<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title> &#187; Atlanta utility fee increase</title>
	<atom:link href="http://acpatl.com/tag/atlanta-utility-fee-increase/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://acpatl.com</link>
	<description>Commercial construction permits</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2026 11:27:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.39</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Proposed New Utility Fees at Atlanta</title>
		<link>http://acpatl.com/proposed-new-fees-at-atlanta/</link>
		<comments>http://acpatl.com/proposed-new-fees-at-atlanta/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Sep 2010 18:14:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Diane Cox]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Atlanta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Atlanta proposed utility fee increases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Atlanta utility fee increase]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acpatl.com/?p=172</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[UPDATE: As of October, this fee increase has been put on the shelf until probably the first of next year. The City Utility Committee requested a comparison of existing fees with proposed fees, and the justification for the increases. The &#8230; <a href="http://acpatl.com/proposed-new-fees-at-atlanta/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">UPDATE: </span>As of October, this fee increase has been put on the shelf until probably the first of next year.</p>
<p>The City Utility Committee requested a comparison of existing fees with proposed fees, and the justification for the increases.</p>
<p>The attached table provides the comparison.  Please note that the current fees were established in 2005, and have not been increased in five years, despite increased costs for both contracted and self-performed services.</p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="213" valign="top"><strong>Service</strong></td>
<td width="213" valign="top"><strong>Current Fee</strong></td>
<td width="213" valign="top"><strong>Proposed Fee</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="213" valign="top">Service Restoration</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$75.00</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$150.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="213" valign="top">Plan Review/Meter Install.</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$1,800-$30,405</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$2,100-$59,500</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="213" valign="top">Re-establish Service</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$1,405-$15,504</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$100.00—up to 3”Case by case 3” and larger</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="213" valign="top">Meter Relocation</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$955-case by case</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">Case by case</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="213" valign="top">Meter Abandonment</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$1,000 up to 2” then case by case</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$1,500-$10,000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="213" valign="top">Fire Service Tap</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$5,405-$13,805</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$7,100-$17,850</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="213" valign="top">Fire Line Detector Check</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$8,405-case by case</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$7,950-$27,300</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="213" valign="top">Fire Service Hydraulic Test</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$155/service</td>
<td width="213" valign="top">$350/service</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>The basic justification for the proposed fee increases is to recover the Department’s costs of providing them.  (The sole exception to this relates to charges to restore services after hours, and on weekends and holidays.  In this case, the fee is a penalty.)</p>
<p>Below are brief descriptions of each fee and the basis of the proposed increase.</p>
<p>There are eight fees discussed herein.  In a separate paper, the Department will address the issue of developer-installed infrastructure (i.e. water mains, fire hydrants and small meters).</p>
<p><strong>Charges to restore service</strong>:  This is essentially a penalty fee for requiring service restoration at night, and on weekends and holidays.  It is intended to encourage service restoration during normal work hours, and offset additional costs associated with night and holiday work.</p>
<p><strong>Fee and deposit schedule for water meter plan review and installation</strong>:  These costs are the Department’s costs per current installation contracts.</p>
<p><strong>Fee schedule for re-establishing service</strong>:   The proposed fee covers the costs associated with office and field work associated with re-establishing an existing residential meter.  Large meter re-establishments are very rare, and will be handled individually.  A new fee schedule is attached.</p>
<p><strong>Fee for water meter relocation</strong>:  Because there is not a high demand for this service, it is difficult to establish a fee schedule.  Also, there are many variables that can impact the complexity and cost of meter relocation.  Therefore, it is most practical to establish cost based on individual circumstances.</p>
<p><strong>Fee schedule for water meter abandonment</strong>:  This cost is based on crew time to remove water meters of various sizes and vaults based on average length of the job and a fully burdened average labor rate, plus equipment, vehicle, tools and contract-related costs (e.g. re-paving the cut at the main, which was made in order to shut off the valve).</p>
<p><strong>Fee schedule for fire service tap</strong>:  These fees vary with size of service and whether it is short side or long side.  The fee is based on contract prices paid by the Department plus 25% to cover Bureau of Operations costs (e.g. tapping the main, excavation, backfill, restoration, equipment, vehicle, materials&#8212;tap, sleeve, valve).</p>
<p><strong>Fee schedule for detector check for a fire line</strong>:  These fees are based on size of service.  The fee is based on contract prices paid by the Department plus 25% to cover Bureau of Operations costs (e.g. additional excavation, equipment, vehicle, materials&#8212;detector check valve, pipe, fittings).</p>
<p><strong>Fee schedule for fire service hydraulic tests</strong>:  A fire service hydraulic test is a test of available flow and pressure at a fire hydrant.  These tests are requested by developers, who are planning main extensions, and they need to know available flow and pressure.  On average the Bureau does 250-350 such tests annually.</p>
<p>This fee is based on cost of service: four hours times a fully burdened labor rate plus $50 for materials, equipment, vehicle, etc. (basic O&amp;M costs.)</p>
<div id="wpcr_respond_1"></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://acpatl.com/proposed-new-fees-at-atlanta/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
