ST9302-CS 950221Re: Sandy Lake Road/TU Transmission Line
Dear 2-:
Thank you for agreeing to serve as your Homeowner Association delegate to receive information
and gather input regarding the status of the Sandy Lake Road project. The City Council
appreciates the opportunity of having this committee of citizens to ensure that proper information
about the Sandy Lake Road/TU transmission line issue is disseminated throughout the
community.
We anticipate regularly informing this committee about the City's status on this issue and also
utilizing the committee as a sounding board for various alternatives that come to the forefront
during this process. As you may know, the City hired Mr. Lambeth Townsend as special
counsel on this matter. On January 20, 1995, I visited with Mr. Townsend in Austin, along
with some members of Council, City Manager, Jim Witt, and our City Attorney, Pete Smith.
At that time, we submitted the attached list of questions for him to research. He was scheduled
to appear at our last Council meeting on February 14th, but was unable to reach Coppell from
Austin due to weather. He is now scheduled to attend our next regular meeting on February
28th.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this information, please contact our City
Manager, Jim Witt.
Sincerely,
Tom Morton
Mayor
TM:kar
hoatu0.221
attachment
cc: City Council
Chaucer Estates HOA Sand Point Estates HOA
Mr. H.W. "Hank" Edmiston Mr. Doug Robeas
116 Dickens Drive 108 Sand Point Court
Coppell, TX 75019 Coppell, TX 75019
Cottonwood Estates HOA Villages of Cottonwood Creek
Mr. Melvin Gross Mr. Eric Fruithandler
152 Cottonwood Drive 219 Winding Hollow
Coppell, TX 7501 Coppell, TX 75019
Creekview HOA Woodridge Homeowners
Mr. Dale Crittenden Mr. Kevin Matheny
152 Glendale 347 Pinion
Coppell, TX 75019 Coppell, TX 75019
Highland Meadows HOA Mr. Don Duncan
Mr. Larry Hansen 489 Sandy Knoll
184 Highland Meadow Circle Coppell, TX 75019
Coppell, TX 75019
Ms. Colleen Cherrett
Lakes of Coppell HOA 633 Raven
Mr. Barry L. Gruebbel Coppell, TX 75019
200 Crescent Ct.//550
Dallas, TX 75201
Meadows of Coppell HOA
Ms. Kim Connell
802 Meadowglen Circle
Coppell, TX 75019
Northlake Woodlands HOA
Mr. Carlos Palasciano
544 Briarglen Drive
Coppell, TX 75019
Oakbend HOA
Mr. David Hoover
629 Autumnwood
Coppell, TX 75019
Pecan Hollow HOA
Mr. Jack Peterson
339 Pecan Hollow Drive
Coppell, TX 75019
odd:
1 0
PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT
QUESTIONS FOR THE PUC IN REFERENCE TO
TU ELECTRIC'S TRANSMISSION LINES TEXAS UTILITIES
1. DOES THE PUC HAVE ANY REGULATIONS WHICH GOVERN
TRANSMISSION LINES WHICH HAVE BEEN INACTIVE FOR EXTENDED
PERIODS, I.E., WOULD THIS BE CLASSIFIED AS AN UPGRADE OR A NEW
LINE?
No rules specifically govern inactive transmission lines. The City could argue that the
line and the certificate of convenience and necessity (CCN) has been abandoned by
inactivity making the proposed upgrade a new line. However, no rule prohibits
reactivation of an inactive transmission line. In the absence of a showing to the contrary,
most likely, the PUC staff would consider TU Electric's proposal an upgrade, not a new
line.
2. WHAT STEPS DOES THE CITY NEED TO TAKE TO FORMALLY OPPOSE
THE UPGRADE OF THE TRANSMISSION LINES EVEN THOUGH TU HAS
NOT YET APPLIED FOR THE UPGRADE?
City could file a complaint and request revocation of the CCN because it has been
abandoned and is not needed or request a declaration that the upgrade would not be
exempt.
3. IF THE CITY CONDEMNS TU'S LAND AND COMPENSATES TU FOR THE
LOSS, WHAT LEGAL ROLE DO WE THEN PLAY IN THE TU PROCESS TO
MONITOR THE REROUTING OF THE LINE?
If TU Electric does not have the right to use the right-of-way just condemned by the City,
the City and other affected parties could intervene in any application filed by TU Electric
for a new transmission line to replace the condemned line.
A. WHAT EXACTLY WOULD THE CITY'S INVOLVEMENT BE IN
SECURING A NEW ROUTE IF WE CONDEMN THE EXISTING ROUTE?
a. City could work with TU Electric to secure an acceptable route. Or, oppose TU
Electric's application for a route that is unacceptable to the City.
1322',000-00 I.QES 1
B. WHAT WOULD BE OUR INVOLVEMENT OR CONTROL IF TU STARTS
CONDEMNING A ROUTE THAT WE AS A CITY ARE OPPOSED TO?
CAN WE THEN CONTROL WHERE THEY CONDEMN OR DO THEY
HAVE FREE LATITUDE TO CONDEMN ANY ROUTE OF WHICH THE
PUC APPROVES?
b. TU Electric's new route must be approved by the PUC. The City could intervene
in TU Electric's application for the new transmission line CCN. Once TU Electric
obtains the PUC's approval, the City would not have any control over TU
Electric's condemnation of the approved route.
4. DOES THE PUC REVIEW THE NEED FOR ANY UPGRADES OR IS IT THE
CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR INSURING THAT ALL UPGRADES ARE
APPROPRIATE AND NECESSARY?
As a regulatory authority, the City does not have jurisdiction concerning the approval of
the transmission line routing. The PUC has a rule exempting from CCN requirements the
upgrade of an existing transmission line to not more than 230 Kv. The utility must report
the plans for an exempted upgrade for the staffs review. However, the need for the
upgrade is not reviewed or considered by the PUC.
5. CAN TU SHARE EASEMENTS AND/OR LINES, POLES, ETC. WITH THE
TEXAS NEW MEXICO LINE CURRENTLY IN DENTON COUNTY I.E. CAN
PUC GRANT THE RIGHT FOR TU TO ENTER INTO ANOTHER CERTIFIED
AREA?
Upon agreement with Texas New Mexico (TNP), TU Electric could share easements and
poles with TNP. The PUC can grant a CCN to one utility for a transmission line located
in another utility's service area. In fact, the PUC encourages utilities to locate
transmission lines in existing transmission line corridors.
6. WHAT ARE THE ACTUAL GUIDELINES FOR NEW AND/OR UPGRADED
LINES, I.E. WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE SECTIONS AND THE DOCUMENTS
THAT GOVERN THESE UPGRADES OR INSTALLATION OF NEW LINES?
Upgrades of existing transmission lines, which already have a CCN, are exempted from
obtaining a new CCN if the upgrade is to not more than 230 Kv. The guidelines for a
new transmission line or an upgrade to more than 230 Kv are found in the Public Utility
Regulatory Act and the PUC's rules. The PUC must find that the CCN is necessary for
the service, accommodation, convenience, or safety of the public. To make this finding,
the PUC considers the adequacy of the existing service, the need for additional service,
1322X000-001.QES 2
the effect of the granting of a CCN on the recipient and an any public utility already
serving the area, historical and aesthetic values, environmental integrity, and the probable
improvement of service or lowering of cost to consumers in the area.
7. HOW WOULD THE CITY GO ABOUT GETTING A PUBLIC HEARING IN
COPPELL OF THE PUC COMMISSIONERS? WHAT ARE THE PROPER
PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES?
The PUC's rules state that all evidentiary hearings shall be held in Austin unless the
Commission determines that it is in the public interest to hold the hearing elsewhere.
Further, the Commission may hold regional hearings to obtain public comment.
Therefore, if the City were successful in getting the PUC to conduct a hearing concerning
the upgrade or if TU Electric applied for a new CCN, the City could request that a
regional hearing be held in the City to receive public comment and that the evidentiary
hearing be held in the City to enable citizens to testify. Most likely, either type of
hearing would be conducted by a hearings examiner instead of the Commissioners.
8. HOW WOULD THE CITY GO ABOUT OBTAINING THE REAL COST OF
BURYING THE CABLES AND THE REAL COST OF REROUTING THE
EXISTING LINES?
The City could obtain the real cost of burying the cables and rerouting the existing line
by hiring a consulting engineer who has experience constructing transmission lines to
review TU Electric's plans and cost estimates. Such engineers are available.
9. WHAT IS THE ACTUAL LEGAL INTERPRETATION OF THE SECTION OF
THE PUC RULES WHICH TALKS ABOUT GAINING PRIOR CONSENT PRIOR
TO THE REROUTING OF ANY EXISTING POWER LINES I.E., IF THE CITY
CONDEMNS THE CURRENT ROUTE CAN TU THEN GO OUT AND SECURE
A DIFFERENT ROUTE USING THE PROCESS OF EMINENT DOMAIN
WITHOUT HAVING PRIOR OWNER CONSENT OF THE NEW ROUTE?
If the City condemns the current route and TU Electric cannot use the newly acquired
City right-of-way, TU Electric would have to obtain the PUC's approval of a new route
before TU Electric could construct a transmission line. Once the PUC approves the route,
TU Electric can exercise eminent domain if a property owner does not agree to sell the
property or grant an easement. However, PUC rules also exempt from the CCN
requirement the relocation of an existing line due to governmental requirements if the
relocation is in close proximity to the existing line and prior consent of any new
landowner crossed by the new line. Therefore, landowner's prior consent is necessary for
the exemption to apply.
322\000-001 .QES 3