|
|
|
Did the Des Moines Water Works Unfairly Disconnect an 84 Year Old Woman's Water? A Letter Sent to the Des Moines Water Works June Campbell would like to briefly discuss the history of the water connection at 2538 NE 102nd Avenue Ankeny, Iowa. Rural water was connected approximately 20 years ago. June Campbell's husband contracted arthritis and could no longer manage the well based water supply of the small development he had created along NE 102nd avenue. Ray and June were required to connect to the rural water system at that time if they wanted the housing development to also be connected. When Ray and June connected to the rural water system the refrigerator and cold water side of the kitchen faucet were connected for drinking water to the well. The system was never connected directly to the rural water system or the Des Moines Water Works. All other water uses in the house were tied to the rural water system (later Des Moines Water Works). June Campbell never received any updates or correspondence concerning cross connections or the requirement of a back flow prevention device prior to November of 2019. In November 2019 Des Moines Water Works repeatedly blows off the water system to clean out the water lines. When a worker was asked why there were so many clean outs he said it was because a pipe was breached by construction workers. A water works employ came to the house requesting entry to June's basement. The employee claimed this was necessary because a connection by a well to the Des Moines Water Works system was detected. No test results or proof of this were given and June has no idea how a well was detected since the well was not directly connected to the Des Moines Water Works system. June now considers entry on to the property was likely made under false pretenses. The Des Moines Water Works employee left after inspecting the basement. The employ did not indicate or show any possible problems with a cross connection to June Campbell. June Campbell received a letter (Document A attached) from John Lins which stated June would have to install an expensive ($1200.00) back flow preventer because her water system might be connected to Des Moines Water Works lines. June assumed the man who entered the basement saw the connection to the cold side of the kitchen faucet discussed above. The well line was moved to a separate drinking faucet so that even the appearance of a direct connection did not exist. See photo on page 2. June requested an inspection via certified mail (Document B attached) so the Des Moines Water Works could verify that there were no cross connections. Bear in mind June had the intention of making sure there was no cross connection so the water works would not have to worry about possible contamination. June assumed that the least expensive and safest way would be to eliminate any possible connection to the Des Moines Water Works system. Regulation 506.1.2 says the customer is responsible for ensuring that no cross connections exist. June remedied any potential cross connection and tried to have the Des Moines Water Works inspect the plumbing to ensure there was no cross connection. John Lins refused the inspection. 506.1.2 The
customer shall be responsible for ensuring that no cross
John Lins, the cross connection control administrator, claimed June still had to put in the expensive backflow preventer even if the lines were not connected in any way to Des Moines Water Works. John Lins in several phone calls repeatedly said the mere existence of a well on the property required this backflow preventer. John Lins sited the regulation 506.1.1 as his reasoning for the required backflow preventer: 506.1.1 Cross
connections from any well or other source of water to The regulation mentions nothing about a
backflow preventer being required if there is a well on the property.
The moving of the line from the cold water side of the faucet to a
drinking faucet completely satisfies 506.1.1. June Campbell never received prior notification of John Lins contrived regulation requiring a backflow prevention device if a well was on the property regardless of whether there was a cross connection or not. She discussed this matter with neighbors and they also received no notifications. Jon Lins then sent a new request (Document C attached) changing initial requirement (Document A attached) that all well equipment would have to be removed because it was likely, June Campbell an 84 year old woman, would connect the well to the Des Moines Water Works lines. The removal of this well equipment would render the house next door with no water supply. June Campbell cannot think of a reason why she would want to connect her well to the Des Moines Water Works System. What method did John Lin use to determine this supposed future behavior? Does Jon Lins have some way of determining what individuals will do in the future? June has outlined above why the cold water side of the faucet was connected by Ray Campbell (deceased) approximately 20 years ago. There was never any malicious intent or desire to connect the well to the Des Moines Water Works. What is the basis for John Lins claim that it is likely June Campbell would connect her well to the Des Moines Water System? What regulation gives Jon Lins the authority to determine the future intent of June Campbell and to use this assumption as a basis for shutting off June Campbell's water supply if all well equipment is not removed? June Campbell has never had nor will have any intention of connecting the well to the Des Moines Water Works. The theory that June Campbell is compelled to connect the well system to the Des Moines Water Works are the peculiar imaginations of John Lins. Violations of conduct and misrepresentations by connection manager and Des Moines Water Works employees: 1) Des Moines Water Works used probable false pretense for entry to property. Des Moines Water Works employee claimed he needed entry to the basement because a well was detected that was contaminating the Des Moines Water Works system. How was this contamination detected? No test results submitted as proof of well contamination. We were told by a Des Moines Water Works employee performing a blow off cleaning the water main that the cause of contamination was a broken water main damaged by a construction worker. June Campbell was never shown were the supposed cross contamination occurred. 2) After moving the cold water from the faucet to a dedicated water faucet for drinking water (see above explanation) June asked to have an inspector come and verify that no cross connections existed (Document B attached). John Lins refused and said we must install the expensive backflow preventer. John Lins sited regulation 506.1.1 as proof of this requirement which is an obvious misrepresentation of the regulation. John Lins continued to require the backflow preventer even though complete isolation from the system is safer than the backflow preventer since the preventer can fail as evidenced by the need to inspect backflow preventers. 3) Des Moines Water Works ignored the
sunshine law request made on December 11, 2019 for information. This
request was made over 20 days ago. See attached document D.
4) The requirements for compliance according to Jon Lins changed. June Campbell was later required (Document C attached) to remove all well equipment even though this would disconnect water to the house next door. This request included the strange unsubstantiated statement that it was likely June Campbell would attach the well to the Des Moines Water Works System (discussed above). Apparently this was used to justify June Campbell's presence of a well pump in the basement as a “high hazard condition” this determination being a probable abuse of the cross connection control administrators powers.
At this point June Campbell no longer desires to be a customer of the Des Moines Water Works because of the behavior of John Lins. June initially cried when receiving the first letter and in general had trouble sleeping properly. The house has been connected back to the well and the city water has been shut off in the basement and the line disconnected and capped. June feels better now knowing that her water can't be shut off. John Lins seems to want to usurp authority which is beyond what is represented in the regulations and to make baseless judgments. John Lins authoritarian and non-objective approach to management projects a negative image of the Des Moines Water Works to the public. June feels some sort of disciplinary action is required. June will be making a decision with regards to the forwarding of this information to the ombudsman, attorney general, other businesses, agencies, social media and local television stations. June will be posting this information on www.ankenywatch.com/dmwaterworks so various persons can be referred to this website. June will likely make new sunshine law requests with the intent of enforcing the completion of these requests. June will delay any actions on her part to allow the Des Moines Water Works to take appropriate disciplinary actions. If appropriate actions are taken June will consider this matter to be resolved. June feels it is her civic duty to inform the public of the behavior of John Lins if disciplinary actions are not taken.
June Campbell January 15, 2020
|
