Case Background
Florida
Community Water Services (FCWS or Utility) is a Class A water and wastewater utility
providing service in Brevard, Lake, and Sumter Counties. According to the Utility’s
2025 annual report, the Utility provides water service to 2,093 residential and
50 general service customers. FCWS’ rates were last amended in a price
index in 2026.
The Utility’s existing
backflow prevention charge was approved for its Black Bear water system located
in Lake County. On May 7, 2026, FCWS filed a request to
have its miscellaneous service charges be consolidated because the same
operations were conducting the services and to be consistent with the
consolidated rates of the Utility. Pursuant to the Administrative Procedures
Manual 2.07 (5)(a)(6), staff administratively approved the consolidated
miscellaneous service charge request, effective June 23, 2026. On August 31, 2026, FCWS filed an
application for approval of a new tariff page to include a provision that
service is subject to disconnection if the customer does not comply with
backflow prevention device annual testing requirements.
This recommendation
addresses the Utility’s request for a proposed tariff reflecting compliance
language with Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) rules. Proposed
tariff sheet No. 13.15 is included as Attachment A to the recommendation. The
Commission has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to Sections 367.081 and 367.091,
Florida Statutes (F.S.).
Discussion
of Issues
Issue 1:
Should FCWS’ request for revisions to its backflow
prevention device annual testing requirement tariff sheet be approved?
Recommendation:
Yes. FCWS’ proposed tariff sheet shown on Attachment
A should be approved. The approved tariff should be effective for service
rendered on or after the stamped approval date on the tariff pursuant to Rule
25-30.475, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C). In addition, the approved tariff
should not be implemented until staff has approved the proposed customer notice
and the notice has been received by the customers. The Utility should provide
proof of the date notice was given within 10 days of the date of the notice.
(McClelland)
Staff Analysis:
The Utility is proposing to implement Original Sheet
13.15 to include a provision that service is subject to disconnect if the
customer does not comply with backflow prevention device annual testing
requirements. The Utility states that the purpose of the tariff is to comply
pursuant to DEP Rules 62-555.330 and 62-555.360, F.A.C., which includes the
required language regarding backflow prevention device testing.
The Utility’s Cross-Connection Control Program mandates
that a backflow prevention device be installed on all connections, which may
represent a source of contamination due to a lawn irrigation system. The
customers are responsible for piping and appurtenances beyond the Utility’s
water meter toward the dwelling. Rule 25-30.231, F.A.C., requires each Utility
to operate and maintain safe and proper condition of all the facilities and
equipment used in connection with the distribution, regulation, measurement and
delivery of water service to the customer up to and the point of delivery into the
piping owned by the customer. In addition, Rule 25-30.210(7), F.A.C., states
that the point of delivery for a water system is the outlet connection with the
customer’s piping. Due to the location of the backflow devices, which is past
the meter, the cost of inspection will be borne by the customer. The Utility
sends out a notice on an annual basis advising of the biennial testing
requirement per DEP’s rule. Customers will have 30 days from the date of the
notice to complete the testing and provide documentation to the Utility.
Per the Utility’s request, if a customer fails to have the
annual inspection performed and provide documentation of the test to the
Utility within 30 days of the notice, water service will be disconnected. Rule
25-30.320(2)(a), F.A.C., states that service may be discontinued for
noncompliance with any state regulation governing such utility service.
Staff recommends that FCWS’ proposed tariff sheet shown on
Attachment A should be approved. The approved tariff should be effective for
service rendered on or after the stamped approval date on the tariff pursuant
to Rule 25-30.475, F.A.C. In addition, the approved tariff should not be
implemented until staff has approved the proposed customer notice and the
notice has been received by the customers. The Utility should provide proof of
the date notice was given within 10 days of the date of the notice.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Recommendation:
If a timely protest is filed, the tariff should not
be implemented while the protest is pending. If no protest is filed by a person
whose substantial interests are affected within 21 days of the issuance of the
Order, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a Consummating Order.
(Rauch)
Staff Analysis:
If a timely protest is filed, the tariff should not
be implemented while the protest is pending. If no protest is filed by a person
whose substantial interests are affected within 21 days of the issuance of the
Order, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a Consummating Order.
