.jpg)
Homeowners Suggest Policy Changes To PSA
Brian and Janet Goodfellow have a problem with a recent water bill they received from the Rockbridge County Public Service Authority for a house they own on Thoroughbred Circle.
The initial bill came in at $30,991.53 for the usage of 1,644,700 gallons of water over an eight-week period – from Dec. 20 to Feb. 22.
The extraordinary amount of water used during the billing cycle was due to a water line leak that went undetected for two months. The PSA’s response was to offer water and sewer line leak credits of more than $23,000. Still, the two-month water bill the PSA was expecting payment on was $7,656.66.
Not surprisingly, the Goodfellows are not happy about being told they owe the PSA nearly $8,000 for two months of water. “This is a failure of Rockbridge County,” said Brian Goodfellow. “I’m disappointed. I’m frustrated.”
Goodfellow, who has an engineering background, discovered that the water line where the leak occurred was just 8 inches below the surface of the ground – “nowhere near the required depth of 24 to 30 inches, as confirmed by [an] RCPSA service team and the [county’s] building department,” he said.
He suspects the break occurred as a result of subfreezing temperatures that penetrated the shallow depth of the line. Although a private contractor installed the line, the county’s building inspector signed off on the work, said Goodfellow, putting the county at fault in the matter, he contends.
Goodfellow gave a PowerPoint presentation at the PSA’s April 15 meeting in which he went over what he felt were the county’s shortcomings and ways the various issues raised might be addressed.
He said the PSA ought to read the water meters more frequently. The PSA doesn’t have the staff to read the water meters more often than every two months, said Melissa Alexander, the PSA’s executive director.
Technology exists that can detect leaks or when an inordinate amount of water is being used at a particular address, according to Goodfellow. He said Lexington uses such technology. Alexander said the PSA may look into seeing if there is technology available that the PSA can afford.
Goodfellow suggests the PSA offer an insurance plan for customers, perhaps by charging a small fee on everyone’s regular bill, to cover the costs of a leak that goes undetected for a prolonged period of time so that all of the costs don’t fall on an individual customer. Homeowners insurance does not cover the costs of water lost due to a leak. Goodfellow said he verified this by checking with several insurance companies.
Although there have been no other exorbitant bills of this magnitude sent to other PSA customers, Goodfellow believes other customers are at risk of this happening to them because of other improperly installed lines. Goodfellow checked the depth of a water line at another house he owns on Thoroughbred Circle and found that it too was at a similarly shallow depth. He believes the same problem may exist in other homes on Thoroughbred Circle that were built at the same time – less than five years ago – by the same contractor.
As for whether any further adjustments might be made to the Goodfellows’ exorbitant bill in question, the PSA took the matter “under advisement” at its April 15 meeting.
Goodfellow suggests the PSA establish a policy that would set a limit for the maximum cost that could be imposed in a situation such as this – perhaps a two months average of water usage.
“In a county where the average income is $58,135,” he asks, “who can afford an $8,000 water bill for eight weeks of water use?” This cost, he noted, “is equivalent to 28 years of water use.”
