Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves substitute letting homeowners drill irrigation wells; Piedmont Water opposes original bill
Summary
After testimony from Piedmont Water’s CEO and many homeowners, the Senate committee approved a substitute to House Bill 449 allowing property owners to install on‑site irrigation wells without creating competing private utilities; the committee’s substitute was approved with one senator recorded opposed.
The Senate Regulated Industries & Utilities Committee approved a committee substitute to House Bill 449 that would allow property owners served by a private surface‑water system to drill on‑site wells for irrigation use, subject to health‑department and local rules. The substitute was offered after several hours of testimony from residents and from Piedmont Water Company, which opposed the original bill as unnecessary and potentially harmful to private investment.
Adam Schafer, chief executive officer of Piedmont Water Company, told the committee the company has used private capital to build and expand water and wastewater infrastructure around Lake Oconee and elsewhere. He warned the original bill would impose new compliance costs and “create unnecessary regulatory delays, ultimately driving up costs for both taxpayers and customers.” Schafer said the company serves 71 water systems, 10 sewer systems and has invested in multiple surface‑water projects.
Representative Rhodes, who brought the House measure to the Senate, said many constituents reported unexpectedly large summertime bills tied to irrigation use and asked for a remedy that would not impose public utility regulation on the company. Rhodes’s committee substitute narrows the change to allow landowners to drill non‑potable or irrigation wells for use on their parcel and prohibits selling that well water to others; it does not alter Piedmont Water’s existing contracts, including a long‑term agreement with a large system customer.
The committee discussed practical limits: county health department rules and state Environmental Protection Division guidance on wells and septic systems, fire‑flow and wastewater accounting if on‑site wells reduce water volume flowing through the sewer meter. Piedmont officials noted some customers use tens of thousands of gallons a month for irrigation — “upwards of 70,000 gallons” in examples cited — and that system hydraulics and overhead storage tanks (the company said its Reynolds system has about 1.3 million gallons of storage) influence reliability and fire protection.
Lawmakers adopted a language change that confines the substitute to irrigation/non‑potable use rather than creating a general right to move off the system for domestic potable supply. The committee approved the committee substitute and the bill as amended; the clerk recorded one opposed vote (Senator Gooch) when the committee chair called for hands.
Quotes in this article come from committee testimony and the hearing transcript.
