Is this new BWSSB response to RWH?

----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 12:54 PMSubject: BWSSB RWH notice, my letter, TOI news items 21 mar 2010. Sri M.B. Nataraj Sub:- Rain Water Harvesting Ref:- Your e-mail Dated:12-04-2010. ------- With reference to your e-mail dated 12-204-2010, it is to inform that, the Government of Karnataka has brought an amendment to BWSS Act, 72-A to adopt Rain Water Harvesting for the new buildings constructed on site measuring 30 x 40 above and the existing buildings 40 x 60 and above. This is to further inform that, it is not to single out 60,000 of the lakhs of properties. Below 40 x 60 sites, the space left over is insufficient to put up RWH structures. However, they may also have RWH. BWSSB has not authorized any contractors to issue certificates after adopting the RWH. The consumers have to approach the local Water Supply offices to get the details of RWH and to inform the RWH implementation to their respective houses. sd/-Chief Engineer (Quality Assurance)
=====================================================================
=======================================================================

Sir,

I guess you are a BWSSB official? since the appellation at the bottom does not clarify how you got my letter?
The whole problem is the attitude of the approach.
You are antagonizing even the law abiding citizens.
You authorities treat citizens like enemies, criminals and preindependence day natives who understand only the language of the danda.
It is time to treat them like your allies.

Some houses especially my neighbors is already
situated such that all the water on his rooftop falls within his generous open earthed 4000 sq ft plot and is resorbed into the ground.
I have already put up necessary pipes to divert all the water to my 30x 20 front lawn with an open bottomed 1000 litre old sump.
What kind of compliance report should we file?
When the meter reader and aide can be the notice bearers why cannot they be the compliance reporters also on your behalf?
Why make customer run up to BWSSB officials doors?

Then why have you put up the list of authorized RWH contractors? and what do you mean there is not sufficient space? according to your plans even a 3x3x3 pit is sufficient. Does not even the smallest of the small sites have a sump that size?
if so they can accommodate a RWH pit. Why are you illegally- you are not authorized by law to disconnect water and sewerage supply- intimidating the customers- obviously the targetted 60,000- with it?
These are the kinds of actions that create unpleasant sense of opacity and underhand dealings in the BWSSB involvement in the entire RWH project even in the sympathetic willing to comply customers eyes.
It is definitely not a sign of transparent functioning.
The threatening attitude of the authorities is in total contrast with the conciliatory note you have sent me.
This confrontational approach will do any good for this already shaky government's popularity.

Kindly direct your meter readers to be the bearers of compliance reports also.
I wonder what action would you threaten me with if I choose not to go to your offices to file a compliance report.
The approach is either voluntary compliance by created awareness or draconian armtwisting which you started out with.
Incidentally the amendment that authorizes you with recovering dues does not talk anything about citizens having to run upto your offices for filing compliance?
Sincerely yours
M B Nataraj