DWP Scrutinizes Bottled-Water Buying

The Department of Water and Power board called Tuesday for a report detailing the Los Angeles agency’s purchase of bottled water even as a manager said the amount spent during the last two years may be greater than the $31,160 paid to Sparkletts.

Board members also suggested the agency take steps to regain the trust of consumers by including a flier in utility bills that assures customers the city’s tap water is safe and of high quality.

Board President Mary Nichols said she wants the management report to determine whether the agency’s purchase of bottled water is consistent with restrictions set by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and his predecessors.

“The time has come to take another look at our compliance to make sure we are compliant with the executive order,” Nichols said.

Citing public records released by the city controller, The Times reported last week that city agencies have spent $88,900 on bottled water in the last two years, including $31,160 from the DWP to Sparkletts.

With agency officials explaining that much of the water was used in remote offices that cannot easily get potable water, Nichols took a sip of tap water in a glass Tuesday and said, “It tastes delicious.”

She called the news report a “cheap shot” that has embarrassed the agency.

Board member H. David Nahai suggested an outreach effort to assure customers that the water is good and that there is not widespread use of bottled water in the agency.

Robert Rozanski, chief administrative officer of the DWP, said the agency may have bought additional bottled water from companies other than Sparkletts, and that data are being compiled. For that reason, Rozanski said, a plan to report to the board Tuesday on the bottled-water purchases was postponed indefinitely.

“There may be other venders that we have,” he told the board. “We thought we would step back and make sure we do a thorough report.”

The only commercially purchased bottled water in the DWP headquarters was part of stockpiled food and water for utility operators in an emergency, Assistant General Manager Henry Martinez told the board.

Board members also asked department managers to report on whether there is a less expensive alternative to the current practice of spending $500,000 annually to produce and mail a color brochure to DWP residents that meets federal requirements to notify customers about the quality of tap water.

“It’s wrong to spend more money than we need to, and some of the figures I saw were frankly kind of shocking,” Nichols said.

Board member Nick Patsaouras said most people do not read the 16-page brochure, and he questioned why the notice can’t be reduced to one sheet of paper.

Also Tuesday, the board voted to seek bids from companies to take over as project manager of a dust-reduction program in the Owens Valley. The program was designed by CH2M Hill, which is also project manager, but board members are alarmed that the project has nearly quadrupled in cost, to $415 million.

CH2M Hill can bid to keep the work, Nichols said.

“What it does do is to reflect the very strong desire of this commission to not just follow blindly down the path that was set for us years ago, but to actually get control over the program,” Nichols said.

Separately, a DWP subcommittee recommended audits of two contracts under which CH2M Hill served as project manager for the Owens Valley dust-reduction program.

“We just want to make sure that the environmental dust bowl does not turn into the fiscal quicksand of the South,” Nahai said.

The board heard scientific testimony Tuesday against expanding the area where dust reduction is required from the current 29 square miles to about 38 square miles.

Meanwhile, the board has scheduled a public hearing of its Personnel Committee on Jan. 27 to determine whether discrimination and retaliation are widespread in the department.

Nahai called the session after saying he has heard a “steady drumbeat” of complaints in the last few months from DWP employees and others who allege they have been mistreated by the agency.

Patsaouras also asked Tuesday that the entire agency be the subject of a performance audit. He specifically wanted auditors to determine whether its information technology office, which maintains all computer systems, is running efficiently.

“It’s a $120-million budget with 450 employees, and I want to know if it is state of the art,” Patsaouras said.