Published: May 10, 2008 12:34 am            

Future Monongah water source in PSC’s hands

Town officials hoping to build new plant; Fairmont believes it’s better alternative

FAIRMONT — The naming of a future water source for the town of Monongah is now officially in the hands of the West Virginia Public Service Commission — again.

For the past nine years, the town has been trying to replace its waning 57-year-old filtration system with a new model. Officials are set on building a new plant because the existing one is in desperate need of replacement, and the town would like to continue providing water service to its direct and resale customers.

A Rule 42 Exhibit completed in December 2007 by an accounting firm for the town shows the most cost-effective option for the roughly 1,500 customers, which includes the town’s direct accounts and resale customers in Farmington, Coon’s Run and Four States, is for Monongah to build its own plant, Mayor Roger Huffman explained.

The study, which analyzed the costs associated with the proposed water system improvement project, compared the town’s plan to build a new plant to an option proposed by the City of Fairmont to extend a waterline from its current system.

“When we did the Rule 42 Exhibit to find out if it was cheaper to go to Fairmont or build our own plant, it came back that it was cheaper for the people and the resale customers to build our own plant,” Huffman said.

“As mayor, I’m going to do what’s best for the town. If it shows going to Fairmont is cheaper we would do it, but it doesn’t show that and never has shown that.”

In March, the town filed a certificate of convenience and necessity with the PSC in hopes of receiving approval to begin work on the proposed $4,584,000 water plant construction project.

And on April 9, the City of Fairmont filed a Petition for Leave to Intervene on the town’s project.

Fairmont Utilities Manager Dave Sago said that the city believes, by providing water from the nearby Watson storage tank, it can supply Monongah with potable water. He said the city is within 2,000 feet of Monongah’s existing 12-inch water line, and simply seems like a more feasible alternative for the town.

“We feel our alternative is still a better alternative than Monongah building the new water plant,” Sago said. “We aren’t privy to all of their costs or what they are doing, but we still feel, with us being so close to the system, that it is a better alternative. We think folks at the state level still feel the same way.”

The intervention filed by the city also conveyed that Monongah was using “stale” numbers to determine the costs associated with the project and shaved off about $2 million of a previous project estimate that may or may not have contained vital project details.

And while Sago could not guarantee that the customer rates would be cheaper if Fairmont provided Monongah with water service, he believes that the city is still a more viable alternative based on the proximity of the plant and the other information provided by the city.

“We feel we have a viable alternative, and that’s what we’re offering. Monongah may provide whatever they want. We supplied our information, and we’ll go from there,” Sago said. “We’re submitting our information, and somebody will have to make the decision on whether it’s cheaper for them to build a water plant or purchase water off us.”

Currently, Fairmont provides Monongah with sanitary sewer service, and Sago said that it makes sense for the city to supply water to the town as well.

“We treat Monongah’s wastewater. It seems likely that we could treat the needs for potable water the same way we do sanitary sewer,” Sago said.

Huffman believes that the city should stop trying to intervene with what is shown to be the best option for providing water within the town.

Huffman said he also believes that, judging by the water crisis that occurred at Fairmont’s plant last winter, that the city seems to have a rather shaky system and simply wants to get Monongah’s customers on board to help with its own financial troubles.

“I personally think Fairmont just needs to mind their own business,” Huffman said. “Fairmont can’t even handle its own water plant, and they want to take this on to keep water rates lower in Fairmont.”

The certificate filed in March was the second that the town submitted for the construction of a new water plant in the last several years. Last February, the town withdrew an application that had been filed months earlier.

According to documents filed with the PSC, this application was removed not only because the City of Fairmont intervened, but also because Farmington, the town’s largest resale customer, was on the fence about continuing to purchase water from the town.

The financing for the project was not in place, and there was concern over the projected resale rate following the completion of the project.

But this time, Huffman said the town is in a much better place with the application. He said that all of the resale customers have stated that they are in support of Monongah’s application and all want to stay with the town as it progresses on the plans to build its own plant.

Farmington council members even stated at their meeting last week that they will do whatever they can to help the town receive approval to move forward on the plant construction project.

“All of our resale customers are on board,” Huffman said. “They do not want (water from) Fairmont, especially Farmington, which is our biggest customer.”

According to documents submitted by Monongah to the PSC, the town is planning to fund the estimated more than $4.5 million project with a Rural Utilities Service (RUS) loan in the amount of $3.8 million bearing interest at 4.25 percent for a term of 40 years and an RUS grant in the amount of $786,000.

E-mail Mallory Panuska at mpanuska@timeswv.com.

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.