010
SM4500CNE
0.0047
0.011
O.oOO70
0.O.WO50
0.0022
0.50
O.mo82
0.00050
0.w10
EPA 300.0
€PA 200.9
EPA 245.1
EPA2W.7
EPA 200.9
€PA 200.7
EPA 200.9
EPA200.7
EPA200.9
0 . m
O.OOO30
Oao040
7148109 1324
71'1WS 1324
7/23109 1om
7B1109 1246
7131IOg 12:08
7/31109 12:W
10:lO
rn4m
? n wi s m
7Bm0 15:7121109 17A4
7131109 1 2 m
7R21U919:12
7131109 1ro8
7
m 12x3
7131109 1208
7m&9 15%
HBEL, Inc.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,
Page 000076 of 000183
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000077 of 000183
vomnuz ORGANICS
-
62 55O.:iiO (4) (a)
Client
Aqua Utilities Flotide, Inc.
Sample Locatbn:
Tangethe POE Grab
sampltng Dale:
711yo9 1030
Dale Recdved:
7l151O9 1238
Analytical
Method
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 5243
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
€A
!'
524.2
EPA 5242
€PA 5242
EPA 614.2
€PA 5242
EPA 5242
EPA 5242
EPA 524.2
€PA 524.2
EPA 5242
€PA 5242
EPA 524.2
EPA 5242
€PA 5242
- . . . ... .
Lab
M)L
RDL
-
0.12
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
025
0.41
0.43
0.15
0.t6
0.25
0.5
0.5
0.35
0.30
0.21
0.31
0.36
024
0.17
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.22
0.5
om
0.5
0.5
05
0.17
0.15
0.26
0.17
0.11
OK
0.5
,
05
0.5
0.5
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000078 of 000183
Docket NO. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000079 of 000163
AQUA.
Aqua Utilities Florida
Seconday Water Q u a i prolea Report
luly 2010
Tomoka Vkw Water System
Aqua's primary focus in Tomoka View has been to develop options to resolve the total trihalomethane
('ITHM) problem in the water system. Aqua received a permit from the Volusia County Health
Department of Health in December 2009 to install new chloramination treatment equipment, and we
Tangerine is a community of about 263 Aqua Utiities Florida customers inVdusia County.
-
Aqua's installed and launchedthe system later that month to reduceelevated TIHM's. Chloramination
the use of chloramines has been used as a disinfectant in water distribution systems for many years in
many communities throughout the US. and Canada. This new treatment system is working: lTHM levels
have dropped, and the water now meets federal standards. We will continue to closely monitor the
situation.
-
In the past year, Aqua also has worked to tackle the aesthetic qualities- the look, smell and taste of tap
water in Tomoka View. Although these aesthetic qualities are considered "secondav water quality
standards, and Aqua has not exceeded these secondary standards, we have movedforward with
initiatives to address customer concerns.
In July 2009, Aqua determined that a new flushing program would help improve the appearance of
Tomoka View's water. The water can contain natural minerals that can accumulate in distribution
system pipes, and sudden changes in flow in dislribution system can disturb deposits in the mains and
cause dixolored water. Aqua installedeight nevi isolation valves, and blowoff assemblies in strategic
areas 50 that we can target more aggressive flushing where it's needed most. Aqua also devised a
systematic schedule that involves operating valves in a specific sequence to maximize the effectiveness
of the flushing. The plan cleaned up accumulated natural deposits in the mains and should reduce
discolored water in the future. Field operations employees take regular samples from the distribution
system and, if the water quality begins to degrade, they will adjust the automatic flushing devices to
operate mace often and for a longer duration.
The water in Tomoka View also contains naturallly occurring copper, which Aqua determined could be
removed by a "sequestration" treatment system. Aqua contractedwith AquaMag, which installed the
system in December 2009. AquaMag samples water from the distribution system monthly to monitor
the effects of the sequestering program.
Aqua management has met with Tomoka View customers regularly to discuss customer concerns and
create strategiesto improve the look, taste and rmell of their water. We wilt continue t o talk with our
customersand keep them informed asour plans progress.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase 11 OSM Repan
Exhibn SC-3.Page 000080 of W0183
Tornoki View
-I:
Dolhn/numb.n
Comments
185 connections
upadtyfeer:
s
TOal Fees
$
2x8” meters:
$
labor:
s
ne In:
S
MIrcl5s(oftotal
5
Total pmlm:
$
2,063.00
per home
Purchase Water:
381.665.W Totalerpadlyfeer
17,wO.OO (based on Onond’s con
5
5
48,000.00 Annually
4,LXO.W Monthly
Above based on S2.~/lWOgallons
(From the Clty of Ormond Beach)
lAoo.00 (S100/hrX 8 h n plus mlsc materials)
150,wO.W G u d m a t e
25,200.W Doer not lndude capacity fees (guess)
O&M -there Is really no difference given
Twin RIverslTomoka are together and one will
take on all costs of travel and a w . expense
that would be made up bv a reduction in
operator cos&.
574,Msm
current Rate m e :
575poo.00 estimate based on current rate base
Abnndonmem
S20,m.m
of capital auoc. with the plant
con g h n we reduce rate base
Sub-Total:
$
669,855.00
Saleoflmd.
s
(20,m.mi
GnndTeUl:
$
wm.00 whkh cgwh $4119.29p.r connecthn
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000081 of OW183
. . .
(
,
,
. . .
i ,
.
.....
I
,..I,
NOTE: Do MI mund mlues. Report resub ID the aauracy, pfadslon. and sensigvin/ of Ihe a n a l w l
....
..
....................
..<....I
:
.,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
._(. .
.............
..i,.
. . . . .. . . . . . . . . .
.
.
~
R3.13
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Repart
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000082 Of
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Safe Drinking Water Program Laboratory Reporting Format
OW183
Dwkel No 100330-WS
hnarPnsss)l QSM R e p a .
Exn 0 1 SC-3. Page WOO83 of wO183
Dmket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000084 of 000183
..
. .
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase IIPds
Exhibit SC-3,Pa
03
(3116)672--
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
1 .o
4.6 q v l .
-Ugk
1 .o
1a
1.0
1a
24.1
101 %
70-130
OBW Ugk
13.7 Uon.
UUon.
*
1 .o
0.61
I
0.81
1
1
0.61
0.61
0.61
0.61
1
1
1
1
h)ytc.Iwehod: W A S 4 2
1a.s
w
-W-
19.4 Ilon_
6.1
W-
050
050
0.n
0.50
0.50
025
050
025
*- 9 2 %
70130
1m K
70-1 30
00%
70-130
70-130
101 K
025
025
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
Exhibit SC-3, P a M
0.50
050
0.50
7W130
70'130
124 U
101 %
70'130
70'130
025
0.25
0.25
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1 QSM Report
H E t , Inc.
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000087 of 000183
Date issued: March 31.2009
Tor
Will Fontaine
Aqua Utilities Florida. Inc.
930 S South State Road 19
Palatka. FL 321779394
Client:
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Workorder ID: Tomoka View Triannual W S e c
Received:
3/11I09 12:22
[2134204]
Dear Will Fontaine;
Analytical resutts presented in this report haw been reviewed for compliance with the
HBEL, Inc. Quality Systems Manual and have been dfjtennlned to meet applkabb
Method guidelines and Standards referenced in the July 2003 National IEnvImnmental
LaboratoryAccredbtion Pmgram ( N E W ) Quality Manual unless othenuise noted.
The Analytical Results within these report pages =Red the values obtalned from test8
performed on Samples As Received by the laboratory unless lndlceted differentfy.
FDOH Safe Drinking Water Act, Clean WzWr Act and RCRA V #s:
Egs080. E83509
Questions regarding this report should be directed to the Report Signatory at(772) 465-8584
referencing the HBEL Workorder ID [Number].
Respectfully submitted.
...
.
.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Rewrt
MBEC. Inc.
[2134204]
Client: Aqua Utilities Florida. Inc.
P&W3fer
aaEherReMlll
tJ&
worktwder ID: Tomoka V
Oda-lMMUhmd
1.0
Q
u
7.66
0.0030 u
0.017
0.m10 u
O.OOOT0 U
0.0016 U
0.0034
0.025 u
0.026
0.0020 u
0.w10 u
03
0.010 u
ow11
o.wro u
0.Wodl u
0.0022 u
0.0010 u
-
1.o
0.m
0.0030
0.0018
O.Wl0
0.00070
0.0018
0.0014
0.025
0.0037
€PA 140 1
WA 150 1
EPA1001
EPA1007
EPA1007
EPAloo7
O.Oo20
WA1007
EPA1007
0.w10
0.50
0.010
OaOaU
0.0010
o.ax)81
0.OOn
0.0010
€PA1001
EPAzDo7
EPA1007
EPA1007
EPA1007
EPAloo7
€PA1000
WA 100.9
EPAlooo
EPA 2m 9
zms
EPA
EPA 245 1
O.OOOt5
110
0.12
0.011
0.0022 u
4.7
0.0036 U
0.000080
5.0
0.011
0.w30
0.0022
1A
0.0036
EPAW41
0.0047 U
0.W47
0.13
0.10
0.020
0.038
0.027
€PAW 1
x
WAS
A
A
A
0.11 u
0.10 u
0.020 u
0.030 u
0.027 u
0.044 u
0.14 U
0.00 u
0.19 u
0.22 u
P m : YJmS
Laboralay Rsp
Anerrzed
bb
Batch
I k U T b n e ~ i W P )
-umc( w
Laborafocy fD: 2fS420400t
Sample ID:
P.O.E. Grab
i Triannual PrilSec
0.044
0.14
0.60
0.19
022
2.3 u
0.23 u
2.3
023
0.38 U
03B
EPA mn
EPA3ODO
EPA Jmn
EPAYSO
€PA m
m
P
WAS5
EPA 505
EPA S
€PA505
€PA505
WAS5
€PAS
A
JL
A
1
A
WASlS.1
EPA515.1
EPA 515.1
1
EPA5$&1
EPASlS.1
1
1.
1
A
Icp S d 6
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
HBEL, Inc.
CE~~98P~~~’$%?!f00’
5600 US. I NoFvl FOrt Pkrc€ FC 34946
DhOne c17q465-EKS4
F a x -467-
[2134204]
Client; Aqua Utilities Florida. Inc.
PIYMleW
ctU&#Rerultl
w
023 U
0.21
0.44
023 U
0.41 u
0.21 u
0.20 u
0.40 u
0.23 U
0.20
024 U
0.50 u
0.21 u
0.21 u
0.2s u
0.21 u
0.24 u
022 u
0.46 U
0.35 U
0.36 u
0.32 U
0.61 U
Wodrwder ID: Tomoka View Triannual Pri/Sec
W a W Rep
Linll
023
021
0.44
0.23
0.41
0.21
0.29
u
u
0 21
EPA W
021
023
EQPAWI
EPA 5242
EPA S241
EPA 5241
P A 5242
EQA 3242
021
0.24
022
0.46
0.35
0.36
0.32
0.61
0.48
0.46 u
0.070 U
0.070
0.85
0.66
0.31
024
0.63
0.41
0.13
0.85 u
0.- u
0.31 U
0.24 U
0.63 U
0.41 U
0.13 U
(3 u
13
2.8
u
2.a
1.0 u
.s
1
0.0 +Loa
O.SU*1-0.2
pcik
2a
(XI
€PA 515.1
030
0.20
024
Analvred
IMdTknn W m n A n d p l
EPA 5241
€PA5212
WA 5243
EPA 5242
EPA 524.i
€PA 5242
WAY41
EPA 5241
Em5242
EPA 5242
€PA U42
0.40
023
u
Bach
l
WAS242
EPA 5241
EPA 5249
EPA 5252
EPA 5252
WAS51
E P A W
€PA5252
EPAsIs2
€PA S251
EPA 5251
EPA531.1
mu1.1
€PA 547
WAW.l
EPA 5492
EPAOOM
EPADS.1
WAW.
pat
uo
e
1.E
16
su2m0
BOs(0C
0.063
rnpn
O.IRJ47
0.035
nsll
0.022
m
E
ShUSkOC
.
lab
ID
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
HBEC, Inc.
c E m t w m m e w / g000183
5600US.lNMQLFortPlWC€R 34946
ohans m2)46S-E5EU
Far l77i?1467-(5sn
I21342041
Clienl: Aqua Utilities Florida. Inc.
Workorder ID: Tomoka View Triannual Pri/Sec
~~:
M&ix Waler
0.21
0.44
0.23
u
u
u
0.41 U
O Hu
030 u
0.40
u
0.23 U
0.21
0.44
023
0.41
021
028
0.40
023
020
0.24 U
u
0.20
024
0.30 u
0.21 u
0.30
0.21 u
0.23 u
O Mu
u
014
022 u
0.46 u
0.35 U
0.36 u
0.32 U
021
0.21
EPA 524.2
EM5242
€PA $242
€PA 5242
EPA $241
WAS42
EPA 524.2
€PA5242
EPA524.2
EPAS24.2
WAS42
WAS42
EPA5242
023
021
024
WAS741
022
€PA5241
0.46
0.35
0.36
WAUI.2
EPAull
EPA 5242
EPA 5241
0.32
EPA 524.2
€?'A5241
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000091 of 000183
AQUA.
zephyr Sbacs is a commuaity ofabout SO0 Aqua Utilities Florida customus in Pasa, Couaty.
Aqua has WOrLal diligently-
thcp.stmzralyears to impmvctheopcntionaadreliiwy of
tbezephyrSborrssystem.AstheFloridaPublicscrvictcomnusS
' ionnoted in Aqua's last rate
casedccisioo,Aqua itwtdled a m n d well anda gauntor to thc system and d u e d a conscat
orda with tbe Flaida Depsrtmnt of EnvironmentalProtection(FDEP) to address rdiability and
pomi(tingissucs. 'Ihat consent ordawasclclscd onoctoba29.2007. A amsent ada was
issued in April 2009 f
a the late submittal of QuartalyArsenic Samples, and that orda was
satisfied m August 24,2009.
4
-
In thc past year, Aqua bas workcd to tackle the aesthetic qualities thc 1004smell and tasteoftap water in the systam.Although these aesthetic qualities .ICansidered "scuds@' water
q u a l i I y ~ a a d A q u a ~ n o t c x & l t h e s ~ s ~ ~ ~ d ~
Aqua bss moved f6rQArdwith~tiati~
to address CuStMIvr concam.
i
i
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000092 of 000183
Zephyrhills
71% of respondentsrated Aqua's overall water service 1 or 2 on a scale of 1-5
68%of respondentsare not satisfied m~ththe taste of their water
64% of respondentsare not satisfiedw ~ t the
h odor of their water
46% of respondentsare not satisfied with the color of their water
59% of respondentsare not satisfied with the hardness of their water
48% of respondentsare not satistbedwith the reVibilityof their service
45% of respondentsare not satisfied with Aqua's Customer service
92%of respondentsare not satisfied with the value of their water service for the money
65% of respondentsrated Aqua's a t t e n l h and response to water quality Issues involved in
providingwater service 1or 2 on a scale of 1-5
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Florida Department olf Environmental ProteefhLnsc-3, Page 000093 of 000183
Safe Drinking Water Program Laboratory Reporting Format
LABORATORY CERTIFICATION INFORMATION (to ba mmpktd &
AITACH CURRENT W H ANALYE SHEET *
Lab Name:Mvanced Environmntal Labcn(wiss. Inc
w)
€84589
Phone#: 1613)63og616
by lab)
oa(essrrgla(s)Recalved: 09/0212009
- zephjr-5huhi5
proddo O m mr6ficatdn numberr: -74.
ATTACHW H ANbLYlE
pht
cemicahllErpiratanDa(e: Ww2010
PWS1oikapq.I)._8isBprp
Ifyes.
(y
FMdaCerWcntkmB:
Addresc: 9610 Princess Palm Avenue
Tsmps.FL 33618
*Nuys18 HFORUAllON ((D be
- sua typa
~ a m p l ~ ~ u n b e r ~ ~ pm. 0
1 .~~i 7
) :0 0 1
€82001, E83033
SHEET FOR EACH BvBcONlRAClED UB*
Docket No 1W330-WS
Final Pnase II QSM Report
~ ~ h ,sc-3,
b ~ t page
d 000183
Florlds Department of EnvlronmentalProtection
Safe Drlnklng Water Program Laboratory Reporting Format
!
www
mm-m
62-mdlOO
Safe Drinking Water Program Laboratory Reportlng Format
RaPmNlmtalJob
m l 7 W l
PWSlD(Fnm~q.iiJ
5J
2018
Docket No. 100330-WS
_.
..
. .
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000099 of 000183
.~<....
L . -
Tomoka View P W S Flushine PIan
January 201 0
Purwee;
of the watw in the
The purpose ofthis flushing program is tci maintain quality and- a
Tomoh View water distributionsystem.
Intcrrt:
The intent of this plan is to provide guidelines to operations personnel in daily opaations.
Specific conditions in the distribution system may dictate a d d i t i d flushing and monitoriog.
DisMbn
&
onSvs
Manual mnvcntional fh.lshing may be n e u w should conditions dictate in response to water
quality pametas approaching the triggm m Table 1. or in response to customa complaints of
black or discolored water or taste and odor. In these CILIOCS, flushing will be conducted to achieve
and maintain goals for the water quality parametem specified in Table 1. The water quality
pammeas should be tested twice pa wed. at the point of entry and at least two locatioos inthe
distribution systan and the MRT for a total of four locations.
c
I
I
I
until -35 W a a N
I
Automatic Flusbint
The following l ~ n cunmtly
s
have automatic flushing devices it~~talled
and shall continue to
be programmed b runMushas indicated:
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase It QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000100 of 000163
Page 2 of 2
"he following hations shall be manually flushed (midirectionally) BS indicstcd below until
watm is visibly clear and an scccptaMe tofad chlorine midual is achiwd Flush each section in
its
beforc moving to the next sectiim. Refm to the systan fluqhing map for locations of
flusb points and valves. Thc system should be m i d i r a *wn d y flushed twice per year.
Additional manual flushing should be prrftnmed by d o n m response to customs complaints
or watm quality paramdcr triggem in a particular section.
Im~lemcntation:
The &Ishingpmgram will be implanmted at the time chloraminatimgoes ontiie in the Tomka
View wata system and shall remain in effa:twhile the system is on chlommhatim
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000101 of 000183
Rosalie Oaks FlushinP Plan
The purpose of this program is to insure the quality of the potable water provided to the Aqua
Utility Florida, IN. customers in the Rosalie Oab service area The population consists of
seasonallw&lad customem, therefore p r o p tlnshing is importaut to provide quality water.
Intent:
The intent of this program is to provide nlinimum guidelines to operations personnel in daily
operations. Specific conditions in the distribution system aod customer complaints may dictate
additiinal tlushing and monitoring.
Fluahins
The system shall be flushed dircctionally in the order below every Thursday. At a minimum,
each flush point shall flush the volume of water s
pecified.
Ltn. Ft. from
POE. Blow off or
S b a t Name
Urw,Mameter
Last Urn E
Galkns of
water
1762
1
1762
I
875
6
4
367
571
I
936
I
Rush Pdnt # 3
500
6
734
Flush Point # 4
800
6
Flush Point # 5
900
flushpdnt#6
500
Flush Pdnl# 1
flush Pdnt # 2
250
Total Gallons
1174
I
I
1174
I
1
6
I321
I
1321
I
2
82
I
82
I
734
-
"
..
.
Docket No. 100330-WS .
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000102 of 000183
b
0
.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000103 of 000183
..
'.
. I _ _ _ , ,
ZeDhvr Shores PWS FlushinP Plan
€!s!zss
The purpose of this flllshing program is to maintain quality and qpeammx of the water m the
zephyr Shores water distribution system
The intent of this plan is to provide guidelines to operations personnel in daily operations.
Specific conditiim in the distribution system may didate additional flushing aad monitoring.
Distribuaon S ~ s t e mMonitwine Actioa Levels. & Actions:
Manual conventional flushing may be nlxcSSary at any time should conditions dictate in
response to watcr quality parametas approaching the trigger in Table 1, or in response to
customer complaints of black or discolored water or taste and odor. In these cases, flushing will
bc conducted ta achieve and maintain chktrine residuals at or above the m i u i m in Table 1.
Parameter
Free Chlorine
Residual
Action
Flush until residual M.5 mg5 as
Ch
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000104 of 000183
Page 2 of 3
Unidirectional FlnshIn~:
The following locations shall be manually unidiirectiodly flushed as indiied below until water
is visibly clcar and an acceptable chlorine nsidual is achieved. Completely flush each section in
its entirety bebre moving to the next section Refer to the system flushing map for locations of
flush points and valves. The system should be unidirectionally flushed twice per year or mre
ofla as customer Complaints or water qualitydictates.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000105,of 000183
Page 3 of3
FIRE
21
29.33.3448
m
HYDRANT
BLOW OFF
22
.
31,32.33
30
(CONDOMINIUM)
M(ACENTRY)
30
29.33 UC. 34.
58
X,30
hDkIUeIIUtiOn:
The flushing program is cumntly b c i implemented in the zephyr S
shall runam in effect until the swem is on chloraminatba
~ water
m system and
- .
,
.: .
. ..
-
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000106 of 000183
AOUA,
Leisure Lakes PWS Fiushcw Plan
The purpose of this flushing program is to maintiin quality and appearance ofthe water in the
Leisure Lakes water d b t r i i n system
The intent of this plan is to provide guidelines to opaations pasomel in daily operations.
Specific conditions in the distniution system may dictate additional flushing and monitorinp.
Distribution Smtem Monitorine. Action I m & & Actions:
Manual conventional flushing may be ntxxssary at MY time should conditions didate in
response to water qualay panrmetess appmaching the trigger in Table 1, or in response to
customer complaints of black or discobred water or taste and odor. In these cases, tlushing will
be conducted to achieve and maintain chbrine residuals at or above the minimums in Table 1.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1 QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Pa e 000107 of 000183
%age2 of 3
Unidirectional Fluahin%
The following locations shall be manually tlnidirectionally flushed as indicated below until water
is visibly clear sod an acceptable chlorine residual is achieved. Completely flush each section in
its entirety b e f h moving to the next s e c t i m Refer to the system flushing map E x locations of
flush points and valves. The system shoulld be unidxectionally flushed twice pa year or more
often as custom complaints or wata quality dictates.
Flushing Plan - Leisure Lakes
GPM 8
Psi
I
FH 13
Flush Point #2
V20
FH 12
30
m 12
NIA
Flush Point #3
v29
FH 10
30
NIA
V20
Flush Point #4
V37. v38.
V31
FH 10
30
FH 10
V29
Flush Point #5
NIA
FH 7
30
FH 7
NIA
FH 8
NA
-
NA
FlushPoint#7
I
V3
L
I
FH9
I
I
30
t---
I
I
Flush Point #8
v4
-
flush Point #9
v5
FH 9
Flush Point #lo
NIA
flush POlnt #(I
V2
Flush Point #12
Vi 5
FH 4
Flush Point #
3I
VI 0
FH 2
30
FH 2
Flush Point 614
r?m
FH 3
30
FH 3
FH 6
FH 4
Flushing
should
be at
I20
GPM c#
higher.
7
1
%
V10. V15
. -:.
.,. :.
~
1.
i .
.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000108 of 000183
Page 3 of 3
ImDlementation:
The flushing program is currently bciag implemarted in the Leisure Lakes water system and
shall remain in e m until the system is OILchloramination.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Repolt
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000109 of 000183
Sernatia marcLccwIs
application of a bld-based disinfeuaat. Rinstlgand drying
surfaces &a use can also prevmt the establishnimt of the
bacteria by removing its food soand makin[: the
environment less hospiile.
S.marcesoens may also be found in environmeats such as dirt,
supposedly "sterile" places, and the subgingival biofilm of
teeth. Due to this, and the fad that S. marcescenr p r o d u a a
reddish-orange tripyrrole pigment called prodigiosin,
S. marcescens may cause extrinsic staining of the teeth. The
biochemical pathway illustrating the production of prodigiosin
Contents
1 Identification
i
SekntaEe classilkation
I
Kingdom: Baderia
Phylum:
Roteobaoteria
I
Class:
GammaProteobacteria i
orda:
EntnobadaiaIes
I
Family:
Entaobactmaceae
Gmus:
Serrafia
Species:
-
-
Smrvccsnns
Binomial name
Serratiamonxffurs
- - -- ..Bizio
- 1823
. -- I
1
i
-1
I
2Pathogenesis
S. m a r c e s m is a motile organism and can grow in tempemoms rangingfiom S-WC and in pH levels
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
ranging fiom 5 l o 9. It is difierentiatcd from other Gram-negative bacteria ~ W % i @ G t $ t 6 ~ 1 °Of ooo183
hydrolysis, which allows i! to produce exbacellular metalloproteinases which are believed to
h c t i o n in cell-to-extracellular matrix interactions. S.morccscens also exhibits tryptophan and citrate
degradation. One of the end products of tryptophm degradation is pyruvic acid, which is then
incorporated into different metabolic processes oFS. marcescenr. A fmal produd of citrate degradation
is carbon.Thus,S.morcescens can rely on citrate! as a carbon source. In identifying the organism one
m y also perfom a mefhyIred resf, which detanlies if a microorganism performsmixed-acid
famentation. S. marcescens results in a negative test. Another determination of S. mamescem is its
capability to produce ladic acid via oxidative and fermentative metabolism. Therefore, it is said that
S. matrewens is lactose OIF+.(~]
-in
Pathogenesis
S. mamawens can cause infectionin scved sites, including the urinary lrad, respiratory tract, wounds,
and the eye, where it may cause wnjundivitis, kesatitis,endophthalmitis, and tear duct
It is also a rare cause of endocaditis and osteomyelitis (particuldy in people who use intravenous drugs
recreationally). pneumonia, and meningiti~.[~1[~]
Most S. mamescens strains are resistant to s e v d
antibiotics becauseof the presence of R-factors,which are a type of plasmid that carry one or more
genes that encode resistance; all are considered intrinsically resistant to ampicillin, mamlides,and firstgeneration ~epha~osporins
(such as cefdexin)J21
In elkhorn cod, s.ma-cem
is the cause ofthe disease known as white pox
it sometimes oCCUW as a secondary pathogen in viral flacherie disease,[&'""
In silkwonns,
Also in Drosophila research Laboratories, infection with S.rnaroeFcens is wmmon. It manifests itself as
a pink discoloudon or plaque in or on larvae, pupae, or the usually starch and sugar-based food
(especially when improperly prepared).
History
Skrraria marwcens was d i s c o v d in 18 19 by Venetian pharmacist Bartolomeo Bizio, as the causeof
an episode ofblood-red discoloration ofpolenta lii the city of Padua.['I Bido named the olganism four
years later in honor of saafino Semti, a physicist who developed an early steamboat;the epithet
manxscem (Latin for "decaying") was &sen btxause of the pigment's m i d de-t
* * I
observations led him to believe that the organism decayed into a mucilage-like substanceupon reaching
maturity).[*] SerrafiCr was k renamed Monasprodigiosus and BaciIIupmdigimur before Bizio's
original namewas restarad in the 192Os.[fl
a m m was aroncously believed to be a non-pathogmic "saprophyte".[3] and its
reddish coloration was used in school experiments to track infections.It has also been used as a shulant
in biological warfare tests by the United States Milita~y.[~l['~l
On September 26 and 27,1950,the
United States Navy conducted a seuet experiment named "operation SeaSpray"in which some
S. marce.scens was released by bursting balloons ofit o v a urban areas of the San FranciscO Bay Area in
Calicrnia. Although the Navy later claimed the bacteria were harmless, beginningon Scptcmba 29
elevm patieuts at a local hospital developed very rare,gecious urinary tract infectionsand one of t k e
individuals, Edward J. Nevin, died. Cases ofpneumonia in San Francisco also increased after
s. mamcens was rel€asal.['~I~[1~1
Until the 1950s S.m
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000111 of 000183
Sincc 1950, S. niorccscens has steadily incrcased as a cause of human infection, with many strains
mistant to multiple antibioticsj'l The first indications ofproblems with the influenza vaccine produced
by Chimn Corporation in 2004 involved S. mamscem contamination.
Because of its red pigmentation, caused by expression of the pigment prodigi~sin!'~] and its ability to
grow on bread, S. marcescem has been evoked ai a naturalistic explanation of Medieval accounts ofthe
"miraculous"appearance ofblood on the Eucharist that led to Pope.Urban IV institutingthe Feast of
Corpus Christi in 1264. This followed celebration of a Mass at Bolsena in 1263, led by a Bohemian
priest who had doubts concaning transubstantiation, or the turning ofbread and wine into the Body and
Blood of Christ during the Mass. During the Mass, the Eucharist appeared to bleed and each timethe
priest wiped away the blood, more would appear. While it is possible that Serratia could generate a
single appearance ofred pigment, it is unclear how it could have generated more pigtncnt after each
wiping, leaving this proposed explanation open to doubt. This event is celebrated in a frescx,in the
Apostolic Palace in the Vatican City, painted by lRaphaelj'41
In early 2008 the U.S. Food and Drug Admimistnltion(FDA} issued a nationwide dof one lot of
Pre-Filled Heparin Lock Flush Solution USP ["I. The heparin IV flush syringes had been found to be
contaminated with Serratia marcexem, which rtsulted in patient infections. The Centers for Disease
Control (CDC) confirmed growth ofSerratia marcexens from several unopened sytinges of this
product
References
1.
HejariA,Fa~FR(l997)."Serratiam;uccscarsn.
JMedMicmbiol46(11)1903-12.
dOi:10.10991M1222615-46-11-903.PMlD 9368!530.
'
a
Auwaeaer P (October 8.2007). "Serratia species".PoinI-ofXam Inf-lion
TechnologvABX Guide.
Jobs Hopkios University.h t t p J ~ ~ . h ~ b ~ ~ o r g / ~ ~ c t ~
Retrieved on December 13.2008. Froely availalble with ngistratim.
3. A a '"Ank BJ (Odoba 1,2008). "Serrati: Ckerview". eA4edicine.WebMD.
M t p : N ~ i c i o c . m a d s c a p e . c o m l a r t i c k R 2 8 4 9 .RetriMd on Deeemba 13. ZOOS.
4. ^[I]
5. A "SerraliaA4arcsen.s seton implant mfedioa & orbital cellulitis". EyeRoun&.org.
2.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
~
t
h t t D : / / w c ~ ~ o ~ ~ u i o w a ~ ~ ~ ~ Retrieved
~ ~ ~ 200644-06.
3 4 - ~ m m f ~ ~ ~ h ~
A iatt--WPorter JW,Ri&e KB, ef d. (Ifune2002). The etiology of white pox, a lethal diseasc of thc
Caribbean ellrhorn c o d Acmmmdmafa".pro^
-uN
4-w
doi:10.1073/pnas.092260099.PMID 120772%
A a b SeMevbS, Donnc~bmgMS (October 1999). "Arcanmn: The 19th-caturyltalii pharmacist pictured
hcrc was the first to charactcrizcwhat are now lrnown to be bactuia of the p u s Saratia.. ClinInfet D&
29 (4): 770,925. dOi:10.1086/520431.PMlD 10589885.
hap.~~.joumatp.Ucbicago.edu/doi/pdf/59.
A Bho's original report was uapslatad into EagiiiSh in 1924. and published i
n the J o d qfBac&ridogy.
See Merlin0 CP (Novanbcr 1924). "Bartolomsc~
Bizio's Letter to the most Ernie111Priest, Angel0 Behai,
collaming the Phof the Red Colorcd Polenta".JEa&riaI 9 (6): 52743. PMlD 16559067.
PMC 379088. bttpd~b~.org/c&nnidlookup?view-long&pmii16559067.
A Dcmocrcry Now1 I How the US. Govcrntnent Exposed Thousandsof Americans to Lcthal Badaia to Test
Bologieal warfare
Ahttpd/archiv~~wmm/paciiddcaum
w/d1198022Q.html
A cole.Leonard A. (1!88). Uoudr of Sxreq: lRe Art&
Gem-Wafare Tests Over Poplated A n a x
( F o m r d by Alan Cmmfon). Tot~va,
New I<-:
Rowman & Littkticld.. ISBN 0-8476-7579-3.
A Rcgis, Ed. lRe Biology o f h m :
America's ,&ref G e m WhrforeP m j e . . Diane Publishing Company..
ISBN 0-7567-5686-3.
~
6.
~
http:JJea.wikipediaorg/wili/Saratia-m w ;
9/15/2010
-
Docket NO.100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
A Bennett JW, Benrlcy R (2090). " k i n g red l'k story or prodigiosin". Ad6#)&%7&%23Clel0Q0322
of 000183
hi:
10.10166ooSS-2164(OO)47O-O. PMID 12876793.
14. A 'The Mass a1 Bolsena by Raphael". Vatican Museum.h t t p : / / m v . ~ I i c a n . ~ a / 3 _ E N / ~ ~ ~ x &WSDRs/SDRS_O2-01 012.html.Retrieved 2006-0543.
15. A Ahi2 PAT,Inc. Issues N a i h w k k Recall ofF're-Filled Heparin Lock Flusb Solution USP (5 mL in 12 mL
13.
Syrioga)
External links
rn d 2 1 0 3 at eMedicine
Retrieved from "httpJ/en.wilcipediaorg/wiki/Serratia
-v "
Categories: Enterobadaia 1 Microbiology 1 Gnun negative bacteria
I This page was last modified on 25 Augusi! 2010 at 1702.
rn Text is available under the Creative Comnons Attriiution-ShareAlikeLicarSe; additional terms
may apply. See Tams ofUse for details.
Wikipedia@ is a registered tradcmarLof the Wikimedia Foundation,Inc.. a non-profit
Orpenization.
9/15/2010
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000113 of 000183
Northshore Utility District
What is that black "sW
in my toilet, shower or pet's dish?
Each year. a few Northshore Utility Disbict customers call to ask about a black dimy
substance that occedonally forms in moist areas around their homa Cusbmers most
frequently obsenk'lf6 biiet bowls. on the surfaces in shower stalls and bathtub
endosures, in sinks and pet Gter dishes. +
A bladc fungus or mold is thought to be h e cause of the bladc stuff. The fungus or mold
is common inhabitants of our envitrnment. They can be found in many places,
induding human and animal feces, dust soil, and surface water. The fungus or mold will
grow in any moist location where phosphorous containing materials or fatty substances
accumulate. Sources of these substances indude soap residue in bathing areas, feces
in toilets. soap and food residues in pet dishes. The fungus or mold can also grow in
locations such as toilets. The chlorine residual will dissipate from the toilet where water
is left standing for an extended period of time. The black fungus or mold is not known to
cause any waterborne diseases.
Once the fungus or mold is established, it cannot be eliminated entirely. However,
periodic and thorough deaning ofthe surfaces followed by disinfection with chlorine
bleach can control the fungus or mold. Saub the surfaces with a brush and household
deaner. Disinfect the surfaces with a strong chlorine bleach solution, let stand for 10-20
minutes and thoroughlly rinse away with dean water.
To control the growth in the toilet, thoroughly dean the toilet bowl with a h s h and a
toilet bowl deaner. Disinfect the toilet Imwl rim with a chlorine solution. You may also
add a X cup of chlorine bleach to the toilet tank. Let the solution stand for 10-20
minutes. ~ u s the
h toilet a couple ottinies to rinse the disinfectant out of the toilet tank
and the toilet bowl.
If you have any questions regarding this mold, please contact Mi& Holte our Water
Quality Coodirtator at (425) 398-4417.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page OQgJ&of 000163
What is the sou-
of our water?
Our wstomrs recdve water purchasedfrom the cny
OF Hamlbn. supplemented nlth water purchasedfrom
the oncmnatl waterworks. Bc*h mes use and treat
Water fmm the treat Hlami Buried V a l b Aquifer, an
underground water bash. m dty of Gncinnab also
uses and beak water From me Ohio Rlver.
me water IStnated to meet stringent water quality
Standards. R k pumped into ?*oapetanks located
Mmughout Buner County untll it is sent into our
d
-,
rKtem o,
your
budneu.
bottle4 watcr safer than, tap watcn
Not necessarily.Check the bottled water labe( m
Contact lhe bornad water supplier For test results on
Chelr product. under specla1 clrtumstances, wch as
durtw an cmrpcnry. bttled water can be a good cholce
me US. Environmenb~lRotcEtlon Agency regulates p
~ bwater
l ~ symms.As shown In wr
BCWS's wabx supply meets all Federal and State WA drinkjng
water standards. Bottled watw m M M p l y wnh F w d and Drup AdminiatraUan regulatbm. WOSt
wulred mnftwng under mr Fo(I mguk.uon+ k not as frequent as the monnollng donc on
BcWS's wter under EPA mg~Uations.
-d-ca,
Depend(n0 on the sourn of t t water
~
and the treatment process, some bottled waters m a y mmtn
more or *sr amounk of substances man tap water. Some stvdles have show that mkmMal
growth may =cur In bottled water during stwage due m the lack OF &dud dlsln-t.
BCWS
adds chbrln ta us system to control mkroblal gmwth.
FWpk with c o ~ m m i s e d
lmnwne systems should check the water quality test RWDS For BcWS
and the battled water s u ~ s and
, C M S U n thew donor betore decldlng whKh source Is best for
I4t.m
Whv dld I pet a & ! U s & y s l s ~ e M H w .'lirnmI+o' on m i door?
When part OF the water systein hss a S
w
a
m k s In -sure bemuse OF a main break or other
pmMnn. the Oh10 EPA recommends lrsulng a prrcduuonary boll adt o all affected curtomar.
It ~ l s l takes
y
us about 24-4-8 hours to Rx maln breaks ond
water samples. We will nohW
you with a new door tag if the' a d w r y conmuas longer than 48 hours.
6
m
--m
D
How do I pet InlomuUonitbout water quully?
Water qwllty standards For safe drlnknlp water are set by the USEPA and Ohio EPA. The W
sew you mor exceeds JII OF these ~quhments.
Our -anUCciU
wr.
a U We
provides a summary of our water testing for the prrlour
IF you hsw a t h a questions o l m t your water quallty. please cdll w r Customer Ore Depamnent at
(513) 887-3066
* m y ls.the~chlorine In ma mtcr?
10 rhe r.at.:! ti ctwilic
me wa:cI
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
15 lrev licml E&@\ &&Pfl@
000115 of 000183
oepannrtit has InStalied ~ e l . ~ rChloime
al
pump stations th~ouqhoulout set vlce
flirie arc about 0.6 cans per mi!lion 01 mloflne in our water
air? On average
How do I d c c r c l y the amount of chlorine in my water (for Rsh tanks, plant watering.
Ctc.)?
FIN a dean mnmlner and leaving it sllghdy uncovcnd. allow I to stand overnlght. The &lorin wlll
evaporate. To speed up tk ,)mess. warm the water. store the dechlotimted water in the
&rigemtor,
I8 there is k a d In my water7
-5
fO(ku0 EPA regulatlors and guiddlnes fw water system lead t d n g . Ow tests Indicate that,
system-wide, the lead kvtls in aCWS's water are W w the EPA limb.
h e v e r , k a d from your horn's plumbinp can kach Into ywr water. Lead p l p are easily
xntchcd with a house key. kaminp a shiny streak. A piwate laboratoly can testa s
a
W of your
water to test for *Id.
For more hforrwtmn. see:
0
EPKs~~lrr
gWS'S
kadanetelN.FiIct 5hM
Why I s there l w r i d e in ttn water?
Ruorfde prevents tooth dewy and k escrrnthl for p w e r devetopmnt of bows and teeth.On
amage there Is 1 part per nllllon of n w M e In our drlnldng water.
What k the hardness level 01 Bcws*s wata7
me hard- ot the w a t a 6 usually khrren 14s and 170 P a m per mimon. mk equals 8-9 grains
pr galban.
What la tha pH level o( OCWS'a water?
The pn of our water usually iinges b M c n 8.8 a d 9.4.
p a r w a ~ h . an
. odor, wb8tshouId I do?
-Warp
thd.rbpea to bh km'%nWw
c)utWlUrhtcrhp8-Wador,'m.#&*dm
fmm
d.*a. J
!
!
t
.
v
Mdartqsmhamoch '@
q
UroOm. ttwn Unlldak.mbabIymmuQsnunahedr@.aeSmpq
plaIn.&
Qi.h~lnwlymm4thcesopl~
Iy*cIhdI
CWorbm odw occur when the residual chkwlm dlsinfeaant gases ( 0 0 2 ) mmblne with gases given
off by mmmon lw&udd Ihms. New csrpeb, mm. (Inwrr, pire wm=atts, uphomely, scented
BD.m and ocher household prcducts pmduce gases called voc5. When the chlorine gas and VOCI
mmbtnc, you m y
a sm4l that does not rmel like enher duorlmor the sou~ceof the VOC.
Some ofthe most mmmon desm@tkms of the ado- are at urine, fud OII oc chemlois.
Rdurr h s e odors. try piltttng a fan In your wlndow to alr out your home to reduce the kwd of
Mcc or use a cu&n niter tu redm the level of Q02.
TO
U you are UMble to detnmltr the onpln of the OQM; pkase d l w r Curtoma Care Depalrment at
*.
Docket NO.100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
tke ~ b i i d i : w ~
issCauscd t.y ai. buiibin. 81 bw:il clear from lhc b
,
.
;
~
~
~
~
Of
~
000183
~
~
~
,
R
[DP.
Why are there pm'tlcler flaitinp in my water?
Black. brawn or N s t y pdnaei can be caused by mlnerak breaking !nose dwlng hydrant flushlnp.
line Weak or llne nwlntmancr. RvSh w u r lines by runnmg the cold water for several minutes. If
the water docs not dear, the ipartlcles could be codn9 hDm brea!dhroughs In vwr M water
heater or filter system. Call a Ilcend plumber to i n w w a t e the problem.
If whlte or tan particles am ncmting on the surface of the water, the pmbtem nwv be wming (mm
your hot water he-.
The pliistlc dlp tuber In w a f f heam often dlslnteqnte nith phces gdng
thmuph the pluumbing and bdng trapped In faucet aerators. Call a kens& plumber to lnvestipate
the problem.
Wblhere pbk&bh*k
h,~.tO#M?~:
~ , r ~ n ( ~ ~ ~ . ~ m $ d ~ p n * ~ y r o u h a ' h t h e , a k ~ - r ? ~ h ~ r t ~ ~ a
a r k a r p o v c a e ( d e o ( o m d k n r , a n d ~ o ~ p r k ~ ~ c . , d i. i .m h o ~ a b
3'
~
~
.
~
~
''
You can easily remove the rln- wlth a mllet b
o
r
r
l brush and household cleaners. Oose Me tollct Rd
to reduce the number of s p m and
~ reduce the IIgM needed for poWm.
pinhok luks'?
have not yrt dlscoracd why #nho* leak -r.
plttlq In @rescan san from many factors, Indudmg:
what UUK.
0
substandard plpe maniifatulw
0
Immperwtaaatlon
NaUDnal expmk -nUy
Inwooer electtical pmundlng
uca~p(~mbin~n~~
For more lnfornwmn,
s!kkks
Where u n I flnd mom Infarmation about drlnklnp water?
EPA plblfcatims conte.ln mom! lnfomwtlonabout ddnldng water and your health
~ : U w * r r r . ~ v l s a ~ w ~ ~ ~ w ~ , ~ x . h t ~
-
BCWS 130 High Street, Hamilton Ohio 45011 (513) 887-3066
b r d o f c O m m ( % b ~ Gregory
:
V. ~ U v e t t e Olarkr
,
R. Furmm, D n a l d L. D i m
Website W g n e d hVI*
WOmt
think that
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase It QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,
Page 0001 17 of 000183
9/15/2010
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000118 of 000183
Iham skh m h . la (h.rS(rt0 bluru?
http:lh"ww.bufFaowatorauthority.com/FAQ
9/15/2010
Docket No. 100330-WS
Site 6~Fe~a ~R,~~port
EXhIbit ~C-3, Page 000119 of 000183
Lake Josephine
Contact Information
Custonwr I Utility. Lake Joseohine
LaQI E....-I Firm:
0tJw Pe<1Inent ~:
0pwaI0r.
11612010
0..:
Site CIt WIlIIcIMIlty II..IIaIlon: IcanarYWWf
Site ConIact:
ITricia Wi!iamll
iJohnnv Chambeflln
CorUdP'-: 941-1115-7688
lIopC-=
rrricia Williams
FIX:
352-787~3
IJohnny Chamber1in
E....:
TrgetDmfarl_ 2010
rwlllAms.fj)",,~ . com
T _ Goe.. or T-vetPw-..: I~SuIfur
System Paramet.... , SHe Specific nfo,.--_ _ _ _ _ _ _--.
s,-,. T"..I AppIIcaoIJDn: SubdMsion
utility. - . MHP. cIhet) p ............ Serv..t 1250
.I",.ted) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __4
Nuneerolw.tlleo.,. tr..uct. 2=--_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-r
F
Design -(GPM):.f!'2"'22~_ _ _ _ _ _ __I'.­
Numbetol~:·F536=
800
E&U~(a. /Y.W~.~~23~7~OOO~~~~======~~~~~:=============~~~IIIIIIII~ii~~~IIII~1111111111.1
ExI8tlng P~CIt diIIw.ctIoR: Sodium
e
..
e","""""ev....1e for omo.dIng:
Pump~/P~F~~~=--------------------I--'-1
E~PO'WAv~~~----------.-----------~
~~T. . ~/Skr.F1~7~OOO~~-------------------~~----------------_~
HydrClp-.dc: T... ~/Sk.:F3:.cOOO=.._:::'--
...
_______.___________
~
~~ ~~~--------------------~
Ant ....IIIY.. Ie, ~.Iuortde:I'-F-=IauI1de=""__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~
. ___'.. __
. .______
Otoctwve.~ "'''I'''~''~.~l.aQ~~~~~S~Ior1l~~.-ld~HauI~~=;===;;;::======L
Water Analysis
.........
pH
7.67
ToW ... 1-_____1'''
C~~--~=--r"
8onIn~----r"
~~I---~~-­
ms:I-_ _.....:::9r..
8IIc:II
Iron
0.60
0.04
0.03
2.G
auw-~---==--I'"
"'--I---="-f"
1d(II) I - - - - f "
8~
,..,.......
.._ ...... . " ..- "',.-..,.--..,.---.
TOIaI Org. Cerbon
8u1lldes1-._ _ _-r"
185.0
~
170.0
AIk8IInIy
PIIoepMIe
__. . .
P04
HC03
~~--~~I· ..
....!.:!,
T...,..,/--_ _
..........-s SoIok I - - - - - = : : " - {.. T.......... F
I'
. ..
_ --_.. _
- - ­
.
Site 'Ex~~~~ ~e~~tt5~Bg~fJtl120 of 000183
Leisure Lakes
;'1 ,.
~.i ~· IA:"'''~:':: .": .'''l-... -.:J . . .... : ":;..:.,;t~~.•
"
. . -,. ,
•.•'t...:, .•·~~ ( ·.... . · lr; ,
Docket No.1 00330-WS
U. OSM R~port
,l;lnal PhasJ4
!'"'t ,,""~.t: · 1
~
Contact Information
S"
or
eu.1Omer I Ulillly. Leisure Lakes
WIll IdenIIIy I Loc;ation: 101 Pa1< VIew elr. S
Local E~ I Fn.: Tlicia Williams
C_Phone:
~1·915-7688
R..,ConI8ct: ~ricia Willams
F..: 352·78Hi333
Email: IpMll\ams4lla<!uaemoricl.CQf!!
ou.... P..tInenl~;
T"-nI.
(lperalor. Johnny Chambellin
T_ _ O. . for .......18Iion: 2010
Go.Ia
orT-votP_-.:
11612010
Date:
SbCooUct: Johnny Chambel1in
HlIdroaenSurur
System Parameters I Site Specific Info..--_ _ _ _ _ _ _-.
S,.eem T)'Pe1 ~ Subdilrision
P~
utiIIy. s<fIocI. ~. Cllher)
Sent"' 632
esUlllllled) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___t .....- at We.. 101M ~F2c-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __I,-w ..1s to be b"eaIed)
NlmMrat~·1'2'"'7_"6
0 .... Flaw (GPM): 50
A.... Flaw (OP..): 23
MecIge Sizing a.1e (max OP..):
MIll, clesiW' IIow fIIIe) ypicel dem...cl) SIzI.g a.Is -Adedge) "VI
o.aon. per clay. 645
Est.. Uuge (Gala I Y.-): 1 280 425
~ per day) Best estImllle GIIIoedIng:I­
E~P~or~~fGa::~Ct2~====================================~~~II~~IIIIII~II~~II~1I1I1I1I1I1(
E,..lpmenl. .......... for
p.... 0penIl0n/P~t'~=.::"'5..o:.::;sl'--------------------_I101 "'" \new 01. S 10000 .
t.a. Plecid. Fl j\Im Storage T_
Size: 33852 H~T... "....,./SIz.:t-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __I E~ P _ Avllillllllllly.
P,.......,
...
~~ ~~~----------------------I
Anv~ ..... ~~:f_F..::Icu=rIde=--------------------_I OIK...... 0pCI0na ........18:
water AnalY$iS----·-----.--··
W_~
......
= .=. ;======:r--:--.,.....----..- ---.---.-. -r.........,.-,
.-....,..
. --,
Trealment F =~~~=======''=i:::hr.:::.=1iII=
pft
7.40
T_Ae t -____~r .. II'1-As
.j ::J~r.~~~Mn.~~~ '
..·~(i·;
AeP) t-----.I"·gIl (lflulown)
........
11'1­
H....
180.0 gIlClCaC03
All• ...,
154.0
11'1- SI02
1I'1-P04
SlIIc8
..~
~
Iron
... . . . ­
II'1-ClCaC03
gIlHC03
0.170
0 .005
gil ~
TCUI Org. C8rbon
.......
.......
CIIIorIcIM
2.5
45.0
0.12
37.0
Boront-_ _ _--r
Gt-.......
T05:
2.0
2118
· FIuoride~--~::..r"
T..tIIdIIy~---="-i
............ ..,..
T...........
212
Docket No, 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Site P~fil8l~~rp~ebo 121of 000183
Sebring lakes
Contact Information
eua_/UIllily. lSebrin<llakes
5313 KnIQii Ave
Loc:ooI E...... , finn: ITricia Williams
OU-P........ _ :
RepConlad: TriciaWiliams
Fa: 352-78HI333
.­
I!!- IDnMHa~
T..".c oar. fowlrWdlltion: 2010
System
IJohnrN CIIambeI1in
eo.- P-..: 1M104115-7688
0.--: Johnnv ChambeItIn
T'-"
1/612010
D....:
sa.~
Sb"_\dMdyI~
eoo... or T..".cP"""-': iHvdroaen Suf\w
Pa,..,.....,..'
SIte S pecIfIc Info
.,.... Twel ~I'S~ubdMsIon==::!.._ _ _ _ _--f'tAllty. 5ChoaI. MHP._I
_of~:Il'85::!-
~~~ ~-_. '.~ :::·~·i~~~~:'''·
eslim..eell
P..-1letYed: 298
_ _ _ _ _ _ _~
. . . . - of WIlla III be"'-: 1
DMIgn-(GPII~ 194
• " ..... 10 be 1rUIed}
r.u.deligntlow ....)
le.I dllmn)
' F - - - - ­ _ _ _ _--l'Sizing Basis - Adedge)
t==:=~
~
_________________--I'0' PMt _car. 5
___________________
~u..A~.n
33SS2
__
~T
/Sil.:~
___________________
~
1IuIIdInO...-.u ..
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--I MIt ......• ... ~ 1IuorIde:f.:F1cuo1de
:=='":-__________________-l ...,....,..:e:~
. --..- . . ---- ~~~i!i!~ .. _.---_.,,--_..
Water AllalyaJY;.;;;
..·::.DIKIw'ge==~~. :O~'II::II=
..:.
• .::....
::=IIIbIe=::·~~~::::I====l~~~~f=====~w;~~r·--·
F
.,
"
. ,'
•
.
:,; . ~;-. t~
•
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000122 of 000183
Lake Josephine, Leisure Lakes, Rosalie Oaks and Zephyr Shores were ali Included In Group 4
by the Public Service Commission. ThiS was the highest rates approllld. AUF opposed this
wasd
place In Group 1. angerlnei
rate structure. T
Lake Josephine Leisure Lakes Tangerine
Rosalie oaks
calculated
calculated Zephyr Shores
Statewide
Statewide
Approved
Approved
Uniform Rate
Uniform Rate
Group
Group
With W/W A1loc
No W/W allocadon
4
1
Max pli factor. 2
Max lali factor z 2
13.92
16.52 $
14.82
$15.45 S
$
BFC
1.97
6.59 $
4.11
$4.72 $
$
1stTier
2.47
8.24 S
5.13
$5.91 $
$
2nd Tier
5.92
19.78 $
8.21
$9.45 S
$
3rd Tier
Bills at:
3,000 gal
S.P9"II!~--10.000 gal
Average Usage
(7,000Ial)
$
35.29 S
19.63 S
33.32
68.60 $
89.67 $
64.95 $
36.12 $
28.71 S
64.72
SO.44
S
27.14 $
29.62
$
61.01
45.81
SO.88
S
$
$
I
Aqua
Requuted
21.92
S
$
3.80
4.76
$
$
4.76
S
ROle SITUCIUre
In an effort 10 address affordability in its rate case, Aqua proposed a state-wide unifonn rate for both water
and wastewater. Also, Aqua proposed a two-tier inclining block rate sttucture for water, with the second
block baving a factor of 1.25 times the first block. Under its proposed rate sttucture, CUSlOmers throughout
the state of Florida would bave paid approximately $40.92 for water and $88.91 for wastewater for 5,000
gallons. However, the FPSC staff recommended a different rate structure using a grouping ofsystems. The
Commission approved this recommended rate sttucture which included the most aggressive three-tier
inclining block gallonage cbaraes ever approved. The third block begins at 10,000 and has a factor on
times the first block. This has caused a great amowu of concern on the part of customers throughout the
state of Florida. Further, the FPSC created the gaUonage charges with 65% of the approved revenue
requirement included. Thus, only 35% of the revenue requirement is recovered through the BFC. Finally,
the FPSC also took some of the revenue requirement from the wastewater systems and again spread this
over the water rates. These three factors taken together, bas created very high gallonage charges for Aqua's
customers.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000123 of 000183
EXHIBIT H
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000124 of 000183
Exhibit H
Final Quarterly Environmental Comlpliance Update
(Revort on Warning Letters. Consent Orders and NOVs for the Period October, 2010
throuph December 20101
Chuluota WTP - The water in the Chuluota region originates in the Floridan aquifer.
The water is characteristically difficult to treat for public drinking water purposes due to
naturally occurring total organic carbon (TOC) and hydrogen sulfides, which are
indigenous in the local water table. As a consequence, residents in the Chuluota area
have struggled with water quality issues for more than 30 years.
AUF bought the Chuluota system in 2004 as part of its purchase of Florida Water. Since
that time, AUF has collaborated with the FDEP and worked closely with the agency to
resolve issues stemming from TOCs and hydrogen sulfides.
In 2009, AUF hired Dr. James Taylor who recommended AUF pilot two treatment
systems to address the removal of hydrogen sulfides and TOC. Based on the results of
this pilot study, AUF ultimately selected an ion exchange system manufactured by
Tonka Water Systems. This system was selected based on its cost effectiveness as well
as the effectiveness of the treatment process. The pilot testing showed the process to be
very effective in removing both the natural precursors that form TTHMs and the sulfides
that contribute to taste and odor in the water. The ion exchange system will not only
result in lower TI'HMs, it also will reduce the hydrogen sulfide in the well water and
improve the taste and odor of the drinking water.
To expedite the construction and meet the consent order timelines, AUF divided the work
into two phases. As part of Phase 1, AUF modified the pipe configuration, installed new
pumps, and placed into service a 50,CIOO gallon ground storage tank. The project was
designed to add chlorine into the smaller storage tank,reducing the time it has to react
with the organics in the water before anirnonia is added thereby reducing the formation of
'ITHh4s in the distribution system. Phase 1 was placed in service at the end of February
2010.
Phase 2 consisted of the installation of the ion exchange treatment units and the raw
water pipeline f?om plant 1 to plant 2. Construction began in March 2010. In accordance
with the consent order, construction was timely completed with FDEP clearance received
June 24,2010. Thereafter, the new treatment facilities were placed into service.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase It QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000125 of 000183
Once the treatment was optimized, flushing was reduced and the residual disinfection in
the distribution system was changed to free chlorine. Sampling shows that the Chuluota
water system was in compliance with the TTHM standards for all of 20 10.
FDEP closed-out the consent order on December 23,2010. The closure letter from FDEP
is appended as Attachment ''1". A follow up inspection by FDEP in January 201 1 found
no deficiencies. A copy of the inspection report is appended as Attachment "2".
The total cost of the project, including the ion exchange units, the raw water main from
plant 1, converting plant 1 to a storage,'booster station and all of the modification needed
at plant 2 was $2.3 million.
Tomoka View Estates WTP - AUF signed a consent order for this system on
December 18, 2009. As indicated in previous reports, AUF completed construction of
the Chloramination system which was placed in service in December 2009. The results
fiom the quarterly samples taken from December 2009 to June 2010 and the RAA for the
2"d quarter of 2010 were all well below the TTHM standards AUF has received
notification from the Volusia County Health Department that the system has been put on
reduced monitoring for TTHMs. The consent order is closed.
-
Village Water WWTF Village Wai:er effluent ponds were constructed such that the
bottom of the ponds were below ground water table and appear to receive extra ground
water associated with the relatively new Polk County Parkway. Pursuant to the consent
order, AUF is obligated to identify alt'zmative disposal options for the effluent by May
201 1. Before identifying a viable solution, AUF explored a number of potential options
including connecting with Polk County and the City of Lakeland for effluent disposal.
Although AUF has had multiple meetings with the City of Lakeland and Polk County
officials, it could not overcome the political, engineering, high cost challenges of
delivering the treated effluent to either entity.
Following those efforts, AUF has now identified a viable solution for effluent reuse and
is negotiating an agreement with a nearby property owner. AUF expects the site will
acoommodate all of the treated effluent and has drafted a proposed 20 year agreement for
the use of the land. AUF has also engaged Andreyev Engineering Inc. to conduct and
analyze soil borings and BESH Engineering Inc to design and permit the spray field.
AUF anticipates having the spray field loperational by November 201 1. Meanwhile, AUF
has installed monitoring wells around the percolation ponds and is monitoring in
accordance with consent Order. To date, that monitoring has revealed no adverse
impacts.
Jasmine Lakes WWTF - Three of the four effluent disposal ponds at Jasmine Lakes
were constructed prior to the regulations requiring separation fiom the prevailing ground
water table and periodic drying and scarifying. Such ponds are routinely "grandfathered"
2
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000126 of 000183
under the old regulations. In December of 2002 FDEP began citing the previous owners
for the ponds not drying. The previous owners and AUF explored several strategies to dry
the ponds, none of which were successful. AUF agreed to dredge the ponds in 2009 to
remove accumulated sediment as an alternative to drying and scarifying. A careful review
of Rule 62-610.100(9), F.A.C. supported Aqua's position that the ponds were
"grandfathered" under the prior rules imd thus were not required to be dried. AUF and
FDEP have completed extensive hydrogeologic studies of ponds that demonstrate that
they are performing as designed. After prolonged negotiations, FDEP and AUF entered
into a settlement agreement whereby I'DEP has issued a short form consent order. This
case is closed. A copy of the FDE:P consent order closure letter is appended as
Attachment "3".
Palm Terrace WWTF - Similar to the Jasmine Lakes ponds discussed above, the Palm
Terrace ponds were constructed around the same time with the same disposal strategies.
FDEP initially issued a warning letter .assertingthat the percolation ponds in this system
needed to comply with new FDEP rules. However, a consent order was never issued
because FDEP now understands that these ponds were "grandfathered" under the prior
rules similar to the Jasmine Lakes matter. As a result, this issue has been resolved and is
considered closed.
Subsequently, FDEP has issued a new 5 year permit renewal for operating the WWTP,
which included language indicating that this system is "grandfathered", thus remedying
the issue identified in the previous warning letter. The newly issued permit includes
language that does not require the drying of the ponds. As part of the permit conditions,
AUF installed a cross-over pipe between ponds 1 & 2. The two percolation ponds and
the spray field are permitted and designed to take the permitted flows from this facility.
Sunny Hills WTP - On December 2,2010, AUF and FDEP executed a consent order
for this system which addresses ground storage capacity, system configuration and other
issues. See Attachment "4". When ALJF became aware of the issues that prompted the
consent order, it retained the services of Hatch Mott McDonald Consulting Engineers
("Hatch Mott") to inspect the tanks For compliance and evaluate the current ground
storage capacity. Hatch Mott complet1:d its evaluation, finalized design, and submitted
to the FDEP a permit application to interconnect plant 1 and plant 4 with the storage
tank. In the event either well is out of !service the storage tank will remain in service thus
continuing to improve reliability to the customer. The consent order provides that the
project is to be completed within 120 days of issuance of permits by FDEP. AUF is
complying with all terms and timelines in the consent order. AUF hlly expects to
complete the storage tank project this year.
While not part of the consent order, i3S part of AUF's Original Aesthetics Program, it
directed Hatch Mott to conduct a pilot sequestering study to determine whether the
addition of a sequestering agent to the treatment process will reduce aesthetic concerns
3
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000127 of 000183
related to iron in the water. The study proved that levels of iron in the water can be
sequestered so Hatch Mott prepared a 'design and permit package for FDEP's approval.
This sequestering
AUF received project clearance from FDEP on June 21, 2010.
treatment is working very well.
Peace River Heights WTP - AUF met with FDEP staff on November 9,2009 to discuss
the warning letter regarding an alleged gross alpha exceedance. Since that meeting, AUF
sent split samples to several independent laboratories and had Wisconsin State
Laboratory for Hygiene conduct a very thorough analysis of samples ffom this system.
AUF's testing conducted by independent laboratories demonstrated that the original
exceedance of the Gross Alpha MCL was an artifact of the analytical method. The
system has been in compliance with all radiological limits for all of 2010. However,
levels of naturally occurring Combined Radium are close to the MCL. FDEP issued a
consent order requiring special bi-monthly sampling for Gross Alpha and Combined
Radium for two years. The consent order set a trigger for implementation of treatment if
two of twelve individual test results exceeded the trigger. AUF signed the consent order
on June 24,2010.
AUF has been performing the required bi-monthly monitoring while also conducting a
pilot study with ion exchange for radium treatment The pilot testing has been completed
and demonstrated that the treatment would work if the conditions of the consent order are
triggered requiring installation of treatment. AUF is proceeding with preliminary design
for treatment so that plans can be filed expeditiously if the trigger is exceeded. Part of
the engineering evaluation has been the installation of a flow chart recorder to gather
information on system demand to optimize the sizing of treatment, storage and pumps if
treatment is needed The bi-monthly sampling began July of 2010 with the results
currently not triggering treatment. The bi-monthly sampling is required to continue for
two years.
South Seas WWTF - This facility was constructed with four bolted glass-lined steel
tanks - one for flow equalization and three for reject water tanks. Because of the very
aggressive environment (from the wastewater and salt spray from the Gulf), these tanks
had deteriorated in the years since the plant was built. Hurricane Charlie in 2004 also
cause substantial damage at the plant and the golf course used for disposal.
AUF made repairs to the tanks on several occasions, and installed disk filters to replace
old sand filters and improve the quality of the emuent for reuse.
AUF received a warning letter on February 25, 2010 regarding a leak at the facility's
reject storage tanks, which AUF had previously reported to the FDEP. Prior to receiving
the warning letter, AUF had already contacted contractors to evaluate the flow
equalization tank and the 3 reject storage tanks at the facility. Subsequently, the flow
equalization tank failed resulting in a spill of raw wastewater. Aqua had temporary
4
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000128 of 000183
repairs made to the tank and initiated plans to replace all four tanks. FDEP issued a
proposed draft Consent Order to replace the tanks and make other upgrades. That draft
consent order has not been finalized, but Aqua has replaced all four storage tanks at a
cost of over $400,000.
-
Jungle Den WTF This is a consecutive water system that purchases bulk water from
St. John's River Utility(llSJRU"). SJRU was required to install a new chloramination
treatment system and AUF was required to notify customers that it's bulk supplier was
moving to a new treatment system. AUF provided that notice to customers after SJRUs
new treatment system became operational. In November of 2010 FDEP emailed AUF
that it had failed to issued notice before SJRU placed its new system into service. AUF
is working with FDEP and expects the agency to issue a short form consent order in the
first part of 201 1.
Other: Except as set forth herein, as of December 31,2010 AUF has no NOVs from the
FDEP or FDOH, and no new consent orders from those agencies.
5
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000129 of 000183
Attachment 1
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Renort
Exhibit SC-3, Page O I & # & ~ 1 8 3
Govmior
Florida Department of
Environmental Protection
Central District
3319 Maguire Boulevard, Suite 232
Orlando, Florida 32803-3767
Jeff Konkamp
Lt. Governor
Mitni A. Drew
SecreIary
VIA E-MAIL
jmlihvarcik@aquaamerica.Com
OCD-PW-CE-10-0972
Mr. Jack Lihvarcik
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
P.O. Box 2480
Lady Lake, FL 32158-2480
Seminole County - PW
Chuluota Water Svstem
PWS ID # 3590186
Consent Crder OGC Case No. 06-2432
-
Dear Mr. Lihvarcik:
The above-referenced enforcement case IS closed by this office effective December 22, 2010.
Department records indicate that the Con!;ent Order requirements have been met. Our records
show that the last two quarters of total .:rihalornethanes (TTHMs) and haloacetic acids (five)
(HAA5s). and odor results were below the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs).
Public notice is no longer required, becausi?the running annual average for TTHMs and HAA5s is
currently below the MCLs. Please continue to conduct routine (annual) monitoring for TTHMs
and HAA5s. The next annual compliance imonltoring for lTHMS and HAA5s shall be conducted
during July through September 2011. Odor sampling shall be conducted during 2012.
Thank you for your cooperation. You may ornail Nathan Hess at Nathan.Hess@.deD.state.fl.us, or
contact him by phone at (407) 893-3988. should you have any further questions.
Sincerely.
Christianne C. Ferraro, dE.
Program Administrator
Water Resource Management
pecember 23.2010
Date
CCFlkmdlnjh
cc: Tncia Williams, Aqua Utilities Florida Irc. [p~lilliams@aquaamerica.com]
Jay Williams, Public Service Commission [iewillia@psc.state.fl.us]
Karl Henry, Seminole County Health Dspartment [karl-henry@doh.state.fl.us]
Lea Crandall. DEP Agency Clerk, DEP Office of General Counsel
Nathan Hess. DEP Drinking Water Cornpliance and Enforcement
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000131 of 000183
Attachment 2
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000132 of 000183
Rick Sew
Oovcmor
Florida Department of
Jennifer Carroll
1.1 Guvcrnor
Environmental
Protection
Centrai District
3319 b.[aguire Boulevard, Suite 232
Orimdo, Florida 32803-3767
Herschel T.Vinyard, J r
Secrctary
VIA E-MAIL
imiihvarcik@aauaamerica.com
January 28,2011
OCD-PW-SS-11-0078
Mr. Jack Lihvarcik
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
P.O. Box 2480
Lady Lake. FL 321562480
Seminole County - PW
Chuluota Water System
PWS ID Number3590186
Dear Mr. Lihvarcik
This confirms a visit to the subject public water system on January 25.201 1, by Nathan Hess to conduct
a sanitary survey inspection. A copy of the sanitary survey inspection report is attached for your reference
and records.
There were no deficiencies at your water plant at the time of our visit. The overall operation of the water
plant was good, which is a credit to both you and your operator. The Deparbrmnt appreciates the
excellent work being done on your water system and values your continued spirit of cooperation in
complyingwith Department NIBS.
If you have any questions, please contact Nathan Hess by e-mail at Nathan.Hess@dep.state.fl.us or by
phone at (407) 894-7555. extension 2276.
Sincerely,
d
Kim Dodson. Program Manager
Drinking Water Compliance and Enforcement
KMD/njh
Attachment
cc: Tricia Williams. Aqua Utilities Florida Inc. [~.iMlilIiams@aquaamerica.com]
Jay Williams, Public Service Commission [jewillia@psc.state.fl.us]
Karl Henry, Seminole County Health Depactment [karl-henry@doh.state.fl.usl
Nathan Hess. DEP Drinking Water Complirmce and Enforcement
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000133 of 000183
State of Florida
Department of Environmental Protection
Central District
SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
-
Plant Name
CHULUOTA WATER SYSTEM VYTP 2
County
Seminole
PWS ID #
3590186-2
Plant Location
Brumlcv Road and Avenue H.Chuluota. FL 32766
Phone
352-266-0608
Owner Name
Aaua UtilitiesFlorida Inc.
Phone
352-266-0608
P.O. Box 2480.Ladv Lake. FL 3215&2480
Owner Address
Title EnvironmentalComuliance Phone 352-266-0608
Contact Person Tricia Williams
Last Compliance Inspection Date XL%!Q
Last Survey Date ; U 2 !
This Survey Date
-
PWS TYPE: Community
RAW WATER SOURCE
IXI GROUND; Number of Wells
PURCHASED from PWS ID #
Emergency Water Source
Emergency Water Capacity
PLANT CATEGORY 8 CLASS: .rC
MAX-DAY DESIGN CAPACITY: 1.080.000 EDd
PWS STATUS: Aonroved
TREATMENT PROCESSES IN USE
Iron rem0val/seauestration. aeration. d n exch p e .
hvwchlorination.
-
SERVICE AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Subdivision
FocdService: O Y e s U N O
NIA
-
Number of Service Connections
Population Served 3.863
Basis:
1.410
ODerator
OPERATION &MAINTENANCE LOG:
Location
Water Treatment Plant
Comments
Actual
Aciual
-
CERTIFIED OPERATOR &g
Operator(s) B CertificationClass-Number:
C-641 I William Trendel
Hrslday: Required
1
Dayslwk: Required
5+2
Non-consecutive Days?
Comments
-
1
+2
-
0Yes 0 N o S mNIA
-
MONTHLY OPERATION REPORTS (MORs)
MORS submitted regularly?
Yes 0 No
N/A
Data missing from MORs? [XI No 0Yes 0 N/A
Average Da; (from MORs) 4z.201 eud o , ~ o , o ~
Maximum Day (from MORs) L028.000 m
Comments
-
-
Flow Measuring Device
Flow Meter
Meter Size & Type
6"McCrometer (each well)
Date Last Calibrated 1/12/10
-
4
STANDBY POWER SOURCE: yeS
Source Catemihr Diesel
Capacity of Standby (kW)
200
Switchover: [XI Automatic 0 Manual
4 Wwk.
Hrs Operated Under Load
What equipment does it operate?
Well Pumps All
High Service Pumps
AU
(XI Treatment Equipment All
Satisfy avg. daily demand? WYes U N OOUnknown
Audio-visual alarm? B y e s UNO
N
PLANS AND MAPS
Coliform Sampling Plan
DlDBP Monitoring Plan
Lead and Copper Plan
Distribution System Map
Emergency Response Plan
Comments
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
0 NIA
0 No NIA
0 No a NIA
PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCEIOBM
Operation & Maintenance Manuel
Yes
No
Preventive Maintenance Program
Yes 0 No
Flushing Program
Yes
No 0 N/A
Yes 0 No
Records
Isolation Valve Exercise
Yes
No
Records
NYes
N o m N/A
Comments
0
fl 81;
CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL
#BFPAs Unknown
#Tested 10
WWTPRPZ Yes
Date Tested 10/8/10
Written Plan l3.sDate
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000134 of 000183
PWS ID #
Date
COMMENTS Wells 1 and 2 arc at Dlant #I
- r-
3590186-2
1/25/11
station and feed raw water directlv to water treatment Dlant #2.
3
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000135 of 000183
PWS ID #
Date
STORAGE FACILITIES
(G) Ground (C) Clearwell
3590186-2
(E) Elevated
Comments: *Tank installed Aoril2009
Pump
Number
Type
Make
Model
Capacity
(gpm)
Motor
HP
Date
~
~~
I
Transfer (2)
Backwash (2)
Centrifugal
Peerless
F2-1050
750
Centrifugal
Peerless
F2-10258
285
30
15
2010
I
~
2010
4
l/ZS/ll
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000136 of 000183
PWS ID #
Date
3590186
1/25/11
PLANT 1 REPUMP STATION
CHLORINATION (Disinfection)
Type: O G a s E H y p o
Make lwaki (2)
Capacity
1.3 eud
Chlorine Feed Rate 50%
Avg. Amount of Clz gas used
NIA
Chlorine Residuals: Plant 1.30 Remote 1.82Remote tap location 803 Mazurka
DPD Test Kit:
On-site [XI With operator
0 Not Used Daily
0 None
Injection Points Into G1
Booster Pump Info
Comments
STORAGE FACILITIES
(G) Ground (C) Clearwell
-
(E) Elevated
-
IRON REMOVAUSEQUESTRATION
Make
Srenner ( 2 )
Capacity 17 md
Injection Points Well discharge uiuine.
Comments
-
Comments: *Tank installed Auril 2009
HIGH SERVICE PUMPS
Pump Number
1
2
Type
Cen~fugal Centrifugal
Make
Goulds
Goulds
Model
unknown
unknown
Capacity (gpm)
450
500
Motor HP
25
25
Date Installed
unknown
unlalown
5
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000137 of 000183
PWS ID #
Date
3590186
1/25/11
1. Water treatment plant one is no longer viewed .by the Department as an active water treatment plant:
0
0
Submission of monthly operation reports (MORS) for water treatment plant one and the MOR
summation page are no longer required.
All point of entry (POE)sampling is to be conducted at the POE for water treatment plant two.
Only one maximum residence time (MRT)location is required to be sampled for Stage 1
Disinfectant/DisinfectionByproduct Rule sampling.
2. Water Treatment plant two has been approved for four log virus removal/inactivation. Beginning with the
February 201 1 MOR, CT calculations will be required. Failure to meet the required CT for more than four
hours will result in a treatment technique viola1.ion.
Inspector
Approved by
w 7-/
d-
Title
Env. Suuervisor II
Title
Environmental Manager
6
Date
Date
1/26/11
1/28/11
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Reporf
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000138 of 000183
Attachment 3
s
P
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000139 of 000183
Charlie Crist
Governor
Florida :Department of
Environm.endProtection
SolmlWartDiBidoBke
13051NrathTcbCom p.rtnay
JeffKoltkamp
Lt.Governor
Mimi A. Drew
Interim Secretary
Temple Tffracs. maids 33637-
septenlber 10, 2010
RECEIVED
certified Mail No.: 7010 1670 WO W70 0756
RsruRNRECElFTREQUESl-ED
MI.JadcLihvarcilr,Resident
AquaU~Florida,Inc.
P.0.Box 490310
Leesburg.FL 347490310
j I n l i h v a r d k ~ ~ c o m
Re:
settlement of Aqua Utilities Florida, hw.
OGC File NO.07-1021
JasmineLalre S/D WWTP
~acilityIDNO.~ ~ ~ 0 1 2 7 6 8
p-county
Dear Mr. m
vd
The Department is i n d p t o f t h e $?smmmDeparhnentccsts and penalliesm thia aatter.
Enclosed please find a capy of the executed C3arrsent OrderoGc pile No. 07-1021 &the
akerefdfacility
The Depalment shall, thedore, dose the case on tfiis matter. Your eaFoas to return to
complianoe are greatly appreciated. Shoulcl you have any questions, please m c t Frank L.
Fulghum IIIat (8l3) 632-7600. extension
'
411, or via e-maik frankfdghum@dep.atate.fhs.
cc:
..
Pahicia w-,
Aqua utilities ma, hz, p l w l h m e qwameha.Com
Patridc Pards,Aqua Utilities Fla,Inc., pafania@aquaamerka.com
. . Prmcescani,
chnstme
FDm, c h r i s t i n e f i . s t a * f l . u a
Michele Duggw.FLlEP, michele.duggan@dep.state.fLua
_._._
"MoreProtection, Less Procers"
,.-
n...
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM ReDort
Exhibit SC-3, Pag&j&&@00183
Florida Department of
Environmen~lProtection
southvfe3t~
13051 N.Tcbcom M
y
Templo Taraca, FL 33637-0926
Augurt
a,2010
Goveamr
Jeff Kottkmnp
Lt. ODvemor
Mi*l
w.sole
s==t=Y
RECElVfD
Mr.I r k Lihvarcik, Pmident
Aqua Ulilitica MIno.
P. 0. Box 490310
Leesburg, FX.34749-0310
Rc:
Proposed ssctlearent of Aqun Utilities Florida, Inc.
OQCPlkNo. 07-1021
JhLdkBsIDWwTF
Facility ID No. FLA012768
Raar county
kMr. LihVerdL:
The plnpoac ofthis letter is to oomplcte the nsolutMn ofthe meaerprvioudy ideatllled by the
Depaamsat in the Warning Lmrr No. W7-OW2DW5ISWD, dated Merch 8,2007, a copy of
which is attachsd Tbe Dqmnult
that Aqua utili&? Mdq h.was in violation of
FloridaRub a d Statutes. In orderto d v c the mclttas identified,AquaUtiIitica Florida, h.
i0 W U S d Civil pcnaltieSh tbc ULUluM Of S21,ZOO.Oo for vi0Mh Of Rd- 62-520.400 d 62601500(2), Florida AdministnoiVe Cab, in axdaucc With W o n 403.141(1), Flmid.stlr
totes, along with S1.5do.00 to reimburse the Dcpartmcnt oosts,for a total of S23.000.00.
*
lhc Dapaxhcnt is not lamdng civil pclullks for violatiolla &Rule 62-6W.410(6) or Rule 62610.523(4), Florida Admiaiatrative codt. F’lusupnt to Rule 62-610.100(9)(b), FloridD AmniniStrativc Codc. the Facility is an ‘%xidug indlation” sincttiu?facility hnd on file with thc De
prtmatt m rgpaoved permit on or before April 5,1989. Existing installdoan an?moi required
to comply With Rules 62-610.523(4). (6) sad (7),Florida AQninistdve Codc. Furtbsmwwe,
m- to Rule 62-522300(1), Florida A’vc Code. thc Fdlity is an “cxiatinp iartrlMan" since the Facility bnd on file With tb Departmaat n complete a p p l i d m for n &t
on
OT before J1,1983. Punauua to Ruk: 62-522.300(8), Florida MmInistrative Code, existing ~ I n t i m dischnrging
s
to Class 0-II g m d wata am exempt fium ccmplianoe with 800ondsry drhkhg wdcr rt.ndacrb outside of a zone of discharge obtained by Depamncnt pennit
The Department aolarowledgcs that the paylnant of these civil penalties by Aqun Utilities Florida, [no. docs not constihdc an admiasion ofliability. This payment must be mde payable to the
Departmnt of Envir0nmcllt.l Rotccbon
. by caahicr’s ohcck or money order and shall include &e
Oac File Number assigned nbovc and the notstion ”8eosyatcm Milnagcmud and Restoration
Trust Fund”. Payment shall be sent to the Depactmaa of Environmwtal PmtectiOa, 13051 North
Telscam Parkway, Temple Tenace, Florid& 336374W6, within 30 days of you? signing this
letter.
“MorePrneUIW Lsrs PIocass ”
mum-dep..atdafl.
w
.
R o p o s e d S e t t l ~ o f W ~ L c t b u NWUn-0002DWZlSWD
o.
OOC File NO.07-1021
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000141 of 000183
P a m county
prOe2of4
I
h
~
~
n
OGC File No. 07-1021
d
a
f ~ K~ U ) ~ . O ~O O ~~ D
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Repolt
WExhibit
o ~ ~ .SC-3,
S ~ Page 000142 of 000183
PascOColmly
paee3of4
:STATEOF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
lSout&mstDistrict
P r o p a l Settlement of W m h g Letter No. 'WLQ7.ooo2DW51SWD
OGC File No. OF1021
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM ReDort
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000143 of 000183
NOTICE OF RIGIFIS
Persons who M not parties to this Conwclt 13rdcrbut whose substsnhal
*
intawbueaf&tcdby
this Cmaeat Order havc a right, puRusnt to Sectioas 120.569 aad 120.57, plorida S w d o q to
petitionforanadminis(ratl'nhcaringonit Thepaitioarnuatwatriathoinfolmahon
*
M f d
Mow md must be Ned ( m e i d ) at the D*putmenrs Offiw of Gmsral C O u d , 3900 CmmonwealthBod-35,
T s l b a e , INorida 323995000. within 21 days of recti# ofthis
notice. A copy of tho Petition must dao bo mailed at the hof Wing to the Distrtot ofacs
named .bow attheaddrcsr indiecltal hihtre to file apetition within thc 21 days ComStiMes a
W d W I Of
dpht SUGh perSOU hss to BII admfnidvS h?dn@pursusllt to SWdOM 120.569
and 120.57. Fhida Statutes
Thc petition sbsll containthc folio- information:
consaat (kda identification number and the county in which the subject
(a) "be 3-
matter or activity is louted; @) The narmc;
.ddross,ad telephone n u m k of each petitionor;
tfie name. addnrs. aad telephone number oft
kpetitioner's rcprescatllh'ye, if any. which shall be
tbe admess &r savla, purposes d u h g the course of the proceedla; (c) An explrnatton of how
the paitioner's substential interds will be rtffectcd by the Consent order; (a) A stattmslt of
when and how the petitioner d v e d notice of thc Consent w, (e) A st8tcmcnt of dl
mrteri.l facts disputed by petitioner, if my; (f) A statement of the specific facts the patitiom
wntads WMlmt d o 5 modification of the Conscat order. (g) A ststcment of which ruler
or daMcs the petitioner contends mquim n m a l or modiAcaton of the Consent Me, and
@) AsMaucnt of the relief sought by tbepetitiona, St.tingpmckly the action petitionor
-
w i ~ m c ~ t o t s l t e w i t h r r s p c tcltheconrcnt
ct
older.
If a petition is filed. the adminiaeativt hsarl~lgpmm.9 is deai@ to fonnulare agency action.
Aooordingly. the Departmsnrs find action nlay be
fimm the position takon by it in this
Notice. Pasom whose substmripl interests will bep&cfcdby my decision ofthe Dewith
to the subject Conscnt Order have the right to petition to beoome a party to the pmd i n g . The petition must confom to the rcquirnnents specified above aad be filed (rcceivcd)
within 21 days of nceipt of this notice in thr: OfFice of oenerd Counsel at tbc above a d k of
tbc Department Failurs to petition within the allowed time h n e wnstilut~a waiw of any
right such penon has to rrquest a hearing m l d a Wens 120.569 and 120.57, Florida Sratuks,
and to participate as a party to thia pmcdhg. Any subaequent intervention will only be at the
approvpl of the presiding offica upon motion filed pursuant to Rule 28-106.205. Florida Administraiivecode.
Mediation under Section 120.573, Florida Stt&utes, is not available in this proceeding.
,
Department ui
Environmental Protection
'
Docket No. 10033Cl&5
Final Phase IlcPGbMReport
Exhibit SC-3, P@WI0144
of 000183
1.
2.
3.
4.
,&....&
I'
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase It QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000145 of 000183
Attachment 4
~
~
...
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Reoort
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000146 of 000183
Charlie Crisi
Florida Department of
Environmental Protection
Northwest Dlstrlct
160 Governmental Center
Penscola. Florida 32502-5794
Governor
lrff Kaitkainp
Lt. Governor
Minii A. D r m
Secretary
December 2,2010
BY ELECTRONIC MAIL
PRWilliams@aquaamerica.com
Ms. Patricia Williams,
Utility Engineer
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
P.O. Box 2480
Lady Lake, Florida 321582480
Dear Ms. Williams:
Enclosed, please find a copy of the executed Consent Order (OCC File No. 10-2288-67PW)aimed at addressing a storage capacity shortage and other violations noted for the
Sunny Hills Utilities public water system (PWS ID No. 1670647) in Washington County.
Please note the h e l i n e s for corrective actions contained within the document. Also, please
forward your payment for penalties and Department costs within 30 days as directed in the
Order.
Thank you for your assisbnce in this matter. For questions, please contact David Hines,
Potable Water Enforcement, at (850)595-0593, or by email at david.hines@dep.state.fl.us.
Sincerely,
District Director
KWP/dh
Endosure
c: Hany Householder, Area Manager, Aqua Utilities Florida (hhouseholder@aquaamerica.com)
Paul Thompson, Aqua Utilities Florida (PDThompson@aquaamerica.com)
FDEP NW District Panama City Office
Lea Crandall, FDEP Office of Generiil Counsel (lea.crandall@dep.state.fl.us)
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000147 of 000183
BEFORE THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEClTON
)
)
1
)
)
vs.
IN THE OFFICE OF THE
NORTHWEST DISTRICT
. OGC FILE NO. 10-2288-67-PW
1
1
3
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
(Respondent)
CONSENT ORDER
This Consent Order (“Order“) is entered into between the State of Florida Department
of Environmental Protection (“Department”) and Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. (“Respondent”)
to reach settlement of certain matters at issue between the Department and Respondent.
The Department finds and Respondent admits the following:
1.
The Department is the administrative agency of the State of Florida having the
power and duty to protect Florida’s water resources and to administer and enforce the
provisions of the Florida Safe Drinking Water Act, Sections 403.850,
Florida Statutes
(“F.S.”),
and the rules promulgated and authorized in Title 62, Florida Administrative Code
(“F.A.C.”). The Department has jurisdiction over the matters addressed in this Order.
2.
Respondent is a person withm the meaning of Section 403.852(5), F.S.
3.
Respondent is the owner and operator of a community water system, Sunny
Hills Utilities (PWS ID No. 1670643, located at 3810 Gables Boulevard, Sunny Hills,
Washington County, Florida (“System”). ‘ h e System is comprised mainly of two
groundwater wells (Well 1and Well 4), wluch discharge to separate treatment, but which
supply a common distribution system (“Well 1/Well4 System”). Another well (Well 5) and
treatment plant also supply a distant portion of the SUMY
Hills community via an entirely
separate distribution system (“Well 5 System”). The Well 5 System is regulated by the
Department under the same PWS ID numlxr as the Well 1/Well4 System, but is separate from
it and is not the subject of this Order.
4.
PW-co
The Department finds that the following violations occurred:
REV. 06/09
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Repolt
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000148 of 000183
FDEP vs. Aqua Utilities FIorida, Inc.
Consent Order, OGC File No. 10-2288-67-PW
Page 2
Failure to provide a total useful finished-water storage capacity of at least
a)
25 percent of the system's maximum-day water demand as required under Section 62555.320(19)(a),F.A.C. Contributing to the violation are two factors: 1)insufficient total storage
tank volume, and 2) the inability of Well 4 to fill tanks located at Well 1due to current system
configuration;
I
Failure to provide satisfactory results of a 20 sample bacteriological well
b)
survey before placing Well 1into permanent service after having been out of operation for
more than six months, as required under Srection 62-555.315(6)@),F.A.C.;
Failure to perform routine and nitrate/nitrite monitoring and raw
c)
bacteriological monitoring of the water produced by Well 1when it was producing water for
public consumption in July 2007 and August 2007, as required under Rules 62-550.500,62550.512, and 62-550.518(2), F.A.C..
Having reached a resolutic'n of the matter Respondent and the Department
mutually agree and it is
ORDERED:
5.
Respondent shall comply with the following corrective actions within the
stated time periods:
I
a)
By October 1,2010, Respondent shall retain the services of a professional
engineer, registered in the State of Florida, to evaluate the System and make
recommendations that would correct the system configuration in order to allow Well 4 to fill
any tanks within the Well 1/Well 4 System, and shall submit an application, along with any
required application fees, to the Department for a permit for construction needed to
implement the recommendations of the er gineer.
I
By February 15,2011, Respondent shall retain the services of a
b)
professional engineer, registered in the State of Florida, to evaluate the System and make
recommendations for modifications to the system that would address the storage capacity
violation by increasing total Well l/WeIl4 storage capacity to a level which at a minimum
PW-co
REV. 06/09
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000149 of 000183
FDEP vs. Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Consent Order, OGC File No. 10-228867-PW
Page 3
complies with the requirements noted in Rule 62-555.320(19)(a) and @), F.A.C., and shall
submit an application, along with any required application fees, to the Department for a
permit for construction needed to implement the recommendations of the engineer.
If the Department requires additional information, modifications, or
c)
specifications to process the permit applications described in subparagraphs (5)(a) and (5)(b),
above, the Department will issue a written request for information ("RFI") to Respondent.
Respondent shall submit the requested information in writing to the Department within 15
days of receipt of the request. Respondent shall provide all information requested in any
additional RPIs issued by the Department within 15 days of receipt of each request. Within 60
days of the Department's receipt of the applications described in subparagraphs (5)(a) and
(5)@),above, Respondent shall provide all information necessary to complete the application.
Within 120 days of issuance of any required permits described in
d)
subparagraphs (5)(a)and (5)@),above, Resapondent shall complete the permitted modifications
and submit a Certification of Completion ftsr each permit, prepared and sealed by a
professional engineer registered in the State of Florida, along with all supporting
documentation. Respondent shall not place the system modifications into service until
Respondent receives written Department 'clearance.
6.
Within 30 days of the effective date of this Order, Respondent shall pay the
Department $2,095.00 in settlement of the regulatory matters addressed in this Order.
This
amount mcludes $1,595.00 for civil penalties and $500.00 for costs and expenses incurred by
the Department during the investigation of this matter and the preparation and tracking of this
Order. The civil penalties are apportioned as follows: $500.00 for violation of Rule
I 62-555.315(6)(b),F.A.C.;$500.00 for violation of Rule2 62-550.500,62-550.512, and
62-
550.518(2), F.A.C.; and $595.00 for the value of the economic benefit of non-compliance for
missed sampling.
7.
Respondent agrees to pay the Department stipulated penalties in the amount of
$100.00 per day for each and every day Respondent fails to timely comply with any of the
requirements of paragraph 5 of this Order. The Department may demand stipulated penalties
PW-co
REV. 06/09
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000150 of 000183
FDEP lis. Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Consent Order, CGC File No.10-2288-67-F'W
Page 4
at any time after violations occur. Respondent shall pay stipulated penalties owed within 30
days of the Department's issuance of written demand for payment, and shall do so as further
described in paragraphs 8 and 9,below. Nothing in this paragraph shall prevent the
Department from filing suit to specifically enforce any terms of this Order. Any stipulated
penalties assessed under this paragraph sl-all be in addition to the civil penalties agreed to in
paragraph 6 of this Order.
8.
Respondent shall make all payments required by this Order by cashier's check or
money order. Payment instruments shall be made payable to the "Department of
Environmental Protection" and shall include both the OGC number assigned to this Order and
the notation "Ecosystem Management and Restoration Trust Fund."
9.
Except as otherwise provided, all submittals and payments required by this
Order shall be sent to Department of Environmental Protection, Northwest District Office, 160
Governmental Center, Pensacola, Florida 282502-5794.
10.
Respondent shall allow all authorized representatives of the Department access
to the Facility and the Property at reasonable times for the purpose of determining compliance
with the terms of this Order and the rules and statutes administered by the Department.
11.
In the event of a sale or conveyance of the Facility or of the Property upon which
the Facility is located, if all of the requirements of this Order have not been fully satisfied,
Respondent shall, at least 30 days prior to The sale or conveyance of the Facility or Property,
(a) n o t e the Department of such sale or conveyance, (b) provide the name and address of the
purchaser, operator, or person@)in control of the Facility, and (c) provide a copy of this Order
with all attachments to the purchaser, operator, or person(s) in control of the Facility. The sale
or conveyance of the Facility or the Property does not relieve Respondent of the obligations
imposed in this Order.
12.
If any event, including administrative or judicial challenges by third parties
unrelated to Respondent, occurs which causes delay or the reasonable likelihood of delay in
complying with the requirements of this Order, Respondent shall have the burden of proving
the delay was or will be caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of Respondent
PW-co
REV. 06/09
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000151 of 000183
FDEP vs. Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Consent Order, OGC File No. 10-2288-67-PW
Page 5
and could not have been or cannot be overcome by Respondent's due diligence. Neither
economic circumstances nor the failure of a contractor, subcontractor, materialman, or other
agent (collectively referred to as "contractor") to whom responsibility for performance is
delegated to meet contractually imposed cleadlines shall be considered circumstances beyond
the control of Respondent (unless the cause of the contractor's late performance was also
beyond the contractor's control). Upon occurrence of an event causing delay, or upon
becoming aware of a potential for delay, Respondent shall notify the Department by the next
working day and shall, within seven calendar days notify the Department in writing of (a) the
anticipated length and cause of the delay, (b) the measures taken or to be taken to prevent or
minimize the delay, and (c) the timetable by which Respondent intends to implement these
measures. If the parties can agree that the delay or anticipated delay has been or will be
caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of Respondent, the time for
performance hereunder shall be extended. The agreement to extend compliance must identify
the provision or provisions extended, the new compliance date or dates, and the additional
measures Respondent must take to avoid or minimize the delay, if any. Failure of Respondent
to comply with the notice requirements of this paragraph in a timely manner constitutes a
waiver of Respondent's right to request an extension of time for compliance for those
circumstances.
13.
The Department, for and in consideration of the complete and timely
performance by Respondent of all the obligations agreed to in this Order, hereby conditionally
waives its right to seek judicial imposition of damages or civil penalties for the violations
described above up to the date of the filing; of this Order. This waiver is conditioned upon
Respondent's complete compliance with all of the terms of this Order.
This Order is a settlement of the Department's civil and administrative authority
arising under Florida law to resolve the matters addressed herein. This Order is not a
14.
settlement of any criminal liabilities which may arise under Florida law, nor is it a settlement
of any violation which may be prosecuted criminally or civilly under federal law. Entry of this
PW-co
REV. 06/09
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase It QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000152 of 000183
FDEP vs. Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Consent Order, CGC File No.lCL22288-67-PW
Page 6
Order does not relieve Respondent of the need to comply with applicable federal, state, or
local laws, rules, or ordinances.
15.
The Department hereby expressly reserves the right to initiate appropriate legal
action to address any violations of statutes or rules administered by the Department that are
not specifically resolved by this Order.
16.
Respondent is fully aware that a violation of the terms of this Order may subject
Respondent to judicial imposition of damages, civil penalties up to $10,000.00per day per
violation, and criminal penalties.
17.
Respondent acknowledges and waives its right to an administrative hearing
pursuant to sections 120.569 and 120.57,F.S.,on the terms of this Order. Respondent also
acknowledges and waives its right to appeal the terms of this Order pursuant to section 120.68,
F.S.
18.
No modifications of the terms of this Order will be effective until reduced to
writing, executed by both Respondent and the Department, and filed with the clerk of the
Department.
19.
The terms and conditions set forth in this Order may be enforced in a court of
competent jurisdiction pursuant to sections 120.69 and 403.121,F.S.Failure to comply with the
terms of this Order constitutes a violation of section 403.161(1)@), F.S.
This Consent Order is a final order of the Department pursuant to section
120.52(7),F.S., and it is final and effective on the date filed with the Clerk of the Department
20.
unless a Petition for Administrative Hearing is filed in accordance with Chapter 120,F.S.
Upon the timely filing of a petition, this Consent Order will not be effective until further order
of the Department.
21.
Persons who are not parties 3:o this Consent Order, but whose substantial
interests are affected by it, have a right to petition for an administrative hearing under sections
120.569 and 120.57,Florida Statutes. Becaiise the administrative hearing process is designed to
formulate final agency action, the filing of a petition concerning this Consent Order means that
PW-co
REV. 06/09
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000153 of 000183
FDEP vs. Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc
Consent Order, OGC File No.10-2288-67-PW
Page 7
the Department‘s final action may be different from the position it has taken in the Consent
Order.
The petition for administrative helukg must contain all of the following information:
a) The OGC Number assigned to this Consent Order;
b) The name, address, and telephone number of each petitioner; the name, address,
and telephone number of the petitioner’s representative, if any, which shall be the
address for service purposes during the course of the proceeding;
c)
An explanation of how the petitioner’s substantial interests will be affected by the
Consent Order;
d) A statement of when and how the petitioner received notice of the Consent Order;
e) Either a statement of all material facts disputed by the petitioner or a statement that
the petitioner does not dispute any material facts;
f)
A statement of the specific facts the petitioner contends warrant reversal or
modification of the Consent Order;
g)
A statement of the rules or statutes the petitioner contends require reversal or
modifkahon of the Consent Order; and
h) A statement of the relief sough1 by the petitioner, stating precisely the action
petitioner wishes the Department to take with respect to the Consent Order.
The petition must be filed (received) at the Department’sOffice of General Counsel,
3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, MS# 35, ‘Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000 within 21 days of
receipt of this notice. A copy of the petition must also be mailed at the time of filing to the
District Office at 160Governmental Center, Pensacola, Florida 32502-5794. Failure to file a
petition within the 21-day period constitutes a person‘s waiver of the right to request an
administrative hearing and to participate LS a party to this proceeding under sections 120.569
and 120.57,Florida Statutes. Before the deadline for filing a petition, a person whose
substantial interests are affected by this Cctnsent Order may choose to pursue mediation as an
PW-co
REV. 06/09
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000154 of 000183
FDEP vs. Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
Consent Order, OGC File No.10-228847-PW
Page 8
alternative remedy under section 120.573, Florida Statutes. Clioosing mediation will not
adversely affect such person’s right to reqJest an administrative hearing if mediation does not
result in a settlement. Additional information about mediation is provided in section 120.573,
Florida Statutes and Rule 62-110.106(12),Florida Administrative Code.
22.
Rules referenced in this Order are available at
http://www.dep.state.fl,us/legal/Rules/rulelislnum.ht.
PW-co
REV. 06/09
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000155 of 000183
,.
FDEP vs. Aqua Utilitien Florida, Inc.
&nS€lIt Order, OGC Flle No.10-2uu).67-PW
Page 9
I --
__ _-______-----
l___l.___^^_-____
l___l
r-J
DONE AND ORDERED this 2day of-.
2010, in Bscambia County, Florida.
District Ilirector
Northwest District
Filed, on this date, pursuant to section 120.52, F.S.,with the designated Department Clerk,
receipt of which is hereby acknowledged.
November 0 2 , 2010
Date
Copies furnished to:
Lea Crandall, Agency Clerk
Mail Statim 35
PW-co
REV. 06/09
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,
Page 000156 of 000183
EXHIBIT I
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000157 of 000183
Exhibit I
Report on Environmental Issues in Prior Rate Case
Consent Orders
o Chuluota Water System - As explained in detail in the Final Report and in the
Fourth Quarter Environmental Compliance Update, all obligations under the consent
order have been met and FDEP closed out the consent order on December 23,2010.
-
o The Woods Water System FDEP issued a consent order closure letter on Jan 14,
2009. (See Attachment "I".)
-
o Zephyr Shores Water System
FDEP issued a consent order closure letter on
August 24,2009. (See Attachment "2".)
-
o The Village Water Wastewater System As explained in detail in the Fourth
Quarter Environmental Compliance Update, AUF was required to identify alternative
disposal for the effluent from this facility by May 20 I 1. AUF has already identified a
viable solution for effluent reuse and is negotiating an agreement with a nearby
property owner. AUF expects the site will accommodate all of the treated effluent and
has drafted a proposed 20 year agreement for the use of the land. AUF has already
engaged Andreyev Engineering Inc. to conduct and analyze soil borings and BESH
Engineering Inc to design and penrdt a spray field. AUF anticipates having the spray
field operational by November 201 I . AUF also has installed monitoring wells around
the percolation ponds and is monii.oring in accordance with the consent order. To
date, that monitoring has revealed no adverse impacts.
o South Seas Wastewater System - As explained in detail in the Fourth Quarter
Environmental Compliance Updatc:, AUF received a warning letter on February 25,
2010 regarding a leak at the facility's reject storage tanks which AUF had previously
reported to the FDEP. Prior to the warning letter, AUF had already contacted
contractors to evaluate the flow equalization tank and the 3 reject storage tanks at the
facility. Subsequently, the flow equalization tank failed resulting in a spill of raw
wastewater. AUF had temporary repairs made to the tank and initiated plans to
replace all four tanks. A consent order to replace the tanks and make other upgrades
has not been finalized. However, P.UF has replaced all four storage tanks at a cost of
over $400,000. (See photograph appended as Attachment "3".)
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000158 of 000183
Outstanding Warning Letters
o Pomona Park - FDEP issued a case closure letter on this matter on April 17, 2009
(See Attachment "4"). The system was inspected on June 16, 2010 and no violations
or deficiencies were noted. (See Attschment "5".)
-
o Jasmine Lakes As explained in detail in the Fourth Quarter Environmental
Compliance Update, this matter has been successfully closed.
-
o Palm Terrace As explained in detail in the Fourth Quarter Environmental
Compliance Update, this matter has been successfully closed.
o Arredondo Farms - A warning ktter was issued June 12, 2008 alleging effluent
violations for A m ' s wastewater system in Alachua County. It was determined during
the permit renewal process that although the facility was permitted at 0.06 mgd its
actual design capacity was no more than 0.045 mgd. The facility had been treating
0.044 mgd Annual Average Daily Flow and experienced peak days of 0.56 mgd.
FDEP issued a two year permit which gave AUF time to design and construct
improvements including a new hcad works, additional surge capacity, additional
aeration volume and two digesters. The construction was completed and FDEP issued
a clearance letter on August 27, 2010. (See Attachment "6".) The FDEP consent
order closure letter is appended as Attachment "7".
Outstanding Noncompliance Letters
o Silver Lake Oaks Wastewater System for alleged effluent violations relating to total
dissolved solids, nitrates and fecal coliforms. With adjustments to the air flow, new
d i f i e r s , and diligent monitoring, fqe plant has returned to compliance and the matter
is closed.
o Florida Central Commerce Park for alleged failure to submit pathogen monitoring
results every 5 years for wastewater system in Seminole County. This wastewater
system is required to monitor for pathogens and submit results every five years. This
is typically completed in the years when the permit renewal application is required.
Accordingly, AUF monitored for pathogens and submitted the report with the renewal
application. Unfortunately the FDEP permitting section did not make the FDEP
compliance section aware that the report had been received. This miscommunication
was quickly resolved and the matter is closed.
o Valencia Terrace Wastewater System for alleged failure to satisfy requirement to
install a new bar screen and splitter box. The new splitter box and bar screen were
installed on June 9,2009. The matter is closed.
2
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3.Page 000159 of 000183
o Morning View Wastewater System for allegedly not meeting minimum chlorine
contact time and 2 reporting deficiencies. Baffles were installed to meet the minimum
contact time. The reporting deficiencies arose from a misunderstanding by the
operator that was cleared up. The matter is closed. A subsequent inspection letter
cited no deficiencies at the plant. (See Attachment "8".)
o South Seas Wastewater System for alleged effluent violations. This matter is
discussed in the Consent Order section above. Improvements have been completed
and the system is currently operating in compliance with effluent limits.
Other
o Chuluota Wastewater System - Discharge monitoring reports allegedly showed that
average daily flow to the facility hild exceeded permitted capacity. FDEP requested
additional information from AUF regarding permit application which was filed on
December 6, 2007. AUF entered into a reuse agreement with Utilities, Inc.
(subsequently acquired by the City of Oviedo) to accept treated wastewater emuent
for reuse. AUF submitted plans and specifications to FDEP for the facilities to
implement this agreement. FDEP issued a renewed 5-year permit for the Chuluota
wastewater system on April 6,2010. AUF has completed the installation of the reuse
main and expects to begin delivering reuse water to the City of Oviedo by March 1,
2011.
3
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000160 of 000183
Attachment 1
Florida Department of
Environmental Protection
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page bhY'l6~'~5~000183
t ~cnw(ia
Southwest Dlslrla Omce
13051 North klrcrm Parkway
Ttmplr TerrdCe. Florlila 33637-0926
January14,2009
Mr. JohnLihvarcik, Resident
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
P.O.Box 490310
Lssburg, FL 34749
Re:
Consent Order Closure
The Woods
PWSlD No. 660-0347
OGC File No.07-0466-60.PW
Sumter County
Dear Mr. Lihvarcik
This letter is to notify you that the provisions of the above-referenced Consent Order
have been met. The Department, therefcre, considers this case closed.
Your continud cooperation tu comply with applicable Department regulations is
appreciated. If you have any questionr;, please cuntact Kim Woodhouse at (813) 6327600, extension 401. Kim is our new Environmental Specialist (in Drinking Water) for
Sumfer County.
Gerald 8. Foster
Environmental Manager
Drinking Water Section
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Repott
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000162 of 000183
Attachment 2
Florida Department of
Environmerital Protection
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSf$fig@q*,;,,
Exhibit sc-3, Page OQ(hl.Ba,pf000183
I? !! h , t i l k . $ ! , q ?
It
Swthwal,DiWct Ofllce
13051 North Tcicmm Parkway
'TempleTerrace, Florida 33637-01)26
<k>\.c,l,i,..
hl:rh.wl N. ! Y ~ C
51.1 rvl:ll',
August 24,2009
RECEIVED
Mr. John M. Lihvarcik, President rind COO
Aqw Utilities Florida Inc.
I i 00 Thomas Avenue
Leeburg, FL 34748
Re:
Consent Order Closure
Zephyr Shores Mobile Home Estates
PWS-ID NO.651-2018
OGC File No. 09-0737-51-PW
Pasco county
Dear Mr. Lihvarcik:
This letter is to notify you that the providons of the referenced Consent Order have been met,
and the Department has received your payment of S500.00. A copy of the Consent Order is
enclosed that was executed by the District Dirccfor. The Department, therefore, considers this
case closed.
Your continued cooperation to comply with applicable Department regulations is appreciaed. If
you have any questions, plcasc contact Nick Noreika at (813) 632-7600, extension 314.
GBF/nn/dm
Enclosure
cc: Lea Crandall. Agency Clerk, O W .
@ ~ i & ~ ! l ~ & ~
\LJW
>
t1.p
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,
Page 000164 of 000163
A1:tachment3
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000166 of 000183
Attachment 4
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000167 of 000183
Charlic Crlrt
Floriida Department of
Environmental Protection
.
Northeast District
782.S Baymendom Way, Suite 0200
Jwkmnville, Florida 31256-7590
Phmc: SUV807.33W
Fu:90414484366
Cwcrnor
lcff Kotlhnip
i.1. Governor
Michacl W. Sole
Secretary
April 17,2009
SENT BY MAIL
Corporate Service Company
Registered Agent for .
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
1201 Hays Street
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Putnam County - Potable Water
OGC File No. 08-2364-CASE CLOSURE
Pomona Park M"//PWS I D 2540901i
Dear Registered Agenc
..
The Department has receivd the documentation for Items 2(a-i) and the payment of the
fine listed in Item 3. The system has n o w completed all items in the Final Order and the
Department considers this case closed. Thank you for your cooperation in resolving
this matter.
Should you have any questions concerning the Final Order, please feel hee to contact
Ben Piltz at (904)807-3334 or Benjamin.Piltz@dep.state.fl.us. Your continued
cooperation is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Melissa M.Long,'P.E.
Water Facilities Administrator
Enforcement File
cc:
,
Ms;.AlikiMoncrief, QGC
. .
Ms.Mary Wi1son;OGC
Ms. Ollie Henderson, Data Pro:essing FDEP, NED
Ms. Candice McClure, Aqua Uilities Florida, Inc. (cmmclure@aquaamerica.com)
MS. Tricia Williams, Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. (pnvilliams~aquaamerica.mm)
MI.Paul Thompson, Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. (pdthompson~quaamenca.~m)
I
'Won'Pmlcclioii. Lcss Process'
/mpP;/Aunv.dep.statc.ll.uu
.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000168 of 000183
Attachment 5
Docket No. 100330-WS
II. QSM Rennrl
.Final
...-. Phase
..
.
-
Exhibit SC-3,Page 0 ~ 6 M K l 0 1 8 3
Florida Department of
Environmental
Protection
~a~~~~tmshict
Gwcrnor
]elf KMtkanip
Lt. cimenm
7825 e*ymsadowr way, suite moo
Jacksonville, Florida 32256-7590
Phone VDvW7-33CO + Fu:9W448-4366
Mlchxl W. Sole
Sccrctaly
July 2,2010
SENT VIA MAIL
RECEIVED
Mr. JohnLJhvarcik, President
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc
Post Office Box 490310
JUL
- 7 ZO!O
Aqua Utilities
Florida Inc.
Leesburg,PL 34749
P u h m County - Potable Water
sanitary survey 2010
Pomona Park WTP // MID:2540905
Dear Mr.L i h v a e
On June16,2010,a Sanigry Survey of the above referenced Community water system wns
conducted with the courteous assislame of Mr David Haring. The Department irr p l e d to infonn
you &at the above refemxed facility is in c o m p h with the Florida safe Drinldng Water Act,
sedions 403,Florida Statutes 0,
and the rules promulgated thereunder, Florida AduMsttative
Code PAC) Title 62
Please note that the Dishfedion Byproducts sampled in 20W was low enough whereby the system
was able to reduce to triennial monitoring. N a d y , the next set would be due in 2011. Due to the
fact that this would put P ~ O F‘ark
M monitoring for Disinfection Byprodurn in the same
compliance year 8 s Large Communitysystems, the schedule has been adjusted so fhat the system
should sample in 2012with the other small cormunity water s y s t m ~ ~ .
A0 a r e d d e r , this system is requiredto monitor for the following parameku daring 2010: Total
Coliform Bacteria with Residual MsMedani Levels on a monthly basis.
A copy of the Sanitary Survey is e n d o s e d for your records. If you have any questions, please contact
me by Mephone at (904)807-3334 or email at BenjamhPiltzWepstate.fl.us.Thank you for y w
cooperation with Florida’s Sak Water DdnMn;3 Act.
sincerely,
Ben Piltz
Environmental Spedalist I
BRR: BLE? bp
cc:Mr. Paul Thompson,Operator, Aqua Utilities Florida via pdtfiompson@aquaamerica.com
‘Mom Prolccllon. I.M ProcessMlpYAnw.drp.5lale.ff.ud
State of Florida
Department of EnvimnmentalProtection
GeRtFdN~ytheastDistrict
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase I1QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,
Page 000170 of 000183
SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
-
Plant Name
Pomona Park WTP
county
Putnam
PWSID# 2640906
Plant Location 110 Church Street. Ppmpna Park. FL 32181
Phone
Owner- Name
h Phone 352-7326027
Owner Address Post oflics Box 490310. Leesburci. FL 34749
DesignatedRep. John Lihvarclk
Title President
Phone 352-732-8027
Facility C o n t a c t M r . I T i t l e
Owrator
Phone 386437-1 143
Thls Survey Date
6/18/10
Last Survey Date
8/2/07
Last C.I. Date
8/18/09
-
PWS TYPE 6 CLASS: Community (5D)-
RAW WATER SOURCE
GROUND; Number of Wells
0 SURFACEIUDI; Source
0 PURCHASEDfrom PWS ID #
EmergencyWater Source
Emmgency Watw Capacity
SERVICE AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Municloalltv
n
FoodServlce: ~ Y O S IU N O m N / A
GENERAL INFORMATION
192
Number of SeM’ce Connections
Populatlon Served 672
Basis
ODerator
nod
Plant Deslgn Capacity 170.000
Basis yell cawcitv
Average Day (from MOR@29.339
acd
Max. Day (from MORs) -03
m
i
Total Storage Capacity U O O pa)Ions
Comments MOR data IS
lalt 12 month
avaraaa.
LOCATION
Latiiude 3!? 2Q 44.8-h
Longitude4l035’ 45.27” West
G P S m Date:7/97
Directionsus HWV 17
Street k mmma P a h
la.
Tun-leR
na
OPERATION 8 MAINTENANCE
Certified Operator: [XI Yes 0 No 0 Not required
Operator@)& Certification Class-Number
Mr. Paul ThomDson
O&M Log: a y e s U N O OBM Manual: m e s U N O
Operator Visitation Frequency
Hnrlday: Rwulmd
2
Adual
Adual
Daysiwk:
N
o n - wRequlfed
nsecutive~;es~(o
MORSsubmitted regularly?
Data missing from MORs?
No Yes
8:;
5
a NIA
AUXILIARY POWER SOURCE
Yes
None 0 NotRequlred
ource OnanGenerator
30
Capaclty of Standby (kw)
Switchover:
0 Manual
StandbyPlan:
Yes U N O
Hn Operated Under toad
4 hrlmo.
What equipment does it operate?
1xI well pumps
High Service P u m p
Treatment Equipment
Satisfy 1/2 maxday demand? mYes U N OUUnk
Commentssatisfaotcrv
P
to ma tic
TREATMENT PROCESSES IN USE
HvDochlodnation
What additional treatment is needed?
No additionaltmatment Is reauired.
For control of what deficiencies?
DISTRIBUTIONSYSTEM
Flow Measuring Device
Flow Meter
Meter Sire 8 Type 4” Ne-eter
Backnow Prawnlion Devices: [I9 Yes 0 No
Cross-connections NOcross unnecthms observed.
Written Cross-connectionControl Program: Yes
Yes 0 No
Coliform Sampling Plan:
Comments Plans. Manuals. and Lo- arehDt on sIte
at the Dlant.
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Paae 000171 of 000183
PWSTDP
i540805
Survey Date 6/16/$0
Pornona Park WTP
'
COMMENTS
2
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000172 of 000183
Pomone Park WTP
FWSiD#
Survey Date
CHLORINATION (Disinfection)
Type:
Hwo-CMorinatkm
Make Stenner
Capacity $0 nod
Chlorine Feed Rate 45%
AVg. h O W t of C12 g a u r d
N/A
Chlorine Residuals: Plant
Remote .084
Remote tap location Bad1Sam
2540905
8/16/10
STORAGE FACILITIES
(E) Bladder (CW) Cleanvell (C) Contact
(E)Elevated
-
injection Points Pre hvdro tank
Booster Pump info &&w ournos not installed.
Comments
ChiorlnothsUaa
MS
NO
Commenta
Requimonb
‘Quat system
Adq-switchover
Ala-
0
In
I
0
01
I
3
Access Padlocked
Height to Bottom of
Elevated Tank
Height to Max.
Water Level
Last Inspection
Date (for tanks with
access manholes)
Yes
N/A
N/A
2008
Make
Model
AERATION (Gases, Fe, & Mn Removal)
Capacity
Maintenance
Comments
Commenta
\
\
3
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM ReDort
Exhibit SC-3, P a F 000173 of 000183
Pornona Park WTP
WVSID#
540905
S w a y Date
8/16/10
COMPLIANCE MONITORING
COMMUNITY PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
Wrbrly umd-
I
I
Lead and Copper
rsquimd If 25,500 people wwd.
Pohl Or Entry to the drtrlbdonrpm
9l Plunr* CrmWd)
&lPdnt d En(ry lo me BstnbUlon a y & m
I If e m each dmt's w)
2008
;!011
'
I
Samplr takon from pn-.ppmved sample plan eltn.
Sampln fskmfrom dlebibution Waiver Ivmbbb if h m
IS m srbssb~
plpe in Vu dis(ributbn s p t m .
Unless olhefwise noted, all samples shall be representatwe of each soum after treatment.
SCHEMATIC (not to scale):
c12
ARV
1
Distribution
--
4
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000174 of 000183
...
PomOna Parlc Wre
PWSID#
2540905
SutveyDate 6/16/10
DEFICIENCIES:
Inspector
Approved by
Ben Ptltz
Blanca R. Rodriguez
'Title m
r
onmental .%ea 'alist I
rile
5
Enaineer Soedalist IV
Date 07mW 10
Date 07mmo
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000175 of 000183
Attachment 6
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3. Page 000176 of 000183
Charlie Crlst
Florida Department of
Environmental Protection
Northeast Dlstrlct
7&!5 Bymcadarr W y . Suite 8200
liclironvllle, Florida 12256-7590
Phon': 90V807-1300 t Fu: W446-4166
Govcrnor
leff Kottkamp
Lt. Governor
Michael W. Sole
Secrelay
August 27,2010
Mr. John M Lihvarcik
Resident
Aqua Utility Florida Inc
P.O.Box490310
Leesburg, Florida 34749-3 IO
(941) 907-7400
-
Re:
Ahchua County Wastewater
Certification of Completion
Arredondo F a m i Mobile Home Park WWTF FLAOl1315
Dear h4s.Lihvarcik:
-
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) acknowledges receipt ofDEI' Form 62-620.910(12),
Notification of Completion of Construction of
s
m
Hydrasieve Model 554-2-48 influent static fine scnxn which is 304 stainless steel traverse bar screen that is 48 inches
wide by 54 inches long with 0.060 inches (1.5 mm) openings.
An 8,500 gallons flow equalization tank. The equalization tank that has one Roots U-RAI36 blower with a 5 hp motor.
The tank also bas a duplex pumping system with a cripacity of 100 gpm @ 20feet total dynamic head.
An additional 8,500 gallons aeration basin tank.The tank is set approximately 2 feeI above existing tank top elevation.
A flow splitter box to capnue all the flow from aeration basin AT-4and equally distribute flow between aeration AT-5 and
AT-6 and in Nm to clarifier 1 and 2. The box has adjustable aluminum weir gates.
Two 8,500 gallons digester tanks. Aeration and mixng is provided by one Rwts U-RAI36 blower with a 5 hp motor.
Replacement of existing diffusers with membrane type coarse bubble diffusm and replacement of some dcterioratcd
galvanized steel aeration piping.
Replacement of the existing outlet baflle and concrete weirs in both existing clarifiers with new outlet baffles and V-notch
adjustable aluminum weirs. Remove and replace existing 4 inch rehun activated sludge airlift in existing clarifiers and
replace with 3 inch schedule 40 PVC airlih and 6 inch PCV gravity return piping to the head of the plant and to the MW
sludge holding tanks.
There were not significant changes in the design and related materials appmved by the Department under Permit
Number EA011305 issued on December 15,2009. Ihsed on information provided, the Department accepts the
project for service. If you have any questions, please contact Joseph Emery at (904) 807-3342 or
Joseoh.Emerv@dep.state.fl.us.Your continued cooperation in our wastewater program is appreciated.
Sincerely,
D. Vo, P.E.
Wastewater Permitting Section
cc :
Mark Bubel, P.E. -Aqua Utility Florida Inc
Patricia Williams, P.E. - Aqua Utility Florida Inc
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000177 of 000183
Attachment 7
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000178 of 000183
Florilda Department of
Environmental Protection
Charlie Crisl
Governor
Icff Kottkmmy
Lt. Governor
Northeast Dlstrict
7825 Baymeadows Way. Suite 8200
Iacksonvlllc. Florlda 32256-7590
Phone: 904/807-3300 Fa:XJU448-4Xb
Minil A. Drew
kcrelay
October 20,2010
Mr. John M. Lihvarcik, President
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc.
110 Thomas Avenue
Leesburg, FL.34748
Re:
Alachua County - Domestic Wastewater Enforcement
OGC File Number 10-1903
Arredondo Farms MHP - FLA011315
Dear Mr. Lihvarcik:
This letter is to inform you that the above-referenced enforcement project has been
closed by the Florida Department of Erwironmental Protection. All conditions of the
Consent Order have been satisfied.
Should you have any questions concerning this Consent Order, please contact Heather
Webber at Hea ther.Webbw@dep.state.& or at 904-807-3316.Your cooperation is
appreciated.
Sincerely,
'TomKallemeyn
Wastewater C & E Supervisor
cc:
.
.. .
Paul Thomas, Aqua Utilities
Tricia Williams, Aqua Utilities
Stacie Greco, Alachua County
Ollie Henderson, FDEP - Jacksonville
Diana Thurman, FDEP - Tallaha.ssee
Lea Crandall, Agency Clerk, Mail Station 35
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000179 of 000183
Attachment 8
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000180 of 000183
Florida Department of
Enviroinmental
Protection
Central District
3319 Maguire Boulevard, Suite 232
Olando. Florida 32803-3767
Charlie Crisl
Govem or
Jeff Kotrkamp
Lt. Governor
Michael W. Sole
Secretary
SENT VIA E-MAIL TO: jmlihvarcik@aauaamerica.com
August 20,2010
OCD-GWW-10-0624
AQUA UTILITIES FLORIDA INC
PO BOX 2480
LADY LAKE FL 32158
ATTENTION JOHN LlHVARClK
PRESIDENT
-
Lake County DW
Momingview WWTF
Wastewater Facilitv Permit No. FLA01061Q
-
Dear Mr. Lihvarcik:
On July 29, 2010, Department personnel conducted a routine inspection of your wastewater
facility. At the time of the inspection, the overall operation of your facility was found to be in
substantial compliance with the terms an3 conditions in Permit Number FLA010610. Please
review the enclosed inspection report and xrrect any deficiencies, which have been noted.
Your continued cooperation with our wastewater program is appreciated. If you have any
questions, please contact me at (407)893.3313 or via e-mail: iennv.e.farrell@deD.state.fl.us.
Sincerely,
* r F d
Jenny Farrell
Environmental Specialist
Wastewater Compliance/Enforcement
JFlar
Enclosure: Inspection Report
cc: Lake County Water Resource Management, scatasus@lakecounMl.aov
Patrick Farris, Aqua Utilities Inc, oafaris@aauaamerica.com
Edward Pellenz, Aqua Utilities Inc, ~ ~ e l l e n z ~ a a u a a m e r i c a . c o m
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000181 of 000183
8/9/2010 12:0614 PM
FLORIDA D E P A R T M E N T O F E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O T E C T I O N
WASTEWATER COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
FACILITY AND INSPECTION INFORMATION
@
= Optional
Emtry DuCmmr
Name *nd Physkml Locatbnol ParlUty
WAR1 I D
COb.ty
Momingview WWTF
1322 English Road
FLA010610
Lake
7/29/2010 11:45:00 AM
Phanr
@ EslCD*WNme
-
Leesburg, FL 34749 310
N.WW
7R9ROIO 12:08:OOPM
0 f ~ e . i apmmmrnes(s)
Em0
Nlll
PLOW
Aqua Utilities operitor
Adam Michaelsen
N.ar..1Addrru.I~~~~r~(cd~)nirn~d*r
llU*
John M Lihvarcik
Resident
Aqua Utilities Florida Inc.
1100 Thomas Avenue
h.u
@ apcmmrCadf!dhu
PhDn.2
Leesburg, FL 34749
IUFhnTY*
-X Domesno
IC
~
I
E
1I I
Industrial
S.mple%Take~,(YiN):N
W~ltPhota
Tekem(Y/N):
@ Srmple~m:
N
@
N
LqbwkVolume:
silapkr SPUI (YIN):
EIP
N
NIA
@
FACILITY COMPLl
IC = In Complianw; NC =Out ofCompliance, SC = Siiniticant out of Compliance; NA -Not Applicsblc; NE= Not Evalusted
RcllW . d o . Oldrr c0nIpu.m
sr.rul:
In-Complionn:
OutQFCompliancc
- Signifi~cOut-OfC~Ii,~~
Dab
08/17/2010
DU4
August 19.2010
Revised February 1l.2010
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final Phase II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3, Page 000182 of 000183
Facility Name: Morningview WWTF
Facility ID: FLA010610
Inspection Type: CEI
Date: 7/29/2010 12:08:00 PM
FACILITY BACKGROUND
-
Address: 1322 English Road,Leesburg, FL 34749 310, Lake County
Permlt Informadon: Wastewater Permit issued: 3i2t2007, and expires: 2/19/2012
Treatment Summary: Extended Aeration Sewage Treatmert Plant WIEfflucnt To A Percolation Pond
Permitted Capaclty: 0 02
I.
Permlt: IN COMPLIANCE
1.1 Observation: A copy of the permit was onsite and ava.ilableto plant personnel.
2. Comuliance Schedules: NOT APPLICABLE
3. Laboratory: NOT EVALUATED
4. SamuUng: NOT EVALUATED
5. BkfPrds and RenO T t i :
OUT OF COMPLIANCE
5.1 Observation: Generol- A copy of the cumnt laboratory certification was availnble at the time of the inspection (62620.350(1) F.A.C.).
w t i o n a l Comments: Samples are analyzed by Plant Technicians Laboratory.
5.2 N s m a tion: Generol - Operarars' certifications were current and available onaite.
5.3 Bscrvation: Cenerol- The certified operator's daily logbmk was complete,
Additional Comments: The logbook was pre-numbered, bound, and contained sufficient opatiodmaintenance entries.
5.4 Qbservation: Generol - A copy of the Operation and Maintenance Manual as required by Chapter 62-600, F.A.C. was
available to plant personnel.
-
5.5 Observation: Cenerol Please see specific comment
Additional Comments: The RPZ was last imypected 2nd tested on 4/8/10, according to on-site records.
5.6 Observation: Generol- Please see specific comment
Additional Comments: The DMRpapmvork review period was from July 2009 through May 2010, ail DMRs were not
submltted in a timely manner, see below:
The January 2010 DMR was received by the Dqartment on March 1,201 0, thlr DMR war due on or before
February 28,2010.
On the August 2009 DMR the number olexceedance column was left blank. Also, the TSS maximum result reported
on Part A was 1.0 m&lL and thls dld not match the result reported on Part B of 6.4 m g L
The influent and effluent a ~ u asamples
l
are mutine:.y reported m r e ofien than required.
6. Facilihr Site Review: IN COMPLIANCE
6.1 Observation: General- The facility grounds were secured properly.
6.2 Observation: Bocwow Prevenfion - A reduced pressure zone backflow prevention device was in place on the potable water
supply line.
Additional Comments: No leaks or problems were noted.
6.3 Observation:LiftSrarions - No problems or deficiencies noted.
Additional Comments: Two liftstations are connected to this system one master located at the plant and then one in the
community.
I
Docket No. 100330-WS
Final P h a s e II QSM Report
Exhibit SC-3,Page 000183 of 000183
a
lsFJLG6.4 Q b s m ation: Headwarb - Please see specific comment
Additional Comtnents: The liffstation pumps influent directly into the first aeration chamber.
-
6.5 Observation: AerafiunBasins/Ad.Slu~~eThe contents in the aeration chambers appeared to be adequately mixed.
6.6 Observatim: B/awers/Mofurs -The blower was opclational at the time of the inspection.
Additional Commats: Two blowers were m i t e and covered.
-
6.7 Observation: Chrii/ers Please see specific commellt
Additional Comrnents: The stilling well was goad. The clarifier contained pin floc. The skimmer was not on. The weir
appeared level, no flow was entering it at the time of inspection.
6.8 Observation: Dlsinfecfian - Please see specific comment
Additional Comments: Sodium hypochlorite is drip?ed into the parshall flume area. No flow was passing through at the time
of inspection. The chlorine contact chamber contained clear effluent and baffles.
6.9 Observation: Digesters - The tank contents in the ae:obic digester w m well mixed.
Additional comments: There was room for wasting.
7. Flow Measurement: M COMPLIANCE
7.1 Qbservatioq: The copy ofthe flow calibration repod is current and satisfactory.
Additional Commentq:This flow meter was last calibrated on lanumy 26,201 0 by Central Florida Conlmls. Inc.
8. ODeration and Maintenance: IN COMPLJANCE
8.1 Observation: General - Please see specific comment
Additional Cornments: The facility grounds w e n well maintained.
9. Emuent Ouslity IN COMPLIANCE
9.1 Observation: No excecdances were reported during ?hisDMR review period.
Additional Comments: The DMR review period was from July 2009 through March 2010.
IO. Emuent Dirnosnl: IN COMPLIANCE
10.1 Observation: Genera/ - At the time of the inspection, no flow was entering the rapid infiltration basin (RIB).
m: General - The RIBS appeared to be well maintained
10.2Qbsma
t.
10.3
: General - Advisory signs were postul around the disposal site indicating the nature of the project area.
10.4 Observation: General - The fence surroundingthe zfiluent disposal site provided adequate access control (62-610.5 IR(10)
F.A.C.)
11. ResidusldSludee: M COMPLIANCE
11.1 Observation: General - Please see specific commait
Ad&tional Comments: Residuals are hauled to 412 Biosolids RMF; sludge was last hauled on July 28,2010.
12. Groundwater Ounlity: NOT APPLICABLE
13.
m:NOTAPPLICABLE
2
Docket No. 100330-WS
AUF's report on complaints to Comm . - 2011
Exhibit SC-4, Page 000001 of 000001
Aqua 00mpliance
Florida 2011 Year-to-date Primary Root Cause Complaint Reasons
Estimated Bills
High bill dispute
"Billing Dispute
Bill Format
Termination Notice/nonpaymenVnon-access
PaymenVCredit Processing
Balance Transfer
Service Termination
Denied Payment Arrangements
Incomplete Work Order
Wrongful Termination
.1Il.
0
5
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
,
Qiam
0
1
0
0
1
2
3
0
3
6
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
4
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
O·
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
O·
0
1
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O· 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
40
0
1
0
0
7
0
0
0
·1
O.
Low Pressure
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
Denial of Service
0
0
0
0
'Poor Service Quality
0
0
0
Unable to ContacVNo return Call
0
0
0
0
0
Property Damage/Maint.lDist.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Rates
' 2
0
0
0
Water Quallli'
0
3
0
0
3
0
Miscellaneous
12
71
16
8
9
Total
5
15 6
Includes CS complaints involving keYing error, Unreasonable PARS, No follOW through, Discourteous/Not Helpful
"Includes No bill, Incorrect billing info (spelling, addresses). incorrect name on acct, general billing disputes
..
Docket No. 1o.o.33o.-WS
AUF's report on complaints to Comm . - 20.0.9-20.10.
Exhibit SC-5, Page 0.0.0.0.0.1 of 0.0.0.0.0.2
Aqua
~ompliance
Florida 2009 Year·to·date Primary Root Cause Complaint Reasons
. _o:.(al§
Estimated Bills
0.
0.
High bill dispute '
2
0.
"Billing Dispute
5
9
Bill Format
0.
0
Termination Notice/nonpaymenUnon-access
0.
0
PaymenUCredit Processing
0.
0.
Balance Transfer
0.
0
Service Termination
2
0
Denied Payment Arrangements
0
0.
Incomplete Work Order
0.
1
Wrongful Termination
0.
1
Low Pressure
0
0.
Denial of Service
0
0.
'Poor Service Quality
0.
0.
Unable to ContacUNo return Call
0.
0
Property Damage/Maint.lDist.
0.
0
0.
0.
Rates
Water Quality
0.
0.
3
3
Miscellaneous
Total
12 14
" Includes CS complaints InvolVing keying error,
" Includes No bill, incorrect billing info (spelling.
0.
0.
10.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
9
17
0.
0.
0.
0
1
0.
13
15
0.
0.
7
15
0
0.
6
9
0.
0.
3
13
0.
0.
3
8
0
0.
6
10.
0
0.
1
3
0.
0.
4
7
0.
0
54
121
0
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0
0.
0.
0
0.
0
0
0.
0
0.
3
8
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
O· 0.
0.
0
0
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
1
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
2
0.
0.
0
0.
1
0.
0
0.
1
4
2
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
1
0.
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
4
2
0.
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4
1
1
1
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
(j
13
1
1
0.
1
1
0.
0.
3
0.
4
16 . 213
11
33 30 25 18 17 16 17
Unreasonable PARS, No follow through, Discourteous/Not Helpful
addresses), Incorrect name on acct, general billing disputes
Docket No.1 00330-WS
AUF's report on complaints to Comm. - 2009-2010
Exhibit SC-5, Page 000002 of 000002 .
Aqua .;ompliance
Florida 2010 Year-to-date Primary Root Cause Complaint Reasons
rtolii~
Estimated Bills
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
High bill dispute
4
3
2
4
4
1
2
7
3
4
3
2
39
"Billing Dispute
3
5
7
4
5
10
59
9 8 3 3 3 2
(l
Bill Format
0
0
0
0 '0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Termination Notice/nonpaymenUnon-access
1
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PaymenUCredit Processing
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Balance Transfer
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Service Termination
3
2
19
2
1
1
3
2
0
0
1
1
3
Denied Payment Arrangements
O.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Incomplete Work Order
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Wrongful Termination
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Low Pressure
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
Denial of Service
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
'Poor Service Quality
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
Unable to ContacUNo return Call
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Property Damage/Maint.lDist.
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Rates
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Water Quality
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
5
3
4
1
24
2
1
3
5
1
1
0
0
3
Miscellaneous
Total
14 14 18 15 13 14 11 15 12
8
17
9
160
Includes CS complaints InvolVing keYing error, Unreasonable PARS, No follow through, DiscourteouS/Not Helpful
"Includes No bill, incorrect billing info (spelling, addresses), Incorrect name on acct, general billing disputes
..
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertising