Log in

Residents challenge CCWC rate proposal

EPCOR officials made their case for the proposed Chaparral City Water Company rate increase to the Town Council on Oct. 3, but two residents spoke up to make their objections known.

Lina Bellenir said she was billed for 61,000 gallons of water her last billing cycle when only one person was at home during the time.

She said that is not an unusual circumstance, but CCWC has been unable to locate a problem to resolve the issue.

You must be a member to read this story.

Join our family of readers starting at $5 for your first month and support local, unbiased journalism.


Already have an account? Log in to continue.

Otherwise, follow the link below to join.

Please log in to continue

Log in
I am anchor

Residents challenge CCWC rate proposal

Posted

EPCOR officials made their case for the proposed Chaparral City Water Company rate increase to the Town Council on Oct. 3, but two residents spoke up to make their objections known.

Lina Bellenir said she was billed for 61,000 gallons of water her last billing cycle when only one person was at home during the time.

She said that is not an unusual circumstance, but CCWC has been unable to locate a problem to resolve the issue.

In response to EPCOR Vice President Jim McKee explaining the need for significant repairs needed on the system after it acquired the company, Linda Bordow wondered why there was no oversight for the “shoddy” construction.

The comments from McKee about the condition of the system prompted Councilman Cecil Yates to question him about the due diligence his company did before the purchase.

McKee noted that there were a few visible issues but most of the problems have come from the underground infrastructure.

“We can’t see what was underground,” McKee said. “We hired an engineering firm that was familiar with (CCWC) to be a consultant.

“We felt the system was in good condition; we’ve had a few surprises.”

That prompted Bordow to ask why EPCOR would choose to have a relationship with an engineering firm that might be “too cozy” with the seller.

Both Bordow and Bellenir commented that they feel it is ridiculous for EPCOR to be raising prices because of a reduction in water use.

“We are being punished for conserving water,” Bellenir said.

In response to that McKee said water rates are determined up front based on past customer use, in this case actual 2006 water use, as a result declining demand and more efficient water-using appliances have had an impact on revenue.

In response to a question from Councilman Henry Leger, McKee said there had only been a handful of residents who have attended EPCOR open house meetings related to water company operations, the sale and proposed increase.

At a meeting held Sept. 25, there were just two members of the general public in attendance, McKee said.

Mayor Linda Kavanagh said residents have expressed concern to her regarding arsenic levels in the water.

McKee explained that arsenic occurs naturally in water wells and in some cases high concentrations.

About five years ago the federal EPA changed the acceptable standard for arsenic in drinking water. He said the standard was lowered from 50 micros per liter to 10 micros per liter.

Water companies have had to take action to mitigate the levels of arsenic by blending or treatment. He said the issue with arsenic in the one well used by CCWC has been addressed.

Chaparral City Water Company was acquired by EPCOR USA in 2011, and this is the first time the company has proposed a rate increase since the acquisition.

McKee said CCWC has quite a bit of catch up to do financially since the last rate increase went into effect in 2009. That increase was based on a “test year” of 2006.

The new rate proposal is based on 2012 costs, and McKee said much has happened during those six years, including $15 million in infrastructure improvements.

EPCOR is asking the Arizona Corporation Commission to approve rates to provide a revenue increase of $3.1 million annually.

McKee said the money is needed for operations, infrastructure, CAP costs (CCWC purchases most of its water from the Central Arizona Project).

November 1 is the deadline for anyone wishing to file as an intervenor in the rate case, and ACC staff and intervenor testimony is due Nov. 25.

CCWC will provide its response to testimony by Dec. 30, and the public hearing before the ACC is scheduled to begin Feb. 18, 2014. Members of the public will be able to comment at this meeting.

Additional information and documents related to the rate case can be found at epcor.com/chaparral or www.acc.gov. Customers may contact the company via email using chaparralratecase@epcor.com.

Share with others


Have an opinion on this story? Click here to send a letter to our editors.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here