Control Number : Item Number: 834. Addendum StartPage : 0

Transcription

1 Control Number : Item Number: 834 Addendum StartPage : 0

2 t'^^^^^^^^ PUC DOCKET NO SOAH DOCKET NO DEC (9 PM 3: 47 APPLICATION OF ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANY LLC TO AMEND ITS CERTIFICATE OF CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR A PROPOSED 138-KV TRANSMISSION LINE IN DENTON TARRANT AND WISE COUNTIES (HICKS-ELIZABETH CREEK CCN) PUBLIC UTILITY COPIMlSSEGtI PUBLIC UTILIRfWV&NISSION OF TEXAS ORDER This Order addresses the application of Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC to amend its certificate of convenience and necessity (CCN) for a new 138-kV transmission line between the Hicks and Elizabeth Creek substations located in Tarrant and Denton counties. The project is deemed critical to reliability pursuant to P.U.C. PROC. R (b)(3)(d). On November 17, 2014, the State Office of Administrative Hearings' (SOAH) administrative law judges (ALJs) issued a proposal for decision which recommended granting the applicants' application. The ALJs recommended that the Commission adopt filed route 107 as modified pursuant to the supporting landowner requests. On December 10, 2014, the ALJs filed changes to the proposal for decision in response to the parties' exceptions and replies. The Commission agrees with the ALJs' recommendation and adopts the proposal for decision issued, including the findings of fact and conclusions of law, with some modifications. The Commission deletes findings of fact 91 and 93 because the findings of fact are not consistent with the Commission's policy regarding engineering constraints. Additionally, findings of fact 116A, 116B, and 116C have been added to address and clarify the route 107 modifications contained in the proposal for decision. The Commission adopts the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: I <Co^?

3 PUC Docket No Order Page 2 of Findings of Fact Procedural History l. Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC is an investor-owned electric utility providing service under Certificate of Convenience and Necessity No On January 7, 2014, Oncor filed with the Public Utility Commission of Texas an application to amend its certificate of convenience and necessity for the Hicks - Elizabeth Creek 138-kilovolt transmission line in Denton, Tarrant, and Wise counties. The project consists of a new double-circuit 138-kV transmission line that would extend from Oncor's existing Hicks switching station in central Tarrant County to Oncor's existing Elizabeth Creek substation located in southern Denton County. The new 138-kV doublecircuit line would be approximately 12.7 to 27.2 miles in length, depending on the route. 3. On January 7, 2014, Oncor: (a) mailed written notice of the application, including a map, to each municipality within five miles of the requested facilities; (b) either hand-delivered or mailed the written notice of the application, including a map, to each county in which the requested facilities will be located; (c) provided notice of the application to each neighboring utility providing the same utility service within five miles of the requested facilities; and (d) mailed written notice of the application by first class mail, including a map, to each landowner as stated on the current county tax rolls that will be directly affected if the requested CCN amendment is granted. 4. On January 8, 2014, Order No. 1 was issued, requiring, among other things, information from Oncor regarding notice of, the need for, and alternative to the project, as well as a recommendation from the Commission Staff regarding the sufficiency of the application. 5. On January 9, 2014, Oncor filed an affidavit attesting to the provision of a copy of the Environmental Assessment and Alternative Route Analysis (EA) to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD). 6. On January 9, 2014, Oncor filed an affidavit attesting to the provision of a copy of the application to the Office of Public Utility Counsel.

4 PUC Docket No Order Page 3 of On January 15, 2014, Oncor published notice of its application in newspapers having general circulation in the counties where the requested certificate of convenience and necessity is being requested, including the Denton Record-Chronicle, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, the Times Register, and the Wise County Messenger. 8. On January 23, 2014, Order No. 2 was issued granting various motions to intervene. 9. On January 30, 2014, Oncor filed an affidavit attesting to the provision of notice to cities, counties, neighboring utilities, and landowners. 10. On January 31, 2014, Order No. 3 was issued granting various motions to intervene. 11. On February 10, 2014, Order No. 5 was issued finding Oncor's application sufficient and approving Oncor's notice. 12. On the same day, Order No. 6 was issued granting various motions to intervene. 13. On February 11, 2014, the Commission issued its Order of Referral and Preliminary Order referring this proceeding to SOAH and specifying the issues to be addressed. 14. On February 19, 2014, SOAH ALJ Kerrie Jo Qualtrough issued SOAH Order No. 1. This order set out various case management procedures, provided notice of a prehearing conference, established an intervention deadline of February 21, 2014, granted various motions to intervene, and entered the standard protective order. 15. On February 20, 2014, TPWD filed its comment letter regarding the project and made various comments and recommendations. 16. On February 26, 2014, Johnny H. & Eloise Vinson and Chisholm 2000, LP (the Vinsons) filed a plea to the jurisdiction, a motion to dismiss, a motion for submission of certified question to the Commission, and a plea in abatement, arguing that certain language in Oncor's application failed to invoke the jurisdiction of the Commission, which required dismissal of the application. 17. On February 26, 2014, the Hillwood Group objected to the interventions of various parties.

5 PUC Docket No Order Page 4 of On February 27, 2014, SOAH Order No. 2 was issued granting various motions to intervene and changing the location of the prehearing conference. 19. On February 28, 2014, Oncor filed a supplemental affidavit attesting to the provision of notice. 20. On March 5, 2014, Vann Cattle Yards, Inc. filed a motion to notify additional landowners. 21. On March 5, 2014, SOAH ALJs Travis Vickery and Kerrie Jo Qualtrough convened a prehearing conference in Austin, Texas. 22. On March 10, 2014, SOAH Order No. 3 was issued memorializing the prehearing conference, requiring a response to Vann Cattle's motion, granting various motions to intervene, and requiring submission of a proposed procedural schedule. 23. On March 10, 2014, SOAH Order No. 3 was issued, requiring Staff and Oncor to respond to Hillwood Group's objections to the interventions of various parties. 24. On March 13, 2014, Oncor filed an amendment to its application. The amendment clarified certain language in the application that the Vinsons objected to in their motion. 25. On March 21, 2014,- SOAH Order No. 4 overruled the Hillwood Group's objections to the intervention requests of various landowners, adopted a procedural schedule, provided notice of the hearing on the merits, and denied Vann Cattle's motion to notice additional landowners because it presented route adequacy issues to be addressed at a later stage. 26. On April 1, 2014, SOAH Order No. 5 was issued denying the Vinsons' plea to the jurisdiction, motion to dismiss, motion for certified question, and plea in abatement. 27. On April 9, 2014, Vann Cattle filed a statement withdrawing its challenge to route adequacy. 28. On April 10, 2014, the Vinsons appealed SOAH Order No No Commissioner voted to hear the Vinsons' appeal of SOAH Order No. 5 by April 17, On June 10, 2014, SOAH Order No. 8 was issued granting various motions to intervene.

6 PUC Docket No Order Page 5 of On June 19, 2014, SOAH Order No. 9 was issued granting various motions to intervene and requiring copies of the intervenor maps Oncor prepared and made available to the parties. 32. On June 27, 2014, SOAH Order No. 10 was issued scheduling a prehearing conference and granting a late-filed motion to intervene. 33. On August 1, 2014, SOAH Order No. 13 was issued dismissing certain intervenors. 34. On August 1, 2014, SOAH Order No. 14 was issued regarding the location of the hearing on the merits. 35. The hearing on the merits commenced on August 18, 2014, and concluded on August 19, On August 27, 2014, SOAH Order No. 17 set the schedule for the filing of post-hearing briefs. 37. On September 29, 2014, the evidentiary record closed. Application/Proiect Description 38. The project consists of a new double-circuit 138-kV transmission line extending from Oncor's existing Hicks substation to its existing Elizabeth Creek substation. 39. Station work will also be required at both endpoints. 40. The application contains 53 geographically diverse routes, which is more than an adequate number of reasonably differentiated alternative routes to conduct a proper evaluation. Need 41. The area of northern Tarrant, southern Denton, and southern Wise counties is a fast growing part of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area that is expected to continue growing for years into the future. 42. The following table demonstrates Oncor's past and expected load growth in the study area:

7 PUC Docket No Order Page 6 of 19 LOAD (MW) IN AREA OF PROJECT Load in the study area has increased steadily from 603 megawatts in 2008, to more than 800 MW in 2013, and is expected to be over 900 MW by This increased load is being driven by large industrial, commercial, and residential development in the study area. 44. The electricity that serves this area is generated remotely and delivered through 345/138-kV autotransformers at Oncor's Roanoke switching station. 45. As early as 2017, the increased demand for electricity in this area will cause overloads on the existing autotransformers creating reliability and service concerns. 46. The project is needed to relieve autotransformer overloads, reliably serve load growth, and provide a second transmission feed into Elizabeth Creek. 47. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas approved the project as a reliability project that is needed in service by The project will solve reliability issues by creating a 138-kV line from Hicks to Elizabeth Creek that will allow installation of an additional 345/138-kV autotransformer at Hicks. This additional autotransformer capacity will relieve the overloads on the existing two autotransformers located at Roanoke. 49. The project will also provide a second transmission feed into Elizabeth Creek which will allow new growing electric load to be served from Elizabeth Creek and increase reliability of service. 50. This new transmission line will allow a new substation to be built in an area that is currently only served by long-distance distribution feeders. This new substation will enable Oncor to provide reliable service to the new developing load in the middle of the study area.

8 PUC Docket No Order Page 7 of Oncor considered and rejected other alternatives to the project because they failed to provide the same electrical advantages as the project. These alternatives were (a) increasing autotransformer size at Roanoke, (b) adding a third autotransformer at Roanoke, and (c) adding an autotransformer at Alliance substation. These alternatives would not address the existing reliability concerns at Roanoke, accommodate load growth needs, or facilitate future anticipated needs in a cost-effective manner, as would a 138-kV transmission line between Hicks and Elizabeth Creek. 52. There is no distribution alternative to the project. 53. The facility will facilitate robust wholesale competition. 54. The project is not needed to interconnect a new transmission service customer. 55. The project is necessary for the service, accommodation, convenience, and safety of the public. Routes 56. To assist Oncor in its route selection process, Oncor retained HDR Engineering, Inc., to prepare an EA. 57. Route 107 consists of links A-B-D-D1-D3-Il-M-WW-P-Q-FF-GG-HH-HH2-HH3-II. 58. The project will be constructed on Oncor's standard 138-kV monopoles made of steel or concrete. 59. Route 107 is the best alternative when all routing factors are considered. 60. In conjunction with a previously certificated project, route 107 would aid Brazos Electric Cooperative, Inc. by providing an alternative source of transmission service to Elizabeth Creek and increasing reliability if a Brazos line goes out of service. Community Values 61. Oncor held three public open house meetings to gather public input and ascertain community values. The first meeting was held on July 23, 2013, at Carl E. Schluter Elementary School in Haslet, Texas. The second meeting was held on July 24, 2013, at

9 PUC Docket No Order Page 8 of 19 W.R. Hatfield Elementary School in Justin, Texas. The third meeting was held on July 25, 2013, at Prairie View Elementary School in Rhome, Texas. 62. A total of 107 people signed in as attending one or more of the public participation meetings. 63. A total of 44 attendees completed questionnaires and submitted them to Oncor's routing consultant, HDR, for consideration. 64. Upon request, Oncor representatives also met with public officials, landowners and neighborhood groups to further explain the project and answer questions from members of the public. 65. Based on the questionnaires completed by open-house attendees, 82% of respondents indicated that maximizing the distance of the line from residences, including single-family and multi-family dwellings, is the most important factor pertaining to the location of transmission lines. 66. A commonly-held community value was limiting disruption of existing and planned commercial and residential development in the study area. 67. A basic community value in the study area is the preservation of parks and recreational areas. 68. Based on information received by HDR from the public involvement program, the locations of portions of 20 existing preliminary route links were modified and 14 new route links were added. Other slight modifications were also made to increase paralleling opportunities. 69. Information received from the public open-house meetings and from local, state, and federal agencies was considered and incorporated into the selection of recommended and alternative routes by Oncor. 70. Route 107 does not significantly impact community values, recreational and park areas, historical and aesthetic values, or the environmental integrity of the area traversed by route 107.

10 PUC Docket No Order Page 9 of Route 107 mitigates as many of the specific concerns expressed by the community at the open houses as would construction of any of the other alternative routes. 72. Oncor shall cooperate with directly affected landowners to implement minor deviations in route 107 to minimize the impact of the project. Recreational and Park Areas 73. Route 107 will not significantly impact the use or enjoyment of parks and recreational facilities. 74. Route 107 does not cross any parks or recreational areas. 75. Two parks or recreational areas are within 1,000 feet of the centerline of route 107. Historical Values 76. No adverse effects to archaeological or historical resources are anticipated as a result of the construction of the project. 77. There are no recorded cultural resource sites located within 1,000 feet of route Of the approximately 80,123 feet of route 107's overall length, approximately 11,402 feet pass across areas of high archaeological or historical site potential. 79. In the event Oncor or its contractors encounter any archaeological artifacts or other cultural resources during project construction, work will cease immediately in the vicinity of the resource and the discovery will be reported to the Texas Historical Commission (THC). Oncor will take action as directed by the THC. Aesthetic Values 80. The project will not significantly impact aesthetic values. 81. Aesthetic impacts of the project have been considered and minimized to the extent possible, including the use of monopoles on the entirety of route Of the approximately 80,123 feet of route 107's overall length, approximately 13,204 feet lies within the foreground visual zone of a park or recreational area.

11 PUC Docket No Order Page 10 of Of the approximately 80,123 feet of route 107's overall length, approximately 8,464 feet lies in the foreground visual zone of U.S. and state highways. Environmental InteQrity 84. The EA prepared by HDR analyzed the possible impacts of the project on numerous different environmental factors. 85. Oncor and HDR appropriately performed an evaluation of the impacts of the project on the environment, including endangered and threatened species. 86. No known occurrences of any threatened or endangered plant or animal species or designated critical habitat areas were indicated during review of the study area. 87. TPWD ranked route 107 within the top quarter of the 53 proposed routes from an ecological perspective. 88. Construction of the project on route 107 will not significantly impact existing land use, or socioeconomic, geological, hydrological, or wetland resources, and will not adversely affect historical or archaeological resources. Probable Improvement ofservice or Lowering of Consumer Cost 89. The project is needed to satisfy reliability and load growth issues in the study area. The project will improve service. Renewable EnerQy Goals 90. The project will not adversely affect PURA's goal for renewable energy development. Enzineerim- Constraints 91. DELETED. 92. Based on the information available, none of the routes filed in the application present any known engineering constraints that cannot be resolved during the design and construction phase of the project following Commission approval. 93. DELETED.

12 PUC Docket No Order Page 11 of 19 Costs 94. The estimated cost for the proposed routes ranges from $28,231,000 to $68,425,000, excluding station costs. Route 107 is estimated to cost approximately $29,720,000, excluding station costs. 95. Route 107 is 15.2 miles long (80,123 feet). This is approximately 2.5 miles longer than the shortest route (route 16) and 11.1 miles shorter than the longest route (route 210). 96. Route 107 is $1,489,000 more expensive than the least expensive route (central route 76) and $38,705,000 less expensive than the costliest route (eastern route 17). 97. There are approximately $13,202,000 in station costs associated with the facilities at the existing Hicks and existing Elizabeth Creek that are also included in the project. Including these costs, route 107 is estimated to cost approximately $42,922,000. Compatible Right-of-Ways (go Ws) 98. The total length of route 107 is 80,123 feet, or approximately 15.2 miles long. 99. Route 107 would parallel existing transmission lines for 16,202 feet Route 107 would use existing transmission line ROW for 2,016 feet Route 107 would parallel existing public roads and highways for 1,586 feet Route 107 would parallel pipeline ROW for 16,019 feet Route 107 would not parallel any railroad ROW Route 107 would parallel apparent property boundaries for 13,798 feet The total length of route 107 that would run parallel to or use existing compatible ROWs, including apparent property boundaries, is 49,621 feet The total length of route 107 that would not run parallel to existing compatible ROWs, including apparent property boundaries, is 30,502 feet Route 107 would parallel existing compatible ROW for 61.9% of the total length of the route Route 107 would not parallel existing compatible ROW for 38.1 % of the total length of the route.

13 PUC Docket No Order Page 12 of Route 107 would not parallel any natural or cultural features Route 107 ranks 23rd out of the 53 routes in terms of the percent of its total length parallel to compatible ROW Route 107 is superior to route 72 in its use of compatible ROWs. Prudent Avoidance 112. The project complies with the Commission's policy of prudent avoidance Over its approximately 15.2 mile length, route 107 has 14 habitable structures within 300 feet of its centerline Route 107's 14 habitable structures within 300 feet of its centerline ties the route with the lowest number of affected habitable structures among all 53 filed routes Route 107 complies with the Commission's policy of prudent avoidance. Alternative Routes with a Less Ne.eative Impact on Landowners 116. The following landowners have requested modification of one or more links of route 107: (1) Lennar Homes of Texas Land and Construction, Ltd.; (2) Beechwood Portfolio Investments, LLC and Fossilwood Investments, LP (Beechwood); and (3) the Todd Group. 116A. The routing modification requested by Lennar Homes is described in Lennar Homes Ex. 1 Supp. Testimony, Att. DBA-3A. Lennar's requested modification involves connecting links Q and S at an alternative location to link FF and slightly deviating from links S and GG. All route changes are within Lennar's property boundaries. 116B. The routing modification requested by Todd Group is described in Todd Group Ex. 2 at 9. Todd Group's requested modification involves altering link D to abut Oncor's CREZ easement and the Barnett Gathering easement to minimize the amount of unusable land created by link D. All route changes are within Todd Group's property boundaries. 116C. The routing modification requested by Beechwood is described in Oncor Ex. 10 Att. TJY-R-1. This modification seeks to route the line parallel to existing constraints on

14 PUC Docket No Order Page 13 of 19 SOAR Docket No Beechwood's western and southern boundaries without overlapping other easements. All route changes are within Beechwood's property boundaries The requested modifications for Lennar Homes and the Todd Group would not result in a significant incremental cost The requested modification on Beechwood's property is estimated to cost an additional $400,000. Given the overall estimated cost of the route 107, this increase is not significant Based on the representations of Lennar Homes and the Todd Group and the information known to Oncor, the proposed modifications on those properties appear feasible and no obstacle to construction appears to exist that could not be resolved during the design and construction phase of the project. However, Oncor would need to conduct on-the-grounds surveys Regarding Beechwood's proposed modification, there are several potentially incompatible pipeline and railroad easements along the western and southern boundaries of Beechwood's property. Oncor will need to perform on-the-ground surveys to determine the exact location of these easements. Based on information currently known to Oncor, Beechwood's representations, and Beechwood's understanding of the need for Oncor to avoid overlapping incompatible easements, Oncor is not aware of an existing obstacle to construction that could not be resolved during the design and construction phase of the project There is no evidence that Beechwood will make contributions to offset the additional cost associated with the accommodation There is no evidence that the proposed accommodations of Lennar Homes, Beechwood, and the Todd Group will diminish the electric efficiency of the line or reliability It is reasonable to modify the routes as requested by the affected landowners, and such modification will lessen the negative impact on the landowners. TPWD's Written Comments and Recommendations 124. On February 24, 2014, TPWD filed its comment letter on the project.

15 PUC Docket No Order Page 14 of Oncor must comply with all environmental laws and regulations, including those governing endangered and threatened species Oncor must comply with all applicable regulatory requirements in constructing the project, including any applicable requirements under section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act In preparing the EA, HDR reviewed TPWD's previous correspondence on the project HDR relied on habitat descriptions from various sources, including the Texas Natural Diversity Database and other sources provided by TPWD and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), along with observations from field reconnaissance, to investigate whether habitat for endangered or threatened species is present in the study area Once a route for the project is approved by the Commission, Oncor will coordinate with the USFWS and the TPWD if threatened or endangered species habitats are identified during field surveys Route 107 is unlikely to affect federally- and state-listed endangered and threatened species To protect raptors and migratory birds, Oncor will follow the procedures outlined in the following publication for protecting raptors and other birds: Suggested Practices for Avian Protection on Power Lines, The State of the Art in 2006, Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC), 2006 and the Avian Protection Plan Guidelines published by APLIC in April, Oncor will consult the Reducing Avian Collisions with Power Lines: State of the Art in Oncor will take precautions to avoid disturbing occupied nests and take steps to minimize the impact of construction on migratory birds, especially during nesting season Oncor will minimize the amount of flora and fauna disturbed during construction of the transmission project, except to the extent necessary to establish appropriate ROW clearance for the transmission line. Oncor will revegetate using native species and consider landowner preferences in doing so. To the maximum extent practicable, Oncor will avoid adverse environmental impacts to sensitive plant and animal species and their habitats as identified by TPWD and USFWS.

16 PUC Docket No Order Page 15 of Oncor will implement erosion control measures as appropriate and return each affected landowner's property to its original contours and grades unless otherwise agreed to by the landowners. Oncor is not being required to restore original contours and grades where different contours or grades are necessary to ensure the safety or stability of the project's structures or the safe operation and maintenance of the line Oncor will exercise extreme care to avoid affecting non-targeted vegetation or animal life when using chemical herbicides to control vegetation within the ROW. Oncor's herbicide use will comply with rules and guidelines established in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and with Texas Department of Agriculture regulations Oncor will use best management practices to minimize the potential impact to migratory birds and threatened and endangered species After a transmission line route has been selected and approved by the Commission, qualified individuals will conduct a field assessment of the entire length of the chosen route to identify water resources, potential migratory bird issues, and threatened or endangered species habitat that may be impacted as a result of the project Oncor will use permitted biological monitors to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act and other applicable regulatory requirements. Additionally, Oncor will conduct assessments to determine if federally- or state-listed threatened and endangered species habitat is present Oncor will use best-management practices to mitigate the potential impact to all bird species, including the use of bird flight diverters where appropriate Oncor must comply with all aspects of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act Mitigation measures are determined after a route is approved by the Commission and on-the-ground surveys are completed for the route. Should construction impact federally-listed species or their habitat or impact water under the supervision of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Oncor will coordinate with the TPWD, USFWS, or USACE respectively to coordinate permitting and any required mitigation.

17 PUC Docket No Order Page 16 of The standard mitigation requirements included in the ordering paragraphs in this Order, coupled with Oncor's current practices, are reasonable measures for a utility to undertake when constructing a transmission line. II. Conclusions of Law 1. Oncor is an electric utility as defined in Public Utility Regulatory Act (PURA) and (6). 2. The Commission has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to PURA , , , , , and SOAH has jurisdiction over this proceeding pursuant to PURA and Texas Government Code Oncor provided proper notice of the application in compliance with PURA and P.U.C. PROC. R (a). 5. This docket was processed in accordance with the requirements of PURA, the Administrative Procedure Act in Texas Government chapter 2001, and the Commission's rules. 6. The Project is necessary for the service, accommodation, convenience, or safety of the public within the meaning of PURA (a), taking into consideration the factors set out in PURA and P.U.C. SUBST. R Route 107 complies with all aspects of PURA and P.U.C. SUBST. R , including the Commission's policy of prudent avoidance. 8. The application is reasonable and should be approved. 9. The application does not constitute a major rate proceeding as defined by P.U.C. PROC. R III. Ordering Paragraphs In accordance with these findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Commission issues the following Order:

18 PUC Docket No Order Page 17 of Oncor's CCN No is amended and Oncor's application to build a new double-circuit 138-kV transmission line extending from existing Oncor Hicks switching station to the existing Oncor Elizabeth Creek substation is approved. The approved route for the project is proposed route 107 as described in the EA and this Order and as modified to the extent feasible following on-the-ground surveys, for the following landowners: Lennar Homes (modification as depicted in Lennar Homes Ex. 1 Supp. Testimony, Att. DBA-3A); Todd Group (modification as depicted in Todd Group Ex. 2 at 9); and Beechwood (modification abutting, without overlapping, easements on its western and southern boundaries as depicted in Oncor Ex. 10, Att. TYJ-R-1). The landowner requested modifications approved to route 107 are reflected in findings of fact 116A, 116B, and 116C. 2. In the event Oncor or its contractors encounter any archaeological artifacts or other cultural resources during construction of the transmission line, work shall cease immediately in the vicinity of the resource and report the discovery to the THC and take action as directed by the THC. 3. Oncor shall follow the procedures described in the following publications for protecting raptors: Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power Lines: The State of the Art in 2006, Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (2006), and the Avian Protection Plan Guidelines published by APLIC in April, Also, Oncor should consult Reducing Avian Collisions with Power Lines: State of the Art in Oncor shall take precautions to avoid disturbing occupied nests and will take steps to minimize the impact of construction on migratory birds, especially during nesting season. 4. Oncor shall exercise extreme care to avoid affecting non-targeted vegetation or animal life when using chemical herbicides to control vegetation within the ROW. Herbicide use shall comply with rules and guidelines established in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and with Texas Department of Agriculture regulations. 5. Oncor shall minimize the amount of flora and fauna disturbed during construction of the transmission project, except to the extent necessary to establish appropriate ROW clearance for the transmission project. In addition, Oncor shall revegetate using native

19 PUC Docket No Order Page 18 of 19 SOAI3 Docket No species and shall consider landowner preferences in doing so. Furthermore, to the maximum extent practicable, Oncor shall avoid adverse environmental impacts to sensitive plant and animal species and their habitats as identified by TPWD and the USFWS. 6. Oncor shall implement erosion control measures as appropriate. Also, Oncor shall return each affected landowner's property to its original contours and grades unless otherwise agreed to by the landowner. Oncor shall not be required to restore original contours and grades where different contour or grade is necessary to ensure the safety or stability of the project's structures or the safe operation and maintenance of the line. 7. Oncor shall use best management practices to minimize the potential impact to migratory birds and threatened or endangered species. 8. Oncor shall cooperate with directly affected landowners to implement minor deviations in the approved route to minimize the impact of the transmission line. Any minor deviations in the approved route shall only directly affect landowners who received notice of the transmission line in accordance with P.U.C. Proc. R (a)(3) and shall directly affect only those landowners that have agreed to the minor deviation, excluding public ROWs. 9. Oncor shall be permitted to deviate from the approved route in any instance in which the deviation would be more than a minor deviation, but only if the following two conditions are met. First, Oncor shall receive consent from all landowners who would be affected by the deviation regardless of whether the affected landowner received notice of or participated in this proceeding. Second, the deviation shall result in a reasonably direct path towards the terminus of the line and not cause an unreasonable increase in cost or delay to the project. Unless these two conditions are met, this paragraph does not authorize Oncor to deviate from the approved route except as allowed by the other ordering paragraphs of this Order. 10. Oncor shall conduct surveys to identify pipelines that could be affected by the Hicks to Elizabeth Creek transmission line and coordinate with pipeline owners in modeling and

20 PUC Docket No Order Page 19 of 19 analyzing potential hazards because of AC interference affecting pipelines being paralleled. 11. Oncor shall update the reporting of this project on its monthly construction progress report prior to the start of construction to reflect final estimated cost and schedule in accordance with P.U.C. SUBST. R (b). 12. All other motions, requests for entry of specific findings of fact or conclusions of law, and any other requests for general or specific relief, if not expressly granted herein, are denied. SIGNED AT AUSTIN, TEXAS the 1^day of December PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF TEXAS ^ ^ ^ DONNA L. NELSON, CHAIRMAN KENNETH W. ANR"SON;^,FI^:; COIVIMISSIONER BRANDY q:\cadm\orders\final\42o00\42o87fo.docx