To amend the law regarding sewer systems.
HB2079 amends West Virginia law governing public service districts to prohibit mandatory hook-ups and installation fees for new or expanding sewer systems. The bill keeps the existing framework that allows districts to require sewer connections in certain circumstances, but adds language stating that if a district requires a property owner to connect to sewer facilities and the owner must make exterior plumbing changes to do so, the district board must authorize payment of all reasonable costs for those changes, including installation, operation, maintenance, and purchase of pumps or other approved methods. It also directs that the ongoing maintenance and operation costs for those extra installations be reflected in user charges subject to Public Service Commission approval.
The bill also makes related changes to sewer-connection procedures and billing rules. It preserves the authority of districts to compel connections where sewer service is available and adequate, but clarifies notice requirements before sewer charges may be imposed and ties sewer charges to actual or average water consumption by customer class. The measure also retains provisions on stormwater service, delinquent account liens, payment methods, and service shutoff authority, while leaving in place exemptions for certain permitted private sewage systems.
If enacted, HB2079 would alter §16-13A-9 of the West Virginia Code by shifting some of the financial burden of mandatory sewer connections away from property owners and toward public service districts, at least for reasonable exterior plumbing modifications and related equipment needed to connect. It would affect public service districts, county commissions involved in rate approval, property owners, tenants, and occupants subject to sewer connection requirements, as well as the Public Service Commission, which would continue to oversee related charges and billing practices.
The overall sentiment reflected by the bill text is consumer-protective and utility-regulatory: it appears designed to limit mandatory connection costs and reduce the financial impact on homeowners and other customers facing sewer expansion projects. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from lawmakers in the available materials. The main point of potential contention is the cost shift: districts and local governments may view the bill as limiting their ability to recover infrastructure and connection expenses, while property owners are likely to favor the added protection from mandatory hook-up and installation charges.
HB2079 would amend §16-13A-9 of the West Virginia Code, which governs public service district rates, fees, sewer connection authority, delinquency enforcement, and related billing practices. The bill would specifically add restrictions on mandatory sewer hook-ups and require public service districts to pay reasonable exterior plumbing and equipment costs when they compel a connection, with those costs and ongoing maintenance to be reflected in PSC-approved user charges. It would therefore affect public service districts, county commissions, the Public Service Commission, and customers subject to sewer expansion or mandatory connection orders.
The bill’s apparent policy direction is favorable to property owners and customers because it limits mandatory connection costs and shifts some expenses to the district. No committee discussion or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate in the materials to indicate broader support or opposition. Based on the text alone, the measure reads as a consumer-relief and ratepayer-protection bill rather than a utility-expansion bill.
The central point of contention is who should pay for sewer connection-related costs when a district requires a property to hook up to a new or expanded sewer system. Supporters would likely emphasize relief for homeowners, tenants, and small property owners facing forced connection expenses, while opponents may argue that public service districts and local ratepayers should not be required to absorb installation, pump, and exterior plumbing costs. A secondary issue is whether the bill could make sewer expansion and compliance more expensive or administratively difficult for districts trying to finance infrastructure improvements.