1 before the arizona power plant and transmission … · 2019. 5. 20. · 16 casa grande has an...

LS No. 165 PREFILING CONFERENCE 04/02/2012

1 BEFORE THE ARIZONA POWER PLANT AND TRANSMISSION LINE SITING COMMITTEE 2 3 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ) TEP - PINAL CENTRAL TO TORTOLITA ) DOCKET NO. 4 PROJECT ) TBA ) 5 ) LS CASE NO. 165 ) 6 ) PREFILING ) CONFERENCE 7 8 910 At: Phoenix, Arizona11 Date: April 2, 201212131415 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS16171819 ARIZONA REPORTING SERVICE, INC. Court Reporting20 Suite 502 2200 North Central Avenue21 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-148122 By: GARY W. HILL, RPR, CRR Certified Reporter23 Certificate No. 5081224 Prepared for:25

ARIZONA REPORTING SERVICE, INC.


1 INDEX TO EXHIBITS 2 NO. DESCRIPTION MARKED IDENTIFIED 3 Exhibit 1 Letter dated March 28, 2012 4 From Larry Rains to Peter McIlvaine 5 9 5 Exhibit 2 Map 5 8 6 Exhibit 3 Notice of Project Hearing 28 28 7 Exhibit 4 Map of CEC Sign Locations 28 28 8 910111213141516171819202122232425



1 BE IT REMEMBERED that the above-entitled and 2 numbered matter came on regularly to be heard before the 3 Arizona Power Plant and Transmission Line Siting 4 Committee, Arizona Attorney General's Office, 1275 West 5 Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona, commencing at 10:06 6 a.m., on the 2nd day of April, 2012. 7 8 9 BEFORE: JOHN FOREMAN, Chairman1011 APPEARANCES:12 For the Applicant Tucson Electric Power:13 ROSHKA DeWULF & PATTEN, PLC By Mr. Jason D. Gellman14 and Mr. J. Matthew Derstine15 400 East Van Buren, Suite 800 Phoenix, Arizona 8500416 and17 TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY18 By Mr. Marcus G. Jerden, Senior Legal Counsel 88 East Broadway19 Tucson, Arizona 8570120 For Walton Development:21 ROSE LAW GROUP, PC22 By Mr. Court S. Rich 6613 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 20023 Scottsdale, Arizona 852502425



1 Also Present: 2 Mr. Ed Beck, Tucson Electric Power Company Mr. James Rees, Arizona State Land Department 3 Mr. Ruben Ojeda, Arizona State Land Department Mr. Manny Gonzalez, Pinal County 4 5 6 GARY W. HILL, RPR, CRR Certified Reporter 7 Certificate No. 50812 8 910111213141516171819202122232425



1 (Exhibits 1 and 2 were marked for 2 identification. 3 4 CHMN. FOREMAN: This is a prefiling conference 5 on what I understand to be an application by Tucson 6 Electric Power for a Certificate of Environmental 7 Compatibility to build a 500-kilovolt transmission line 8 from Pinal Central substation to Tortolita substation. 9 My name is John Foreman. I'm the Chairman of10 the Arizona Power Plant and Transmission Line Siting11 Committee. Thank you for coming in. This is an12 organizational procedural meeting where we're trying to13 get things squared away so we can have this application14 proceed with no more adventure than is absolutely15 necessary under these circumstances.16 Let me ask those of you who are at the17 conference table here with me to identify yourselves for18 the record.19 MR. GELLMAN: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Jason20 Gellman and Matt Derstine from the law firm of Roshka21 DeWulf & Patten on behalf of the applicant Tucson22 Electric Power Company. Also present from the company23 is Ed Beck and Marc Jerden.24 CHMN. FOREMAN: And, sir, for the record?25 MR. REES: My name is James Rees. I'm with the



1 Rights-of-Way section of the Arizona State Land 2 Department. 3 CHMN. FOREMAN: Very good. 4 MR. OJEDA: Mr. Chairman, Ruben Ojeda with the 5 Arizona State Land. I manage the Right-of-Way section. 6 MR. GONZALEZ: Manny Gonzalez, Assistant County 7 Manager with Pinal County. 8 MR. RICH: Court Rich with the Rose Law Group on 9 behalf of Walton Development.10 CHMN. FOREMAN: Okay. So let's talk about11 timing, first off. Do we have some kind of idea when12 you folks would like to file and when you would like to13 have a hearing?14 MR. GELLMAN: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we intend to15 file this Friday, April 6. We have looked at venues and16 dates and times for a hearing. We have found that the17 Holiday Inn in Casa Grande is available. I think the18 Siting Committee has used that venue in the past for a19 couple of transmission lines in that area; and the two20 prospective, I guess, three-day windows that we have are21 from May 16th through May 18th and May 29th through22 May 31st; and I think May 29th is the day after Memorial23 Day.24 So I think we would prefer the 16th through the25 18th, but the 29th through the 31st is available.



1 CHMN. FOREMAN: Okay. All right. Peter will 2 circulate e-mails to the Members of the Committee, and 3 we'll check and see what their availability is on those 4 two windows with an indication that the preference would 5 be for May 16th to May 18th. 6 Now, you've mentioned three-day windows. About 7 how long do you anticipate the hearing will last? 8 MR. GELLMAN: We have anticipated, I guess, 9 about two to three days. We anticipate, I believe, two10 intervenors, Mr. Rich's client and Pinal County. We11 have not heard one way or the other about any other12 entities intending to intervene or not. So that's what13 we expect at this time.14 CHMN. FOREMAN: Mr. Rich, your client was15 Walton --16 MR. RICH: Walton Development, yes.17 CHMN. FOREMAN: And just briefly, could you18 summarize your client's interest in the project?19 MR. RICH: Sure, Your Honor. They are the20 owners of several thousand acres within and nearby the21 study area, the most directly potentially impacted, I22 know, is acreage along Interstate 10 just north of the23 Tortolita substation. They're the owners of nearly all24 of the private land on the east side of the Interstate25 10 right of way, through that vicinity. And then they



1 also own several different parcels of large development 2 land within the City of Eloy, just west of Interstate 3 87. We'll certainly have exhibits that can identify 4 those more. And if I may, I can point on your map to 5 show you kind of -- 6 CHMN. FOREMAN: All right. Well, Exhibit 2 to 7 this hearing is a map that's been provided by the 8 applicant which shows the study area and the proposed 9 alternative routes. If I understand what you indicated10 earlier, there is a parcel of land that your client owns11 that is, it looks like it's directly north of the12 Tortolita substation along the east side?13 MR. RICH: Yes, Your Honor. It's shown in white14 on the map area. That's the private land. They were15 also involved in the planning of much of the State land16 which is depicted in blue through which the orange line,17 for the most part, would at least impact in some18 respect.19 CHMN. FOREMAN: And again, with the reminder20 that this is a procedural conference and not a21 conference where we're going to discuss the merits --22 MR. RICH: Sure.23 CHMN. FOREMAN: -- of the proceeding, can you24 tell me basically what your client's position is going25 to be? Are you opposed to the whole project, opposed to



1 just one of the alternative alignments? 2 MR. RICH: Sure, that's a good question. No, 3 Your Honor, we are in favor of the preferred alignment. 4 CHMN. FOREMAN: So your presentation, if you do 5 present something, would be in favor of the preferred 6 alignment -- 7 MR. RICH: Correct. 8 CHMN. FOREMAN: -- rather than opposing -- 9 MR. RICH: Right, and we are -- I should qualify10 that -- in favor of the preferred alignment and opposed11 to the alternative alignment.12 CHMN. FOREMAN: All right. Very good. We had a13 letter from a Larry Rains, the Deputy City Manager of14 the City of Casa Grande, which has been marked as15 Exhibit 1 for this proceeding, and it indicates that16 Casa Grande has an interest in this matter, which17 apparently is not expressed explicitly in the letter,18 but in an e-mail -- no, I'm sorry. I don't have an19 e-mail on that point. I have an e-mail from Rick Miller20 of the City of Eloy indicating that Eloy supports only21 the alternative that is located east of the Pinal22 Mountains, and I'm assuming that that's the preferred23 route.24 MR. BECK: Yes, Your Honor.25 MR. GELLMAN: Yes.



1 CHMN. FOREMAN: So Mr. Rich, do you anticipate a 2 formal intervention? 3 MR. RICH: Yes, Your Honor. 4 CHMN. FOREMAN: All right. Do you anticipate 5 presenting the testimony of witnesses or presenting 6 exhibits to the Committee? 7 MR. RICH: Your Honor, I would foresee 8 potentially one witness and maybe a handful of exhibits 9 at most.10 CHMN. FOREMAN: And the witness would be?11 MR. RICH: Likely Benjamin Belkin. He is -- I'm12 trying to recall his title. He is essentially the13 director of Arizona for Walton Development, but I'll14 provide you with his formal title.15 CHMN. FOREMAN: And just so I can get some kind16 of idea as far as the timing is concerned, what type of17 testimony is it going to be? Is it just going to18 express the interests of your client in the project, or19 are we going to have expert testimony?20 MR. RICH: No, I think Mr. Belkin would present21 testimony with regard to why he believes the preferred22 alignment is preferable. He likely would talk about23 some of the challenges that he believes that the24 alternative alignment would provide from a future flood25 control, land planning perspective and some impacts it



1 may have on the City of Eloy as well. 2 CHMN. FOREMAN: How long do you anticipate it 3 would take you to present the direct testimony? 4 MR. RICH: I don't think the direct would take 5 more than 45 minutes to an hour, at most. 6 CHMN. FOREMAN: Do you anticipate -- I assume 7 you've been in contact with counsel for the applicants? 8 MR. RICH: We have over the last couple years, 9 we've been in contact and meeting.10 CHMN. FOREMAN: Do you anticipate any11 cross-examination of witnesses that they're likely to12 present?13 MR. RICH: I would like to have that14 opportunity. Given that their preference is the same as15 ours, I don't anticipate that being lengthy; but I would16 like to, depending what they say, retain the right to do17 that, certainly.18 CHMN. FOREMAN: I should have sketched this out19 earlier. How many witnesses do you anticipate20 presenting?21 MR. GELLMAN: Most likely two, Mr. Chairman,22 Mr. Beck, and then from Environmental Planning Group,23 Mr. Kevin Duncan; and we would like to present them in a24 panel, and it would be, I would anticipate our direct25 lasting most of one day at this time. That seems to be



1 pretty typically how our directs usually go. And that 2 would probably be it. 3 CHMN. FOREMAN: Okay. 4 MR. GELLMAN: And I should note for the record, 5 I've been contacted, once we send out the letter 6 notifying certain entities of the prefiling conference, 7 I was contacted by representatives from the City of Casa 8 Grande as well as the City of Coolidge. So I know they 9 have an interest.10 CHMN. FOREMAN: Do you know whether the City of11 Coolidge is planning on any kind of participation in the12 hearing?13 MR. GELLMAN: I would anticipate them submitting14 written comment. I have not heard -- they have not15 expressed any intention of formally intervening.16 CHMN. FOREMAN: Okay. All right. Now,17 Mr. Gonzalez.18 MR. GONZALEZ: Yes, sir.19 CHMN. FOREMAN: You're here from Pinal County?20 MR. GONZALEZ: Yes.21 CHMN. FOREMAN: And do you folks plan to22 formally intervene?23 MR. GONZALEZ: We don't know. I mean if the24 preferred alignment continues, it's our position, we25 prefer that alignment, and we have been in support of



1 Eloy's position as well. So basically, the preferred 2 alignment is what we would like. We would basically 3 like to have kind of like a placeholder intervention in 4 case we need to, but at this point -- 5 CHMN. FOREMAN: Well, I don't know that there's 6 any legal basis for a placeholder intervention. But I 7 can offer you this. If you or someone from Pinal County 8 would like to come be sworn as a witness and testify 9 before the Committee and thereby give members of the10 Committee the opportunity to cross-examine you and ask11 any questions if they have any about your position, I12 would be more than willing to either encourage the13 applicant to call you or do so myself as a Committee's14 witness.15 And I'll extend that same offer to Walton, too.16 That might -- and State Land, if you folks want to do17 that, I was going to get to you folks in a little bit.18 But the manner in which interested parties can19 participate in Line Siting Committee hearings is limited20 by the statute and the procedural rules accompanying it,21 and it's not user-friendly.22 So I'm trying to find a way to make sure that23 people who do have an interest have a full and fair24 opportunity to present what they want to present to the25 Committee so the Committee will be sure and have that



1 available. And we are, of course, interested in what 2 the local municipalities and local developers have as 3 far as thoughts about the project or concern. 4 So let me -- there is a procedure called a 5 limited appearance that would allow you to file a 6 written pleading that would express your position that 7 could be allowed into the evidentiary record. But there 8 also is the opportunity to have somebody come forward 9 and testify, be subject to cross-examination, and that10 way get evidence into the record that can be considered11 by Members of the Committee. So however you would like12 to proceed, let us know.13 If you do intend to intervene, it will be14 important that you file a request to intervene before15 the beginning of the hearing. I think it's ten days or16 two weeks before the beginning of the hearing. And the17 Committee makes the decision about whether or not18 you'll -- well, actually, no. You're a governmental19 agency, so you intervene as of right. So there isn't20 going to be any decision about intervention. If you21 want to intervene, you simply give us a notice of22 intervention, and you'll be accorded that right.23 But if you do, we're going to want to know in24 advance who your witnesses are. If you're going to25 present any documentary evidence, we're going to want to



1 see those documents in advance and have them shared with 2 the other parties so that they'll be prepared to proceed 3 at the time of the hearing. 4 MR. GONZALEZ: Mr. Chairman, that's great. I 5 don't know if you know, but we have hired Mr. Larry 6 Robertson in the past, and Mr. Robertson is actually out 7 of the country right now; and once he gets back, we will 8 sit down with him and decide if we are going to hire him 9 to be our representative legally on this matter. But I10 will pass on this information to him once he gets back.11 CHMN. FOREMAN: He's very familiar with the12 procedures of the Committee, so I'm sure there won't be13 a problem. If you do have a procedural issue that you14 want to raise, you know, feel free to contact Peter or15 me.16 MR. GONZALEZ: Okay. Thank you very much.17 CHMN. FOREMAN: So let's go now to State Land.18 What's your interest, and what is it you would like to19 do with regard to the hearing?20 MR. OJEDA: Our interest is, as you see from the21 map, everything in blue is State Trust Land. Our22 interest is to protect the trust and utilize, like I23 said, a decision that would be, I can't say in the best24 interests of the Trust, but the least impact to the25 Trust in cooperation with the applicant on an alignment



1 that we've been participating with the applicant for 2 quite a few years now on the project. 3 So I don't know what our position is in the 4 process, Mr. Chairman. I have not had an opportunity to 5 consult with counsel in regards to what our 6 participation would be. At the minimum, it would be 7 something in writing for the Committee, and it very well 8 may be something in person as well. I don't know. 9 CHMN. FOREMAN: The Committee is always10 interested in the position of State Land where there is11 State land that's involved in a project. So let me12 encourage you to at the very least give us some sort of13 written letter --14 MR. OJEDA: Absolutely.15 CHMN. FOREMAN: -- or memo that would describe16 with particularity whether you favor or don't favor the17 project, whether you favor or don't favor any of the18 particular alternatives that have been offered and why.19 And that will be very helpful to the Committee, and I20 know they'll be interested.21 MR. OJEDA: We certainly will do that, and22 that's one of the reasons why I'm here today as well, to23 let you know that we will participate in this process.24 CHMN. FOREMAN: And it will be very helpful if25 that written participation could be made available to



1 everybody in advance of the hearing so that everybody 2 will have a chance to review it before then. Again, if 3 you want to -- you have a right to appear under the 4 statute. State Land has an absolute right, just like 5 any other governmental agency. So if you do intend to 6 formally appear, you need to give us some notice in 7 advance. But if you're just wanting to present 8 information, you're not interested in cross-examining 9 witnesses and stuff like that, you'll have to make your10 own decision about what's the most sensible use of the11 resources of your agency.12 But if you are going to be participating in13 other ways, again, we need to have you talking to us in14 advance so that we'll know what it is you're intending.15 And there will be a prehearing conference that16 will be held within a week or so of the hearing dates,17 as soon as we get those set; and at that time we'll be a18 little more precise, or I'll ask you to be a little more19 precise about what it is you want to present and so on.20 All right. We want to make sure that we have21 contact information for you so that when we get down to22 scheduling times and places firmly, we'll be sure that23 you folks know.24 MR. DERSTINE: Mr. Chairman, could I inquire of25 the State what their position is on the proposed routes?



1 CHMN. FOREMAN: Sure. 2 MR. OJEDA: As far as our position, I think 3 we're leaning towards the preferred route, only because 4 there's another big project coming down the line in the 5 future, the SunZia project. We would rather collocate 6 as opposed to having two lines come into State Trust 7 land. I mean I'll be frank and honest. None of the 8 alignments are something that we like. However, you 9 know, they are what they are. We prefer something to10 the, farther west and to the City of Eloy rather than11 Casa Grande, but that is not part of the subject area12 any longer. It was initially. We were in favor of13 those, only just because of the impacts to the trusts.14 We've worked --15 CHMN. FOREMAN: As I've learned in my tenure on16 this Committee, I have yet to have a project that has17 brought joy to the hearts of everyone who has been18 associated with it. Usually what we do is we make the19 least bad decision, and that's what we try to do.20 MR. OJEDA: There's different missions, with all21 due respect, Mr. Foreman, and, you know, it always seems22 to appear that the Commission looks at the blue land as23 all open and not developable, and, you know, that's24 normally where it kind of goes. But we deal with it,25 and we work well with TEP. We have been partners in a



1 lot of projects. 2 CHMN. FOREMAN: Good. As I said, the Committee 3 is always very interested in input from State Land, and 4 we look forward to your thoughts with regard to the 5 project. 6 MR. OJEDA: Absolutely. We're welcome to be 7 here. 8 CHMN. FOREMAN: All right. Now, let's talk 9 about a tour. Is it possible for some of this -- is it10 possible for some of this land to be accessed by vehicle11 where we could get a good look at it?12 MR. BECK: Again, Chairman Foreman, we will have13 a Google Flyover for this project as we have in our14 others to show the various routes. The preferred route,15 especially on the north-south piece east of the16 mountains, is difficult to access. There is a trail17 that goes up along the fence line there that we can18 potentially get in to see portions of that. But the19 physical reality of getting out there and doing a tour,20 at least for the preferred portion on the north-south21 will be somewhat difficult.22 CHMN. FOREMAN: Okay.23 MR. BECK: But we can prepare to have one should24 the Committee choose to do it, and we'll do the best we25 can to get you to see as much as you can.



1 CHMN. FOREMAN: I think it would be valuable to 2 at least plan a tour and give us some options. It may 3 be that sticking to the paved road will be sufficient. 4 It may be that folks would like to take off 5 cross-country and see how far we can go. 6 The Commission appears to have, at least in its 7 last hearing, expressed an interest in having us see 8 in-person alternatives, and so I'm sure that the 9 Committee members will take that into consideration in10 advising me as to whether or not a tour would be11 appropriate.12 And I have a preference for, you know, seeing13 things in the real world where it looks like there will14 be some value to doing that. So please put one15 together. As usual, let's try and schedule it for 8:0016 a.m. the beginning of the second day. Schedule it for17 the morning of the second day of the hearing, and then18 we'll make a decision on the first day of the hearing19 whether we'll take it. And please schedule the Google20 Flyover as early in your presentation as you can.21 MR. BECK: Yes.22 CHMN. FOREMAN: So that we can get a sense of23 whether making an in-person tour would add anything to24 the Google Flyover.25 All right. Are you aware of any other



1 jurisdictional permitting issues that are in process? 2 In other words, are there permits before federal 3 government or state and local agencies or governments 4 that need to be acquired that are in process that we 5 don't know about? 6 MR. GELLMAN: Mr. Chairman, the one thing I will 7 point out, Mr. Beck referred to the north-south portion 8 of the preferred route. Along a portion of that 9 portion, the alignment, I guess, would cover both State10 land and BLM land. And in that portion, we will be11 applying for a 2000-foot corridor or asking for a12 2000-foot corridor in that particular section. So there13 could be a situation that comes up that implicates the14 National Environmental Policy Act should the line have15 to be placed on BLM land, and to what extent I'm not16 sure. But that is a possibility.17 CHMN. FOREMAN: 2000-foot wide corridor down18 that line?19 MR. BECK: Mr. Chairman, specifically on the map20 you have before you, the yellow area is BLM. And in our21 discussions with State Land, they have indicated their22 interest in having us move the alignment over onto the23 BLM for that -- there's a 12-mile stretch. So you're24 going to hear that, both in our testimony and25 potentially to the extent State Land participates in the



1 case. 2 Our issue, we've got issues with that, and we'll 3 bring those up in the hearing. But that is the one area 4 of question, I guess, relative to State Land's position 5 and/or BLM, and we are actually having a meeting with 6 BLM later this week to discuss this project, and they 7 may decide to come forward as an intervenor, possibly. 8 We haven't had any indication at this point that they 9 will; but based on this piece of the project, they may10 want to at least state their case to the Committee.11 CHMN. FOREMAN: Independently of this project12 and independently of all of the projects, past or13 pending, I've been trying to encourage BLM and federal14 agencies to integrate more into the State siting15 processes, because it's my feeling that the siting16 processes ought to work together and parallel rather17 than being consecutive processes. So please extend to18 them my invitation to appear and participate.19 And let me ask the representatives of State20 Land, have you had any contact with BLM?21 MR. OJEDA: Yes, sir, we have had some brief22 discussions with BLM on this project as well as the23 SunZia project.24 CHMN. FOREMAN: Do you anticipate that a25 decision with regard to the placement of this line in



1 this case may have some impact on the SunZia project? 2 MR. OJEDA: Yes. 3 CHMN. FOREMAN: I believe you indicated earlier 4 that your thought was that at least the final portion or 5 part of the final portion of the SunZia project, which 6 as I understand it, is supposed to end at the Pinal 7 Central substation, would be collocated with this 8 project; is that correct? 9 MR. OJEDA: Yes, sir, as far as the collocation10 meaning contiguous easement, so to speak, so they have a11 double-circuit 500 TEP proposal and a single-circuit12 500. So you have three 500-circuit kV lines. So, you13 know, the our thought was the 2000-foot corridor would14 allow some sharing of those utilities within that15 easement area because, if you look, it's probably16 between 500 and 600 feet of right of way.17 CHMN. FOREMAN: So your discussion of the18 desirability of the 2000-foot corridor here contemplates19 not just the placement of this line, but also the20 placement of the SunZia lines; is that correct?21 MR. OJEDA: That's correct.22 CHMN. FOREMAN: It sounds to me like the folks23 who are involved in the SunZia project might have an24 interest in that aspect. Has anyone talked with them25 about the possibility that they might have an interest



1 in the discussions in this case? 2 MR. BECK: We have had ongoing discussions with 3 SunZia. In fact, the SunZia group is a participant in 4 funding for the siting of this line from their interest 5 standpoint, because they're looking at the potential for 6 our line to serve kind of as Phase 1 of their project. 7 So I don't think the decision has been made that 8 there truly will be two additional 500s in addition to 9 ours. It could be the one that TEP is proposing jointly10 with SunZia and just one as the second future line for11 them.12 CHMN. FOREMAN: Would one or both of you please13 communicate with the people who are involved in the14 SunZia project and tell them that I would appreciate15 their thoughts with regard to this project, specifically16 placement of the conductors, the corridor width, and, of17 course, the placement of the corridor vis-a-vis State18 Land and BLM along there.19 MR. BECK: Yes, sir.20 MR. OJEDA: Yes, sir.21 CHMN. FOREMAN: I'm sure that the Members of the22 Committee would be interested in the potential impact of23 the decision in this case on a potentially future24 project. So I think we ought to at least give them the25 opportunity to participate in this hearing, and I guess



1 the sooner we could hear back on that, the better. 2 MR. BECK: Yes. 3 CHMN. FOREMAN: Well, that could make things 4 very interesting. 5 So are there any other jurisdictional issues 6 associated with this case that anybody is aware of? 7 MR. GELLMAN: No. 8 MR. BECK: I guess, Mr. Chairman, one thing that 9 I probably need to bring up at this point is relative to10 the State land issue, because of the timing involved in11 getting permitting for State land, TEP is considering12 making application within probably this month for the13 preferred route with the understanding that it doesn't14 go forward unless it gets approved in the CEC process.15 But just from a timing perspective, we're anticipating16 making that application so they can start their17 processing of the application.18 And I guess, I don't know if you can give19 feedback on a position relative -- does that cause you20 any concern if we're in that process?21 CHMN. FOREMAN: No. The statute is, as I've22 said many times in many different ways, an interesting23 statute, and it has a number of curious aspects.24 State Land used to be, used to have a25 representative on the Committee, as I think I've talked



1 to people at the State Land Department before. 2 MR. OJEDA: Yes, sir. 3 CHMN. FOREMAN: I don't understand why State 4 Land does not still have a representative on the 5 Committee. But we play the cards that we are dealt. 6 State Land has a constitutional responsibility 7 with regard to dealing with its land, the land in its 8 trust or trusts. And no one has tested the question of 9 whether or not the decision with regard to a CEC10 supersedes a decision by State Land or whether State11 Land supersedes a decision by the Committee, confirmed12 or modified by the Commission, with regard to the siting13 of a transmission line.14 My own thought is because the siting authority15 of the Committee and the Commission is statutory and the16 decision with regard to State Land is constitutional, at17 least in its basis, there's a very strong argument that18 you can make that State Land takes precedence.19 So no one wants to go through one of these20 hearings for nothing. If State Land has a problem with21 a project, the Committee would like to hear about it22 before it sheds blood over the placement of a line.23 So not only -- I'm glad you're doing it, and we24 would appreciate it very much if we could have a25 response by the time of the hearing as to what State



1 Land's position is. 2 As I said much earlier on, we don't make people 3 happy at these hearings. We understand that's just part 4 of the job. So it's important that we do as little 5 violence to our own psyches and the psyches of the 6 people who are around these projects as possible, and I 7 can't think of anything that would be more traumatic 8 than making a difficult decision that turns out to be 9 utterly meaningless.10 So let us know as soon as you can --11 MR. OJEDA: Absolutely.12 CHMN. FOREMAN: -- what your position is on it,13 and it will be very helpful. I think I'm beginning to14 sense from what you've said and from what I understand15 of the magnitude of the SunZia project that it sounds16 like the two of these things need to be considered17 together, both from the Committee's perspective, but18 also from State Land's perspective. So any help you can19 give us there, that would be great.20 MR. OJEDA: Absolutely.21 CHMN. FOREMAN: All right. Are there other22 issues then we need to address?23 MR. GELLMAN: Mr. Chairman, just regarding24 notice, obviously we'll go through the same process of25 putting together a Notice of Hearing and publishing in



1 the newspaper. We also had one copy of the proposed 2 sign and sign locations that I've just handed you. The 3 proposed sign itself is pretty much in the same format 4 that we've done in the past, and then the other document 5 is a map of proposed locations of where TEP would put 6 signs notifying the public of hearings. 7 CHMN. FOREMAN: Okay. 8 MR. GELLMAN: But we'll basically do the same 9 process we've done in past cases. We'll also send a10 letter notifying interested parties, entities that were11 involved in the stakeholder process of when the hearings12 will take place and the location of those hearings.13 CHMN. FOREMAN: All right. We'll mark the14 proposed notice as Exhibit 3, and the map showing15 proposed locations of notices Exhibit 4.16 (Exhibits 3 and 4 were marked for17 identification.)18 CHMN. FOREMAN: I think the only change I would19 make in what you proposed is the May 17 start time which20 I think we'll make 8:00 because of the time of the year21 and the heat. If we're going to go on a tour, I would22 want to get started at 8:00. And we'll hope that the23 May 16th through 18th time works out.24 All right. Other issues?25 MR. GELLMAN: I don't believe there are any



1 others. As far as we intend to, again, do what we've 2 typically done in these cases, which is submit prefiled 3 testimony and a PowerPoint in advance to the other 4 parties so they will have ample opportunity to review, 5 and pretty much what we've done in past hearings we 6 intend to do in this one. 7 CHMN. FOREMAN: Okay. I will generate the same 8 sort of prehearing procedural order, and I'll send it 9 around to all of you so that you'll know what it is will10 be expected of you if you do decide to intervene as a11 party.12 I can't think of anything else that we need to13 address here.14 MR. DERSTINE: Mr. Chairman, could I just note15 for the record that before State Land gets too giddy16 about throwing its constitutional weight around, there's17 probably some good arguments why the Siting Committee's18 decision might take precedence over State Land's19 preferences; and as you said, the issue is untested.20 CHMN. FOREMAN: The issue is untested, and I was21 not meaning to offer an advisory opinion.22 MR. OJEDA: I didn't know we were getting giddy.23 CHMN. FOREMAN: But I assume you would agree24 that it is because of the constitutional provision25 something that we need to take seriously.



1 MR. DERSTINE: Absolutely. 2 CHMN. FOREMAN: All right. Very good. 3 Hopefully, I won't have to rule on it, by the way. 4 If that's all, unless there are other questions 5 from anybody, we are adjourned. 6 MR. DERSTINE: Thank you. 7 MR. GELLMAN: Thank you. 8 MR. RICH: Thank you. 9 (The prefiling conference concluded at 10:48 a.m.)10111213141516171819202122232425



1 STATE OF ARIZONA ) ) ss. 2 COUNTY OF MARICOPA ) 3 4 5 6 7 I, GARY W. HILL, Certified Reporter No. 50812 8 for the State of Arizona, do hereby certify that the 9 foregoing printed pages constitute a full, true and10 accurate transcript of the proceedings had in the11 foregoing matter, all done to the best of my skill and12 ability.1314 WITNESS my hand this 3rd day of April, 2012.1516171819 GARY W. HILL, RPR, CRR Certified Reporter20 Certificate No. 508122122232425


City of '.,Casa Grande PAD / CPA

MAR ii O 2012

RECEIVED

March 28,2012

EXHIBIT ""

j I ~___~__r'P E.FI L\ NG

Peter MaclIvaineAssistant to ChairmanState of Arizona Power Plant andTransmission Line Siting Committee .PACRD/CPA1275 W. Washington st.Phoenix, AZ 85007

RE: Proposed Tucson Electric Power 500kV line

Dear Mr. MaclIvaine:

The City of Casa Grande is ïn receipt of the TEP map. with the proposed line siting for the 500kVline from pinal Substation down to Tortolita Substation near the Tucson area. Thank you for theopportuníty to review the map and to offer any comments. The line siting is outside the city'splanning jurisdiction. Casa Grande's planning boundary to the east ends along the Eleven MileCorner Road. The city does not have any comments to offer at this time.

c§[~~i-'Larry RainsDeputy City Manager

.r- ',. ; . . ..' :

',.: ' . ,'o' :.. :', ','" .. ," ",,: ..

•• .-0: •••••. ' ••

,.. ,' .~.:.. ' " : ,:/ :" ':.~':'.:'•':' i:', '. ., ~'" • ,," ;'.: ::',,:' . . . .... -; .~", '.i 'Ó. ,. "o;.: . " ~'::. ':. . . ; • '.. ¡•

--o,, ':,' ,', • 'I >.::~~...~. :_':.-: ',~ .: .

Telephone: 520/421-8600 - Telefacsimile: 520/421-8602 - TDD: 520/421-8623City Hall: 510 East Florence Boulevard - Casa Grande, Arizona 85122

R6 E

EXHIBIT("(

500kV Transmission Line Project

Ownership and Jurisdictionwith Alternative Routes

Figure 1

...~ El!!LEGEND

Project Features

c::J Project Study Area

.,.., Preferred Route (Route 1)

~ Route Segment lA

~ Alternative Route (Route 2)

NottI: Rou/tls ha'ltl btltln shifttId for graphical purpoSllS

Land Ownership and Jurisdictionc=J Bureau of Land Management

c=J Bureau of Reclamation

.. Department of Defense

C=:J State Trust

~StatePark

Dprivate

E::J City of Casa Grande

D City of Coolidge

c=J City of Eloy

Utilities

à Substation

&. Planned Substation

/'.../ SOOkV Transmission Line

/'.../ 230kV Transmission Line

/V 138kV Transmission Line

A/ 11SkV Transmission Line

,",,, Planned SOOkV Transmission Line /V Pipeline

Reference Features

D Township and Range

Section

D County Boundary

r '-1Jurisdictional Boundary

:¡ç,;, Interstate

/'../ Highway

Road

CitylTown

'1'" -.... Airport/Heliport

/" •./ Railroad

River

, Wash

Canal

Reservoir':"..:

AScale = 1:186,000

Contour Interval = 50 FeetMarch 2012

Sou,~u; .r:.:ona St.l. Lana O.p .. tmont. 2ODS. Ponal Co~nt~. 20". Crt~ or Cua Grana •. 2003. C~y o! Eloy200&. Crly o! Coo~dg •. 200&. Tc....n ot Moron~. 2008. St,utMop US .... ESRI. 2007. EPG. 2008. POWERrnoppc_rrrnlp.pboll5.'Om o 2007 PIaU•. A O".¡..,on ot In. MoGr.""'¡"¡,R Compan .....

NOTICE OFPROJECT HEARING

A state siting hearing for the Pinal Central-Tortolita 500kVTransmission Line Project in this area wiU be held at:

9:30 a.m., May 16, 2012«.;"A ~8:30 a.m., May 17,2012

l and9:00 a.m., May 18, 2012

attbeHoliday Inn Casa Grande

777 N. Pinal Ave. Casa Grande, AZ 85122

Public comment wiU be takenat the hearing as weU as at6:00 p.m. on May 16, 2012.

For more information, visit theTucson Electric Power Company

website at tep.com,or caU (888) 751-0145.

A UniSource Energy Company

fln"H\111,-

j ""'16•1011 9!UI

15

Sign Number Latitude* Longitude* Notes

1 472774.39 3601446.69

2 472383.58 3603010.34

3 475239.41 3604374.82

4 475435.07 3608774.26

5 475433.83 3608792.31

6 475564.42 3631309.84

7 475564.58 3631332.66

8 475577.67 3634555.14

9 468017.52 3637899.58

10 456617.23 3638071.17

11 456614.15 3638028.43

12 451808.74 3636859.35

13 451794.35 3636858.82

14 450193.88 3636846.27

15 450178.79 3636844.84

16 446925.68 3637121.13 Facing West

17 452215.80 3631617.34 Facing South

18 452226.84 3631594.78 Facing West

19 454968.86 3631564.07

20 454968.93 3631571.62

21 460078.91 3630042.81

22 460075.05 3630042.83

23 460127.67 3626675.04

24 460151.10 3626677.56

25 460076.42 3619747.01

26 459327.46 3618808.29

27 459527.09 3616990.27

28 459540.16 3616978.00

29 463044.81 3613477.11

30 467225.64 3613438.02

31 469186.90 3613436.77 Facing East

32 469194.27 3613408.21 Facing North

33 469221.38 3610587.54 Faci ng South

34 469230.26 3607057.82

35 469226.07 3607028.22

36 472384.61 3605582.94

37 472385.00 3605568.78

*NAD 83 UTM Zone 12N

till I S

17 20·~1~8==~·~1~9==========~

2324

~I

I"_',' I· n "1"-1" $I.t. P'J~k

33•

Created by: UA50493 on 811612011

,.

76

5:4

'I ".

~I¡()O¡PoMOUN/AIN

CEC SIGN LOCATIONSPinal Central to Tortolita 500kV Project

Legend_ Preferred Route

- Alternative B

- Optional Link

Sign Location

.... Substations

Land Ownership

Bureau of Land Management

Dept. of Defense

Fish and Wildlife Service

Forest Service

Local or State Parks

National Park Service,..~~ ....RpE:~T~~

.. R., 'y hl q-

Other

Private

State Trust

Tribal Lands

o 0.5 5__ IC=- __ C:::==- __ C:::=:::JIMiles

2 3 4

This map is for general planning purposes only.TEP and UniSource makes no warranty of its accuracy

A UniSource Energy Company

Filepalh: IITuswparC02~andIProjectsIPinaICentral_ TortolitaISign_Locations. mxd

1 before the arizona power plant and transmission … · 2019. 5. 20. · 16 casa grande has an...

Documents