State regulators have sided again with another utility against its ratepayers.

Against the recommendations of its advisory Office of Regulatory Staff, Public Service Commissioners have given Carolina Water Service approval to:

• Charge customers almost $1 million to pay its lawyers’ legal fees for a river pollution lawsuit they lost.

• Raise water and sewer rates and add 10.5% — another $800,000 – in profit.

• Charge customers for sewer system liners before they were installed.

• Allow CWS to keep millions of dollars in federal tax cut savings instead of sharing them with ratepayers.

Many businesses and regulated monopolies use these tax savings to lower their prices and rates.

ORS director Nanette Edwards said her office provided testimony on key points that would have saved CWS customers money but were rejected by the PSC in favor of the water company.

An ORS news release said it wanted to advise CWS customers of the PSC’s decisions over its opposition.

Critics say the mission of the ORS and the PSC is conflicted because they must protect the public and the monopolies they regulate.

The ORS also recommended against customers paying for leaking liner upgrades at the Friarsgate plant as required by the state health officials.

ORS said CWS customers should not pay for upgrades before they are installed.

The PSC gave CWS 10.5% Return on Equity – a profit higher than the 9.08% ORS had recommended.

The PSC denied an ORS’ request to flow through to ratepayers the benefits of the federal tax cuts as some businesses are doing.

ORS opposed CWS charging customers legal costs in the I-20 plant pollution lawsuit of $998,606.

The most controversial PSC act was allowing CWS to charge customers rather than shareholders for lawyers to defend it in suits by the Congaree Riverkeeper and others over numerous violations that polluted the Saluda and Congaree rivers.

Bill Stangler of the Congaree Riverkeeper group said, “The ORS raises questions about why the ratepayer should have to pay to defend Carolina Water for violating the federal Clean Water Act. If I was a customer, I’d want to know why.’’

According to Acting Executive Director Nanette Edwards, “This ruling gives a green light to passing litigation costs to ratepayers where the utility failed to comply with the law, was sued, and then lost.”