Opinion ID: 221719
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether Logan-1 has provided or made water service available

Text: In order to establish that it has adequately made water service available, Logan-1 must first show that it has the legal right to provide water service. See Sequoyah Cnty., 191 F.3d at 1201 n. 8; see also Moongate Water, 420 F.3d at 1084-85. Here, no one disputes that Logan-1 has a right under Oklahoma law to provide water service within its assigned territory. Logan-1 must also establish that it has in fact provided or made [water service] available, 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b). See Sequoyah Cnty., 191 F.3d at 1201-03. This inquiry focus[es] primarily on whether [Logan-1]... has proximate and adequate `pipes in the ground' with which it has served or can serve the disputed customers within a reasonable time. Id. at 1203; see also Butterfield Park, 291 F.3d at 1267-68; Rural Water Dist. No. 1, 243 F.3d at 1270. [A] water association meets the pipes-in-the-ground test by demonstrating that it has adequate facilities within or adjacent to the area to provide service to the area within a reasonable time after a request for service is made. This is essentially an inquiry into whether a water association has the capacity to provide water service to a given customer. Sequoyah Cnty., 191 F.3d at 1203 (quotation, citation omitted); see also Pittsburg Cnty., 358 F.3d at 713; Butterfield Park, 291 F.3d at 1268; Rural Water Dist. No. 1, 243 F.3d at 1270. Further, Logan-1 must have made service available prior to the time an allegedly encroaching association began providing service in order to be eligible for § 1926(b) protection. Sequoyah Cnty., 191 F.3d at 1202 (quotation, alterations omitted). The district court determined that, in this case, there were disputed issues of fact remaining as to whether Logan-1 had made services available to the customers at issue before Guthrie began providing those customers with water. The parties do not challenge that determination on appeal. In granting Logan-1 partial summary judgment, however, the district court made several legal determinations as to how it intends to resolve that factual question. Guthrie challenges two of those legal conclusions here.