ISSUE #1 Encumbering Private Property w/o Benefit if a Contractual Easement

On Thursday, May 25, 2017 JULIE located underground utilities throughout our backyard in advance of designing a planting area to visuaHy screen the utility boxes in the NW corner of our lot. JULIE identified that ComEd had run its secondary service to our home diagonally across the yard thereby encumbering the use of our private property. I have attached a copy of our Plat of Survey with the path of the initial service installation shown in red.

On the morning of Friday, May 26. 20171 called ComEd to investigate what entity had authorized ComEd to encumber our backyard. I was transferred to the New Business department and the telephone representative indicated that Orleans Homes had authorized the encumbrance. I asked for evidence of the stated authorization. The representative was unsure if such documentation existed.

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017 I was contacted (by phone) by Stanley Wilk, Area CIPA Manager, Fox River. ComEd New Business to discuss my concerns regarding authorization to encumber our private property. Mr. Wilk stated that it was not Orleans Homes who provided the authorization but rather the 111.C.C who grants such authorization under the "Schedule of Rates for Beclric Service". I stated that I reviewed pages 17 6-178 and I find no evidence to support his statement. Mr. Wilk was unable to cite specific pages wherein the Commission provided such authorization.

On Tuesday, June 20, 20171 called Stan Wilk again. Mr. Wilk confirmed that ComEd does not have an agreement with the builder granting ComEd a contractual easement and ComEd has no specific authorization from the Illinois Commerce Commission via its tariff. Because ComEd has no record of the builder requesting lot line trenching, ComEd's policy on new service installation assumes the builder provides informal authorization to install the secondary service diagonally across the rear yard. Further. Mr. Wilk staled that the Village of Oswego does not require lot line trenching by its ordinance. I requested that ComEd provide written evidence of this theory to me such that I could file a claim with the builder.

I called Mr. Wilk on June 26. 2017; July 5, 2017 and July 11. 2017 to obtain ComEd's response to my request to put in writing their theory of why ComEd could encumber private property withoutthe benefit of an easement. Anally, on July 12. 2017 Mr. Wilk returned my call otter I contacted Carlos Ruiz of the 111.C.C Consumer Services Division to report that Mr. Wilk would not return my calls. Mr. Wilk stated that he had forwarded my concerns to various departments within ComEd and that no one was responding to him. No written explanation was ever provided.

After 10 weeks of attempting to resolve my dispute with ComEd through their assigned representative, Mr. Stanley Wilk, it is clear to me that Mr. Wilk has no authority to resolve this complaint and is stone-walling me in hopes that I give up my pursuit of what I believe is right. ComEd is unwilling to provide written evidence of the theory upon which they rely to encumber private property. ComEd clearly understands that the Commission's informal complaint process does not compel ComEd to take any action and thus, ComEd can ignore its customers.

·-VJ

?.-->~L- = Bu1t..1:>1Jc;,. ~' l!e eit.. Lt~

SFlllNG GAlE AT SOU1HBURY PHASE 2

S1tllWM1ER IWW<WMT

S 33'28'31• E 79.88'

ISSUE #2 Failure to Honor Contractual Agreement

During my initial conversation with ComEd's New Business Department on May 26. 2017 J requested that ComEd relocate our secondary service into the permanent easement on our property and minimize the use of our unencumbered private property. That afternoon Elizabeth Moesch-Chiquito. ComEd general service representative, came to our home to discuss the location of the existing secondary service and what options would be available to eliminate interference with our proposed. and contracted for. patio installation. I asked if ComEd would only relocate that portion of the original secondary service that is in conflict with our proposed patio. She stated that ComEd would not install splices to effect such partial installation and that my only option was to replace the entire secondary service from the service pedestal in the permanent easement to the meter connection on the side of our home. She took measurements of our agreed-upon line of lay and said she would get a contract to me after the Memorial Day weekend.

On Tuesday, May 30. 2017 Ms. Moesch-Chiquito e-mailed me a proposed contract with a cost of $3077.72. She stated that she had made a JULIE request to mark the rear and side easements of our Jot to finalize the line-of-lay. On Thursday, June l. 2017 JULIE completed their marking. Ms. Moesch-Chiquito came to our home again to see the JULIE markings to confirm that we could go forward with the contract to relocate our secondary service into the established easements.

On Friday. June 2. 20171 went to the ComEd office at 2001 Aucutt Road, Montgomery, IL 60538. I advised Ms. Moesch-Chiquito that the offered contract contained provisions that were not applicable and certain statements regarding the scope of work were inadequate. I asked if this blanket contract could be amended. Ms. Moesch-Chiquito stated that no changes could be made and that my only option was to sign the contract as is or ComEd would not perform the work as I requested. I signed the contract and handed a personal check to Ms. Moesch­Chiquito in the amount of $3077.72. I requested that the work be performed during the week of June 5. 2017 as our contractor was scheduled to begin our patio installation of June 12'". I requested that a fully executed copy of the agreement be e-mailed to me. Later that same day I received a fully executed copy of the agreement. A copy of this agreement is attached.

Demands made by ComEd in this contract. where a customer requests work. are inconsistent with ComEd's policies and practices for new secondary service installation. Specifically.

1. Paragraph 5 states. in part: "Applicant agrees to secure for Company such additional easement rights as may reasonably be required for the installation, operation and maintenance of Company facilities to serve residences on the Jots or premises described in Paragraph 1 above." This step was NOT taken when Orleans Homes requested initial service.

2. Paragraph 6 states. in full: "If provision for service connections has not been included in the easement provision of the recorded plat. Customer hereby grants an easement strip. for each Jot indicated in Paragraph 1 above. five (5) feet in width extending from the point on the property line at which the service connections enter each Jot to the Customer Transformer Station, if any, and continuing to the wall on each building adjacent to the outdoor connection device." By signing the attached contract I provided ComEd with a contractual easement outside of the permanent easement recorded on our Plat of Survey. ComEd's policy assumes informal authorization from Orleans Homes without the benefit of a contractual easement.

ISSUE #2 Failure to Honor Contractual Agreement

3. Paragraph 15 states. in full: "This agreement is subject ta the provisions of the Company's Schedule of Rates as on file with the Illinois Commerce Commission." Issue #3 describes ComEd's failure to abide by its Schedule of Rates in both the original installation and the relocation requested by myself.

4. Paragraph 16 states. in part: "Company will install secondary services utilizing lot line trenching when practical." There are no obstructions on our permanent easements that make their use impractical. ComEd's stated policy directs their crews to use the shortest path for secondary service installation when no specific request for lot line trenching is made.

5. Paragraph 17 states. in part: "Rule 234 requires the horizontal clearance between electrical conductors and a building to be a minimum of 7.5 feet. Reference the National Electrical Safety Code for specific information." Issue #4 describes ComEd's failure to abide by Rule 234 of the National Bectrical Safety Code in the original installation of our secondary service.

On Friday, June 9. 2017 at 7 AM Ms. Moesch-Chiquito and another individual came to our home to mark the designated line-of-lay for the relocated secondary service. I asked if she would return later in the day to assure that the ComEd crew fulfilled the responsibilities in the contract between myself and ComEd. She stated that such oversight was not her responsibility.

On Friday. June 9. 2017 at 9 AM a three-man crew from ComEd arrived to relocate our secondary service. They exposed original secondary service approximately twelve (12) feet from the service pedestal to install a splice. I explained to the crew leader that I had signed a contract and paid for the complete replacement of our secondary service. The crew leader stated that he had the authority to relocate ComEd facilities as he saw fit. Rather than hand­digging around the ComEd transformer and other underground utilities he determined that installing a splice and connecting to the existing secondary service was more practical. He stated that he wasn't bound by the contractual terms of my agreement with ComEd and if I had issue with that I needed to pursue that matter with ComEd management. The crew then attempted to locate the secondary service along the side of our home to install a second splice. After 30 minutes of unsuccessful digging they determined that it was too deep and proceeded to replace the secondary service to the meter connection.

RESIDENTIAL UNDERGROUND AGREEMENT PL#:4n163 RUA#: WE170171 R: 00

Agreement Date: 0513012017

1. Pursuant to the Company's "Schedule of Rales", ComEd {"Company"} and DONALD FIELD {herein referred lo as •Applicant"} agree as follows with respect to the instaUation of underground eleclric seMce facililies for the residential dwelling unit(s) and corresponding lot{s) at 820 COLCHESTER DR in OSWEGO, IL. as described below.

WORK DESCRIPTION: RESIOEHTIAL UNDERGROUND AGREEMENT CHARGES TO COVER THE COST OF TRENCHING AND 118FT OF CABLE

UNDERGROUND RELOCATION SJ,011.n

TOTAL CUSTOMER CHARGE: $3,077.72

2. Applicant agrees that instaUa!ion of underground eledric facilities will proceed as mutuaUy agreed upon, and that in the case of new residential subdivisions. the Company shall not be required to instaff the faciities in segments smaller than considered economical by Company. Service connections sha11 be instalted as required to serve residences on the lots or premises described in Paragraph 1 above.

3. AppHcant agrees that befoie trenching operations are started by Company, {a) the utility easement strips shaH be accessible to Company's equipment, (b) aft obstrudions shaU be iemoved from such easement strips, {c) ma!l<er stakes for lot comers and grade purposes, where necessary, to indicate lot boundaries and final grade. shaU be placed at inteNals designated by Company, {d) grades in the easement strip shaH not be above nor more than four inches below final grade, and (e) applicant shall be responsible for infonning the Company of the location of any underground faolilies, other lhan uliHty owned gas, telephone and electrical facilities. which would hamper or be exposed lo damage by trenching operations; any damage resulting from appHcanfs failure to do so shall be the responsibility of applicanL

4. The charges listed in this contract are for performing the work identified herein under nonnal field conditions. If abnonnat field condilions are encountered and addHional labor and malerial are required lo complete the woll<, or H the scope of work is altered, ComEd reserves the right to collect, and the owner agrees to pay, additional money to cover the increased costs.

5. Company will provide. install. own and maintain suitable underground eledric service facilities including service connections lo seNO the residences indicated in Paragraph 1 above, aU in accordance with the easement provisions of the reconled plat of the developmerrt, if any. Applicant agrees to secure for Company such add"!lianal easement rights as may reasonabty be required for the inslallalion, operation and maintenance of the Company facilities to serve residences on the lols or premises described in Paragraph 1 above. In the event Applicanl is unable lo secure such easement righls, lhe Company will take whatever adion within its power is appropriate.

6. tf provision for service connections has not been included in the easement provistans of the recorded plat, Customer hereby grants an easement strip, for each lot indicated in Paragraph 1 above, live (5) feet in width extending from the point on the property line at which the service connections enter each lol to the CUstomer Transfonner Station, if any, and continuing to the waB on each building adjacent to the outdoor meter connection device.

7. Following installation of the electric seNice faclities, the Company shall have continued access to its facilities without

impediments from over building or other obstructions for operation, maintenance and replacement of the facilities. When these conditions are not met wilh respect to any lol, any -itional costs incuned by the Company by reason thereof shall be paid by the then OWner of said lot. Any removal or restoration of obstruction or sod or landscaping features which become necessary as the result of the installation, maintenance or replacement of the underground efedric service facilities shaH be lhe then Dwnel's responsibility.

8. When applicable, the Applicant agrees, at his expense. to provide and maintain in a good, safe and proper stale of repair an facilities furnished by him in connection with any Customer Transformer Station inciuded in Paragraph 1 above, including the enctosure, foundation, fill and similar facilities, which nonnaHy shaU be furnished by the Applicant If

requested by lhe Applicant, the Company may furnish, at the Applicant's expense, the foundation for such Transfonner Station without alfeding the Applicant's responsibility as outlined above with respect to the ownership and maintenance of said Transformer Station. The Applicant shall bear the expense of any necessary relocation of the Transfonner Station and all fat1llies associated thereto caused by the ads of request of the Applicant.

9. Applicant agrees to pay lo company, the sum of $3,077.72 paymenl in lull prior to beginning of Company work. This amount shown above consisls of the charges computed as indicated in Sedion _ of Appendix on the aHached

document

10. Applicanl agrees to reimburse Company for costs of repairing the Company's eledric service facllilies in the area covered

bV lhe agreement when said facilities are damaged by Applicant or Applicant's contractors and such damage is due to the negligence of Applicant or Applicant's contractors.

11. Applicanl also agrees to bear any additional expense to Company due to revision in constl1Jdion plan required by changes

In the Appticanrs service requirements subsequent to execution of this contract.

12. This agreement becomes effectiVe only when accepled by the Applicant and -roved by the Company. One year from its date. the Company will require a refundable depostt aivering such of the lots listed above which are not then improved and for which a refundable deposit has not been previously made.

13. If this agreement is applied to a single lot or premises, aH phJral references to lots, premises or residences in this agreement shaft be construed as references to a single lot, premises or residence.

14. This agreement shall be void Hnot accepted by the Applicant within lhlrty days from the date submiHed.

15. This agreement is subject to the provisions of the Company's Schedule of Rates as on file with the Illinois Commerce Commission.

16. Company wiH inslaH secondaiy senrices utilizing lot Hne trenching when practical Standard secondary installation is 100 feel Installations over 100 feet are subject lo additianal charges.

17. Be advised Uta! safety on the job site is the responsibility of you and your contraclor. The Occupational Safely and Health Administration (OSHA) requires a minimum of a 10-fool clearance when wmking near ene'!lizsd primary electric Hnes. You

should consider all electric wires lo be ene'!lizsd and non-insulated. WDfkers may be eledrocuted or seriously injured by contad with the power lines or while working in dose proximity to those lines. AH workers and equipment must maintain a safe distance from the power lines at aK times. You or your contractor should not commence work near ComEd's lines until such time that temporary protective measures have been taken to guard against danger of incidental contact. Consult OSHA guidelines for more specific Information when worlcing near or around enel!lizsd electrical equipmenl Contact 1-800-EOISON-1 for questions concerning working in proximity to ComEd electrical facilities.

Permanent structures near electrical equipment are governed by the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC). As an

example. Rule 234 requires the horizontal clearance between the electrical conducto1S and a buHding lo be a minimum of

7.5 feet Reference the National Electrical Safety Code for specific information.

ComEd is very concemed about the safety of its customers and others wotking around It facililles. Compliance wilh OSHA

and the NESC is a requirement. Please ensure that the activities undertaken by you or your contractor Include the safe

work practice of maintaining the required working and permanent structure dearances.

The undersigned customer acknowledges he/she has read lhe foregoing safety statement and agrees lo comply wilh au slate. federal and local safety requirements and shaD have any contractor wmking in proximity to ComEd equipment to

acknowledge and agree to same.

FOR THE COMPANY:

ELIZABETH MOESCH-CHIQUITO Prepared By

Accepted By Signature

Print Name

Account Number: 0400098017

Ser No: WE170171

work Task Number: 1385295101

Mail BiHs To: DONALD FIELD 820 COLCHESTER DR OSWEGO, IL 60543

FOR TiiE APPLICANT:

~/~ -Pb>\..f_.A.~l> ft.e::W>

Print Name

Olflcial Capacily

ISSUE #3 Failure to Maintain a Minimum of 24 inches of Depth

On June 9, 2017 a Com Ed 3-mon crew come to my home to install a new secondary service from the service pedestal in the l 0-foot wide permanent easement to the meter connection on the side of my home in accordance with the agreement between myself and Com Ed.

During the course of their work they uncovered the existing 3-wire service near the transformer box {approximately 12 feet from the service pedestal) at a depth of 10 inches. When I inquired why they weren't starting at the service pedestal in accordance with the agreement between myself and ComEd. the crew leader stated that it wasn't necessary and they could just install a splice connection. He further stated that the terms of the agreement didn't affect his judgement of what was necessary.

On Monday, June 12. 2017 I called Stan Wilk to report that the installation crew violated the 111.C.C. requirement for direct burial to be a minimum of 24 inches deep. On Tuesday, June 20. 2017 Mr. Wilk stated that the crew affirmed that all of their work was done to the 24" depth requirement and no further work would be done. I advised Mr. Wilk that the ComEd crew was not truthful to him.

On June 24, 2017 I sent to Mr. Wilk, via Certified Moil. the attached letter with six photographs showing the actual service installation. A copy of this letter was also sent to Carlos Ruiz of the 111.C.C. Consumer Services Division al his request. The letter highfights that the splice is between 1 l and 12 inches deep and the line going bock to the service pedestal is between 9 and 10 inches deep.

On July 12. 2017 Mr. Wilk stated that Com Ed hos mode no decision regarding whether or not to re-lay the 15 feet of secondary service that hos less than 24 inches of cover. As of today (over 2 months since my June 24. 2017 lelter) ComEd hos not advised me of their intention to either re-lay this 15-foot portion of the secondary service or leave it in place at on inadequate depth. I hove also attached a copy of our Plot of Survey illustrating the portion of the original service that has inadequate depth.

Dona!ci Fl le!

To: Stanley A. Wilk Area Manager CIPA Commonwealth Ecf1Son Company New Business Department Fox River 350 S. Second Street Elgin, IL 60123

Re: Minimum-depth deficiency associated with Informal Ill. C. C. Complaint - 2017 05064

All ..r:..c.t+ N( 1='NT """J

lb 1~*3

O;:;;,veqo. !L 6054.3 630.-217-374]

GcsDon71-;'fac.Lcon1

June 24. 2017

On June 9, 2017 a ComEd crew installed a partial secondary service as a result of the Residential Underground Agreement signed by myself and Bizabeth Moesch-Chiquito. ComEd Field Rep- Fox River New Business. and dated 05/30/2017.

On June 12 2017 I called you to get a progress report on your due diligence based on our prior conversation of June 61h. I reported that the ComEd crew did not comply with the General TeITTIS and Concfrtions. Distribution Facilities, 1st Revised Sheet No. 17 6 filed by Com Ed with the 111.C.C. on June 25. 2015. which states in part:

"The minimum depth for instafling such cable in the ground via direct burial or in duct is twenty-four (24j inches."

You indicated that you would look into this matter and get back to me.

On June 20, 2017 I called you to follow-up on our prior conversation of June J 21h. You stated that the ComEd crew reported that all work was done to the 24-inch depth requirement and that no further work would be done.

I am attaching six photographs to this letter:

ComEd Photo 1: This is a wide-angle view of an opening highfighting the location of the cable splice between the original secondary service and the partial secondary service installed on June 9lh.

ComEd Photo 2: This is a tighter view of the same opening (Photo 1 ) highlighting my placement of a 2"X4" spanning the opening for purpose of measuring depth of the splice.

ComEd Photo 3: This is a close-up view of the measured depth of the splice, which is between 11 inches and 12 inches.

ComEd Photo 4: This is a wide-angle view of an opening highlighting the location where the original secondary service was left in place on June 9lh.

ComEd Photo 5: This is a tighter view of the same opening (Photo 4) highlighting my placement of a 2"X4" spanning the opening for purpose of measuring depth of the original secondary service.

ComEd Photo 6: This is a close-up view of the measured depth of the original secondary service. which is between 9 inches and 10 inches.

Based on the fact that the ComEd crew had no problem with the depth of their work coupled with the time spent by yourself in investigating this matter. I conclude that this insufficient depth does not create an immediate safety hazard.

Should ComEd desire to comply with the previously cited Tariff Sheets. please contact me such that we can agree in advance on the total scope of work, including but not limited to:

?age 2 of 3

l . Scheduling of remedial work; 2. Direct oversight provided by ComEd management; 3. Excovation method for remedying the above described

deficiency; 4. Use of proper backfill technique ( 6-inch lifts with satisfactory

compaction before next 6-inch lift is added) to a height 4 inches below grade; and

5. ComEd's acceptance of responsibility for all costs incurred in items l through 4 plus the cost to install 4 inches of graded topsoil with organic matter followed by sod installation. Topsoil and sod to be installed by our landscape contractor.

The basis of our informal complaint with the Ill. C. C., that ComEd had no right to encumber our property, is still unresolved. We still expect a complete refund of monies paid ($3077.72) to ComEd to resolve the informal complaint. No action by ComEd to cure the minimum-depth deficiency that is the subject of this letter shall in a way be interpreted as resolving our informal complaint to the Ill. C. c.

Sincerely,

Donald Reid

cc: Illinois Commerce Commission 160 North LaSalle Street Suite C-800 Chicago, IL 60601 Attn.: Carlos Ruiz

I I I 2 I . I

ISSUE#4 Violation of National Electric Safety Code

re. Minimum Horizontal Clearance from House Foundation

The Residential Underground Agreement between myself and ComEd states in part:

"Permanent structures near electrical equipment are governed by the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC). As an example, Rule 234 requires the horizontal clearance between the electrical conductors and a building to be a minimum of 7.5 feet."

On Thursday. May 25, 2017 JULIE located underground utilities throughout our backyard in advance of designing a planting area to visually screen the utility boxes in the NW comer of our lot. JULIE identified that ComEd had run its secondary service to our home with less than 7.5 feet of horizontal clearance from the meter connection on the side of our home to a point 42 feet away from the meter connection.

On Monday, June 12. 2017 I called Stan Wilk to report this violation of NESC Rule 234 regarding the 7.5 foot minimum horizontal clearance between the ComEd service and our home in the original secondary service installation. Mr. Wilk indicated that he will look into this matter. On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 I called Stan Wilk again to follow-up on ComEd's response. He stated that ComEd does not accept responsibility for violating NESC Rule 234 with the initial service installation, relying on the relative accuracy of JULIE locates. ComEd states that JULIE locates are accurate to+/- 3 feet. I explained to Mr. Wilk that from the meter box connection to the rear corner of the house (24 feet) that the original service installation was marked 4-6 feet from the foundation. ComEd turned the comer of our house with 4 feet of horizontal clearance before beginning the diagonal portion of the install. ComEd's assertion is that their interpretation of the JULIE's inaccuracy works for ComEd. not the homeowner.

I have attached the Plat of Survey for our home illustrating that 42 feet of the original secondary service installation violated Rule 234 of the National Electrical Safety Code. This portion of the original service is no longer active. having been replaced by the relocated service of June 9, 2017.

e.t...ie: C.\ll-l~ ~J:.'fJ'it ce~ (i.J.G~) 'll"<~U;;?

~4; ~t)Ul.t?.\.J."" bt:f? ~ 'FeoT M1.J.4.N\t.>M

~"U:>N °Vi"..__ ~tfip~C.la ~~

ISSUE #5 Improper Construction Practices by ComEd

Mr. Wilk of ComEd's New Business Department has clearly stated the ComEd policy/practice regarding the provision of new service to o sub-division as:

ComEd management directs its construction crews to follow the shortest route from the service pedestal in the permanent easement to the meter connection on the side of a new home, unless some entity (builder. village or homeowner) requires lot line trenching.

This direction and the lack of ComEd management oversight encourages service installation crews to take shortcuts. Specifically at our home, the original installation in crew in the fall of 2015:

1. Failed to hand-dig around the transformer box and other utilities to a minimum depth of 24 inches as required by the Illinois Commerce Commission's "Schedule of Rates for Electric Service".

2. Shortened the length of secondary service by about 6-8 feet by running the service too close to our home in violation of the National Bectrical Safety Code - Rule 234.

The relocation crew of June 12. 2017 compounded the "minimum depth" problem by splicing into the shallow service rather than replacing the first fifteen ( 15) feet from the service pedestal. According to the crew leader. such work was unnecessary and that the effort would be too time consuming.

When the equipment operator began backfilling the trench, I observed that he was pushing the excavated material into the trench using the blade on his machine without any attempt to obtain a minimally acceptable compaction. I asked him to follow the proper technique by backfilling in 6-inch lifts and then achieving a minimum compaction of 803 by soaking the soil pushed into the trench with water. The equipment operator explained to me that while they are trained in the proper backfilling techniques ComEd management's production standards do not allow crews to stay on a jobsite long enough to follow their training and do the job right. When I asked if ComEd would return to add additional backfill as the backfilled material sunk over time, he explained that it is the homeowner's responsibility to deal with future lawn problems caused by settling.

The net result of ComEd's backfill techniques was that only half of the excavated material could be placed in the trench. When I engaged Renovatio Landscape & Design to repair the ComEd damage to our lawn the following work was required at a cost of $1420.00 (invoice attached):

1. Excavated material not placed in the trench needed to be removed and disposed of: 2. Material in the trench needed to be removed and replaced with properly compacted

materials; 3. ComEd's trenching machine blended existing topsoil with underlying clay making it

unusable as a proper sub-soil for sod replacement requiring new topsoil before sod installation; and

4. ComEd's trenching machine employs a track system rather than rubber tires resulting in lawn damage requiring the installation of a 6-foot wide section of sod for the full length of the secondary service installation.

t>.-11 ~c4NJEfN'\ '44-1 ·T= I?~ &-..::;;:

26 W 161 Plank Roat!, Naperville, !L 6ii563 \\'1v1v~Reno-vatioLandD.con1 RenovatioLD@gmaiLcom (630) 399-8486

Landscape Change Order

DATE: 6119/17

Customer: Don Fields

Address: 820 Golchesler drive Oswego, IL 60585

RE: June '17 Change Order

I Date

6/19117

Description of Service

Turf restoration due to patio installation -Excavate & remove 4• of clay according to "Best Practices" established by Central Sod Fanns (1500sqft @$1.00/sqft)

-lnstaR and grade 15.5yrds of topsoil@ $85/yrd

-Install 2.5 pallets of sod @ $650/Pallet

Subtotal

Cost

$1500.00

$1317.50

$1625.00

$4442.50

Turf restoration due to ComEd secondary service installation

-Excavate and remove soil & clay waste left behind by ComEd trenching and backhoe excavations 360sqft@$1.00/sqft)

-Install and grade 5yrds of topsoil@ $85/yrd

-lnstall 1 paHet of sod @$650/Pallel

Sub total

$360.00

$410.00

$650.00

$1420.00

FINAL OBSERVATIONS

The standards for new secondary service contained in ComEd's "Residential Underground Agreement" {the "Agreement") are in direct conflict with the policies and practices followed by ComEd's New Business Department and related departments ("New Business") responsible for installing new secondary services.

1 . The Agreement requires the use of the permanent easement when practical. New Business ignores the permanent easement unless specifically requested by some entity.

2. The Agreement requires ComEd to obtain a contractual easement whenever service requirements can't be met within the permanent easement. New Business expresses no knowledge of contractual easements and merely asserts its right to cross unencumbered private property without the benefit of an easement.

3. The Agreement requires compliance with the Company's Schedule of Roles of the llfinois Commerce Commission. New Business fails to provide sufficient oversight to assure such compliance as it relates to minimum service depth.

4. The Agreement requires compfiance with the National 8ectrical Safety Code, specifically Rule 234 which specifies minimum horizontal clearance from buildings. New Business fails to provide sufficient oversight to assure such compliance.

ComEd assigns responsibility for resolving informal customer complaints filed with the llfinois Commerce Commission's Consumer Service Division with its New Business Department. Mr. Stanley Wilk. Area CIPA Manager. Fox River, ComEd New Business has no authority to resolve informal complaints. Despite repeated attempts to reach him via telephone (June 12. 2017; June 20. 2017; June 26, 2017; July 5, 2017; July 7. 2017; July 11, 2017; & July 12. 2017), Mr. Wilk does not return calls. His explanation is that he has forwarded all my questions and concerns to various departments within ComEd and no one gets back to him. Whenever he gets an answer he assures me that he will call back. To date, no answers to my questions and concerns have been provided. In my informal complaint {2017 05064). ComEd has made a mockery of the process without any intent to resolve my dispute. As a result ComEd is creating unnecessary work on all parties including the Illinois Commerce Commission. Based on the suggestion made by Carlos Ruiz of the 111.C.C.'s Consumer Services Division I have filed this formal complaint with the Commission.

The ComEd philosophy of imposing production standards on its installation crews without providing proper o~ersight and communication has led directly to:

1. ComEd's installation crew from the fall of 2015 encumbered our property without the benefit of an easement. either permanent or contractual.

2. ComEd's installation crew on June 9. 2017 failed to comply with the terms of the Residential Underground Agreement executed between myself and ComEd.

3. ComEd's installation crews of the fall of 2015 and June 9. 2017 knowingly installed portions of our secondary service with less than one foot of depth. When the June 9th crew was confronted with this fact, they chose to lie to ComEd management.

4. ComEd's installation crew of June 9· 2017 failed to follow generally accepted trenching and backfill techniques, as taught by ComEd. resulting excessive damage to our property.

FINAL OBSERVATIONS

Our home is part of a 107-home sub-division known as The Villas of Southbury in Oswego, Illinois. Based my experience with ComEd along with my observation of the locations of service pedestals in the permanent easement and the placement of meter connections on the sides of homes, I expect that between one-third and one-half of alt homes in The Villas have unauthorized encumbrances on their property. While I possess no knowledge regarding secondary service installation depth or minimum horizontal clearance on any neighbor's property it is hard for me to believe that my circumstance is one-of-a-kind.

It is ComEd's duty and responsibifity to remedy deficiencies in their secondary service instaHations without its customers paying for their errors. In my case. ComEd is responsible for curing the following:

1. Unauthorized encumbrance of our private property; 2. Re-installing the first 15 feet of secondary service from the service pedestal to the proper

minimum depth of 24 inches: and 3. Re-installing the first 42 feet of the initial secondary service from the meter connection

that fails to meet minimum horizontal clearance standards of 7.5 feet as established by the National Electrical Safety Code.

As part of curing these initial installation errors. ComEd must accept responsibility for restoring a customer's lawn to its original condition.

To resolve my formal complaint with the Illinois Commerce Commission I expect to receive reimbursement from ComEd of their fee of $3.0n.72 to relocate our secondary service into the permanent easement to the maximum extent possible plus Renovatio Landscape &

Design's fee of $1.420.00 for restoring our lawn to its original condition. Should I incur additional incremental expenses to achieve this resolution I expect ComEd to reimburse these costs also.

I hope the issues that serve as the foundation of this dispute would cause the Commission to conduct a detailed inquiry into the policies and practices used by ComEd in the provision of new service to recently constructed homes throughout its territory. There is a clear conffict between ComEd's legal department, as expressed in their "Residential Underground Agreement". and the poficies and practices of ComEd departments responsible for the installation of secondary service.