Yes. Members have expressed perfectly understandable concerns about the recommended approach and costs of the water and sewer piping replacement program. These members wanted (and deserved) an independent “second opinion”.

PENNVEST, our financing authority for Stage 1, required an independent review and evaluation of our proposed design by a licensed professional engineer when the design was 20- to 40-percent complete. This review must identify alternatives, if any, for achieving the basic functions of water and wastewater conveyance at lower cost. The review must also determine if we investigated all alternatives thoroughly and if our cost estimates for those alternatives are reasonable.

A selection committee consisting of two POA Board Members and three RS&W Board Members unanimously chose CET Engineering to perform the review following a competitive evaluation process involving over 14 potential firms.

CET’s final report concluded: “In summary, we believe RS&W and their engineer have done a thorough job in considering the alternatives and we concur with the overall approach of replacing the water distribution system and sewage collection system … Although there are some obvious disadvantages with the low pressure sewer alternative, the cost savings achieved with this alternative outweigh the advantages of replacing the existing gravity sewers in-kind. CET’s experience and research done for this review indicate that private and municipal owners of low pressure sewers are satisfied with their performance.”