Gateway BP(1.1)-CS070618From: "Ric Nelson" <Ric.Nelson @transwestern.net>
To: <kgriffin @ci.coppell.tx.us>
Date: 6/18/2007 2:14 PM
Subject: FW: Gateway Phase One Electrical Service
FYI
ric
Ric Nelson
Vice President
TRANSWESTERN
Phone 214.446.45431 Fax 214.446.45701 Cell 972.804.9234
transwestern.net
Original Message
From: Ric Nelson
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 11:53 AM
To: Jeffery.Curry@oncor.com
Cc: rick.fielding @oncor.com; Gary Sieb; Kenneth M. Griffin P.E
(n @ci.coppelltx us); Mindi Hurley (mhurley @ci.coppell.tx.us); Jim Witt
(jwitt @ci.coppell.tx.us); Jack Eimer; Reid Caldwell; Kim Butler
Subject: Gateway Phase One Electrical Service
Jeff,
Transwestern is very disappointed regarding all Oncor responses to date
for the following reasons:
(1.) Previously requested scope of work breakdown from Oncor. Oncor
stated Transwestern would not be charged any fees to serve this project
if service is overhead. Transwestern Phase One Partners are
contemplating this solely because no funds were allocated for the recent
$69K cost you have provided via email two weeks ago. As you know, (based
on our many meetings and discussions in 4th Q'06 and Jan'07 we
anticipated no Oncor offsite service charges because nothing to the
contrary was suggested in the "Will Serve" letter last October. Freeport
Parkway being street lit by underground feeders, (2) empty underground
6" electrical conduits buried on the west side of Freeport down to
1 -635, plus several existing transformers /pads visible along Freeport
lead rational assumption to us (when not warned of impending costs),
Oncor would naturally serve in this underground fashion. It is most
difficult to fathom line trucks, drilling rig, creosote wood poles,
insulators, overhead wire, grounding copper, pole mounted transformers,
and labor to install same is more expensive than cost of the sheathed
underground cable pulled in existing underground "un- used" conduit
already existing.
(2.) Transwestern happens to be involved with a separate entity on other
parcels along west Freeport Parkway. Due to the fact these other
entities have no cross relationships it might as well be separate
developers altogether! The "Will Serve" letter suggests nothing about
tying two dead end lines together in order to deliver adequate power to
this 18 acre development. We view this lending value only to Oncor!
Transwestern did not ask for this, nor do we want to bear any shared
cost at this time. If forced to share this burden in the future, we feel
Lincoln Properties who has equal lineal frontage should bear equal
percentage of the burden as well. It is our contention "if needed to
serve our Phase One site at this time "...Oncor should solely bear this
cost.
Without accurate scope of work, lineal feet, quantities lists of "all
materials" necessary, equipment time required, and man -hour labor
costs to estimate BOTH cost scenarios we are at the undue and unfair
mercy of Oncor's recent split with TXU!
This project is the first phase of the Gateway to the City of Coppell
from the areas main feeder 1 -635 LBJ Freeway! We cannot believe Oncors'
action is in the best interest of Coppell, Oncor, or Transwestern. No
engineering and cost rationale have been shared with us for rebuttal.
We urge Oncors' reconsideration of these mandated charges. We are
requesting your full written response to all issues identified above
(copying the chain of command within Oncor) and all parties above, no
later than Friday, June 22nd!
Respectfully,
Ric Nelson
Vice President
TRANSWESTERN
Phone 214.446.45431 Fax 214.446.45701 Cell 972.804.9234
transwestern.net
Original Message
From: Jeffery.Curry@oncor.com [mailto:Jeffery.Curry@oncor.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 7:24 AM
To: Ric Nelson
Cc: rick.fielding @oncor.com; Jerry.Burk @constructors.com;
fran k. castro @constru ctors. com
Subject: RE: Electrical Conduit
We have reviewed the conduit layout to Building 2. The pull box needs
to be installed as shown on the prints I have provided. We can not make
the pull from the switchgear to the pull box if the box is moved south
to the point where the conduit turns into the property. We do not want
a second pull box installed in the conduit run due to the fact splices
would have to be installed in the box which would add another location
for potential failure in the future. Also, I spoke to Frank and Jerry
concerning the switchgear pad and piers. Their understanding was Oncor
would provide and install the pad and piers. The price I gave you was
with your contractor installing all civil work up to the point where we
cross Freeport Parkway. The price included an Oncor bore of Freeport
and trench /conduit from Freeport to the dead -end pole on Wrangler.
I will be out of the office next week. Call me on my cell phone at
214 549 -7141 if you have any questions.
Original Message
From: Ric Nelson [mailto:Ric.Nelson @transwestern.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 4:09 PM
To: Curry, Jeffery; Curry, Jeffery
Subject: FW: Electrical Conduit
Jeff,
Can we convert back to 4" conduit on our property if we have a pull box
at the easement?
Ric
From: Jerry.Burk @constructors.com [mailto:Jerry.Burk @constructors.com]
Sent: Tue 6/12/2007 8:59 AM
To: Ric Nelson
Cc: frank.castro @constructors.com; steve.gosling @constructors.com;
chris.davis @constructors.com
Subject: Electrical Conduit
Ric,
Have you received any confirmation regarding the approval of converting
back to 4" conduit from the easement electrical tap to service the two
building transformer pads? We desperately need this approval to proceed
with this electrical installation for paving. Please let me know
something as soon as possible. Thanks!
Respectfully,
Jerry Burk
Project Manager
Constructors Associates, Inc.
Direct: 214 525 -5129
Mobile: 214 878 -0195
Nextel: 142*21*13224