HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-02-06 Regular Meeting•
• MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
LA PORTE CITY COM_MISSIOPd, LA PORTE, TEXAS
FEBRUARY 6, 1980
7:00 P.M.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION PRESENT: Mayor J. J. Meza;
Commissioners John Tomerlin, I. J. Kibodeaux, Virginia Cline, and
Tom C. Simons.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ABSENT: None.
OTHER CITY OFFICIALS PRESENT: J. R. Hudgens, City Administrator;
Margie Goyen, City Clerk; Knox Askins, City Attorney; H. F. Freeman,
Chief of Police; Jack Burks, Director of Public Works; Stan Sherwood,
Director of Parks and Recreation; Joe Sease,Fire Chief; Paul Hicken-
• bottom, Assistant Fire T'Iarshal.
OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Wyatt, Houston Lighting & Power Company;
Dave Corbin, Busch, Hutchison & Associates; Celeste Peterson,
Century 21; and Betsy Webber, La Porte Bayshore Sun; Robert Daniel.
PRESIDING: Mayor J. J. Meza.
+ + +
1. CALL TO OR'D'ER - Mayor Meza called the meeting to order.
+ + +
2. INVOCATION - Mayor Meza gave the invocation.
+ + +
•
• •
• Regular Meeting 2/6/80 2
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING - JANUARY 23, 1980 -
Motion by Commissioner Cline, seconded by Commissioner Tomerlin
to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 23, 1980.
Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tomerlin, Kibodeaux, Cline, and Simons.
NAYS: None.
+ + +
4. CONSIDER APPROVING PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 915-P - ORDINANCE
GRANTING A PERMIT AND APPROVING THE PIPELINE APPLICATION OF
ENTERPRISE PETROCHEMICAL COMPANY AND HERCULES INCORPORATED,
TO CONSTRUCT A FOUR-INCH NOMINAL DIAMETER PETROLEUM AND OTHER
HYDROCARBON BY=PRODUCTS PIPELINE - After the proposed ordinance
was read in full, motion by Commissioner Simons, seconded by
Commissioner Cline to approve Ordinance 915-P as read. Motion
carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Kibodeaux, Cline, and Simons.
• NAYS: None.
ABSTAINED: Commissioner Tomerlin.
CAPT-ION: AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A PERMIT UNDER SECTION 18-A-3
OF ORDINANCE NO. 915, "PIPELINE TRANSPORTATION", BEING CHAPTER
18-A OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS;
AND APPROVING THE APPLICATION OF ENTERPRISE PETROCHEMICAL COMPANY
AND HERCULES INCORPORATED, DATED NOVEMBER 20, 1979, TO CONSTRUCT
A FOUR-INCH (4") NOMINAL DIAMETER PETROLEUM AND OTHER HYDROCARBON
BY-PRODUCTS PIPELINE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF.
+ + +
.7
• •
• Regular Meeting 2/6/80 3
5. CONSIDER APPROVING PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 118.4 - ORDINANCE
CALLING THE REGULAR ANNUAL ELECTION; CALLING A RUN-OFF, IF
NECESSARY; DESIGNATING ELECTION PRECINCTS AND POLLING PLACES;
PROVIDING FOR THE USE OF VOTING MACHINES; APPOINTING ELECTION
OFFICIALS; PROVIDING FOR ABSENTEE VOTING; PROVIDING FOR RETURN
AND CANVASS; PROVIDING FOR FILING DEADLINE AND FEES; PROVIDING
FOR JOINT ELECTION WITH LA PORTE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT -
After the proposed ordinance was read in full, it was moved by
Commissioner Tomerlin to approve Ordinance No. 1184 subject to
entry of names of election officials.
Commissioner Cline voiced concern over entry of names. She was
of the opinion that the names of the election officials should
have been decided before the ordinance was prepared.
Commissioner Tomerlin stated that there was a timing problem
and asked if the School had the same period of requirement?
The Attorney stated that the School usually called their election
at their meeting in February.
Commissioner Cline stated that she understood the motion, but
voiced concern if there was a problem with the names of the
• election judges, then where would that leave the City on the
passage of the ordinance?
Commissioner Tomerlin stated that he could amend the motion that
the names could be worked out with the School District itself;
and further suggested that whatever names were proposed that the
the full Commission review those names. If there is a problem,
then get back with the School.
The Attorney stated that the Ordinance couldn't be published
until the names had been filled in.
Mayor Meza stated that the School had been using Lou Lawler
as judge, and Lorraine Miller as alternate judge; Janet Graves
at Baker with Cecile Edwards as an alternate judge. They have
not confirmed these names, but they are the ones proposed.
Commissioner Cline noted that Lou Lawler had conducted the
absentee voting for the past couple of years.
Commissioner Tomerlin asked if the meeting should be recessed
to call Superintendent Williams? The Attorney stated that the
City Clerk had checked with the School and they have not appointed
the judges yet, but the names the Mayor had named were the tentative
ones.
•
•
•
Regular Meeting 2/6/80
5. CONSIDER APPROVING PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 1184 - ORDINANCE
CALLING THE REGULAR ANNUAL ELECTION (CONTINUED)
Commissioner Tomerlin stated that he had no problems with the
names proposed.
Commissioner Cline stated that she didn't think that Lorraine
Miller was available to be a judge because of her business.
There was a brief discussion regarding the names of some of
the people that had been working the elections the past few
years: Nadine Jones, Audrey White, Ruby Phillips; The fact
that clerks are normally left to the discretion of the judge
and the fact that Mrs. Jones had helped as absentee clerk;
and problems caused due to illness and accidents to those who
had been appointed as judges and alternate judges.
•
The Attorney suggested that the Commission might consider
calling a special meeting prior to work shop on the 13th of
February, to fill in the names of the judges and alternates
and the ordinance could be passed as is now so that the
candidates could start filing. He further stated that the
ordinance would not have to be published for several weeks.
The only pressing matter, if pressing, would be opening for
filing, which normally is done 30 days before the deadline,
but that is not statutory.
It was determined that the School Board would be meeting on
Tuesday, February 12, 1980, and the appointment of the judges
by the School would be resolved.
Commissioner Cline voiced concern over how the judges were being
appointed, either collectively with the School Board, or just
appointing them.
Commissioner Tomerlin amended his motion to read: Approve
Ordinance No. 1184 subject to consultation with the High
School on passage of the names of the judges and alternates
and a special meeting be held immediately prior to work shop
on February 13th. Commissioner Cline seconded by motion.
Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tomerlin, Kibodeaux, Cline, and Simons.
NAYS: None.
+ + +
• Regular Meeting 2/6/80 5
6. CONSIDER APPROVING PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 1185 - ORDINANCE
REQUIRING THE HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY TO FILE MODIFIED
RATE SCHEDULES TO BE CHARGED IN THE CITY OF LA PORTE; PROVIDING
FOR RATE SCHEDULES; PROVIDING CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH SUCH RATE
SCHEDULES MAY BE CHANGED, MODIFIED, AMENDED OR WITHDRAWN;
REPEALING ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR PART THEREOF WHICH MAY BE IN
CONFLICT HEREWITH - The Attorney read the proposed ordinance in
full.
Mayor D4eza asked for any further discussion.
Commissioner Cline asked how much this would raise the light
bill?
Mr. Jim Wyatt stated that it would be insignificant amount over
what we are paying now. System wide would be approximately 10~.
Mayor Meza stated that Houston Lighting & Power Company stated
in their letter that if any lower rates were allowed to any other
city, then those rates would be made effective in La Porte.
Mr. Wyatt stated that it was cited in the ordinance that
• La Porte rates would not be higher than any other municipality.
It was moved by Commissioner Cline, seconded by Commissioner
Simons to approve Ordinance No. 1185 as read. Motion carried
by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tomerlin, Kibodeaux, Cline, and Simons.
NAYS: None.
+ + +
7. RATIFY AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND
AUTHORIZING ADVERTTISING FO'R'BIDS F'O'R SANITARY 'SEWER' LINE IN
FAIRMONT PARK - Motion by Commissioner Kibodeaux, seconded by
Commissioner Simons to ratify authorizing plans and specifications
and authorizing advertising for bids for sanitary sewer line in
Fairmont Park. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tomerlin, Kibodeaux, Cline, and Simons.
NAYS: None.
+ + +
•
• Regular Meeting 2/6/80 6
8. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZATION FOR ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR
NUTRITION CENTER FURNISHINGS - The Administrator stated that
lists had been distributed to the officials naming the requested
furnishings for the Nutrition Center. The Administrator stated
that he had asked that the television be placed on the list, but
after talking to Mr. Sherwood and staff members, felt that he had
erred in requesting that the television be on the list because
that is the purpose for the center, to get the Seniors away from
television.
Commissioner Simons stated that there had been an oversight.
Since the Senior would be away from the Clinic down stairs,
he felt that we needed a good first aid kit, portable oxygen
kit and a dish washer.
There was a brief discussion regarding whether or not these
items could be purchased with the $475.00 proposed for the television.
The Administrator stated that all of these prices were estimates.
We would not know until the actual bids came in. After the bids
are accepted, but before the bids are awarded, an appropriation
can be made at that time based on the actual cost.
• Motion by Commissioner Tomerlin, seconded by Commissioner Simons
to authorize advertising for bids for Nutrition Center Furnishings
excluding the television and in its place, a first aid kit, a
portable oxygen kit and a dish washer. A copy of all the furnishing
needs is attached and made a part of these minutes. Motion carried
by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tomerlin, Kibodeaux, Cline, and Simons.
NAYS: None.
+ + +
9. DISCUSS PROPOSED P.P.G. EXPANSION - MRS. CELESTE PETERSON -
Mrs. Celeste Peterson was recognized and addressed the
Commission regarding her concern of the operations of
P.P.G. Industries and the fact that the deadly gas, phosgene,
is being produced in close proximity to heavily traveled streets,
densely populated residential subdivisions and to the business
section of La Porte.
Mrs. Peterson expressed her appreciation to the importance of
industry to our community and the fact that we encourage and
solicit industrial expansion.
•
• •
• Regular Meeting 2/6/80 7
9. DISCUSS PROPOSED P.P.G. EXPANSION - MRS. CELESTE PETERSON (CONTD.)
Mrs. Peterson stated that she had talked with representatives
of P.P.G. and they stated that they had not increased the
production of phosgene and had no plans for expansion of their
phosgene facilities. However they did confirm their option to
purchase a large tract of land adjoining their present facilities.
Mrs. Peterson requested that the City be alert to any permit
requests from P.P.G. and that a public hearing be held for any
permit requests so that the citizens might employ expertise to
evaluate such requests. Further stating that the strength of
our economy is secondary to the safety of our citizens, and
asked that the City monitor this operation.
Commissioner Simons stated that we were looking into a monitoring
system at this time.
Commissioner Tomerlin asked if we had talked with P.P.G.about
their monitoring system.
The Assistant Fire Marshal stated that the previous problems
• had been with Chemetron. P.P.G. has spent a great deal to
improve the monitoring system.
The Fire Chief stated that we have been checking reports of
phosgene leaks.
Mayor Meza asked how dangerous was phosgene?
The Fire Chief stated that you could be gaked and not be
ill for 16 to 24 hours later and that it causes chemical
pneumonia; phosgene should be consider hazardous chemical.
The manufacturing of phosgene is not as hazardous as using.
The question was asked how is phosgene use? It was stated
that you mix phosgene molecules with another molecule to make
finished products.
There was a discussion regarding permits and making the citizens
aware when a request would be made for a permit.
The Attorney stated that the permits would come from the
State and not the City. Permits could be issued and we not
be aware of it. However, building permits would have to be
issued by the City.
•
• •
• Regular Meeting 2/6/80 8
9. DISCUSS PROPOSED P.P.G. EXPANSION - MRS. CELESTE PETERSON (CONTD.)
The Attorney stated that if we were going to limit the operation,
it should be done now.
Commissioner Tomerlin asked that the Fire Chief and Fire Marshal
get a daily operation sheet and see what kind of outside monitoring
that P.P.G. has.
It was determined that we should not be anti-industry, but the
safety of our citizens was foremost.
The Attorney suggested that the Commission might want to do an
ordinance requiring P.P.G. to be tied into the City's police
alarms system to eliminate human error.
+ + +
10. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS - Chief Freeman stated that on February 4,
1980, Sammy Jacobs was honored by the 100 Club as officer of
• the year for his civic activities and youth activities.
Motion by Commissioner Cline, seconded by Commissioner Tomerlin
that a Certificate of Appreciation be given to Sammy Jacobs.
Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tomerlin, Kibodeaux, Cline, and Simons.
NAYS: None.
B.
The City Attorney stated that there were numerous portable
signs in the City that were causing problems. They are in
violation of City ordinances when they on public rights-of-ways
and blinking signs are in violation to state law.
Some cities are outlawing portable signs; some limit to three
weeks to advertise a new business.
There was a brief discussion regarding the signs looking trashy
as well as blocking visibility at intersections.
The Attorney will obtain ordinances from some of the surrounding
cities such as Friendswood, Webster and Deer Park.
C. The Administrator stated that we are approaching completion
• of the Nutrition Center, however there is a delay with the elevator.
There might be an override on the cost of $2,500 to $3,000 on a
$90,000 project.
+ + +
•
• Regular Meeting 2/6/80 9
11. COUNCIL ACTION - A. Commissioner Cline asked about the
status of the study by A & M on the Planning and Zoning Ordinance.
The Administrator stated that A & M was ready to come back and
meet with the officials.
Commissioner Cline stated that she felt that it was a document
that needed to be read section by section and piece by piece;
felt it should be at work shop and it would be a lengthy meeting.
B. Commissioner Simons stated that he had been approached by
members of the Fire Department to buy a Jaws of Life to get
people out of cars, planes, etc.
Commissioner Cline stated that the cost of $8,500 (approximate)
should be budgeted.
Commissioner Simons felt that the need for it was now, if one
life were saved, it would pay for itself; the men have been
trained at A & M to use one.
The Administrator stated that there was $100,000 in Revenue
• Sharing and the funds could be appropriated from that fund.
It was moved by Commissioner Simons, seconded by Commissioner
Kibodeaux to authorize preparation of plans and specifications,
authorize advertising and accepting of bids for one Jaws of Life
and the funds to be appropriated from the Revenue Sharing Fund.
Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tomerlin, Kibodeaux, Cline, and Simons.
NAYS: None.
C. Mayor Meza stated that the officials had received an invita-
tion to the Nassau Bay Open House at their new building on
Sunday, February 10, 1980, at 2:00 P.M.
+ + +
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION - V.A.T.S. - ARTICLE 6252-17 - SECTION 2 -
(E), (F), AND (G) - (LEGAL, LAND AC~UISITTON AND PERSONNEL) -
None.
• + + +
~ ~
• Regular Meeting 2/6/80 10
13. ADJOURNMENT - Motion by Commissioner Simons, seconded by
Commissioner Kibodeaux that the meeting adjourn. Motion carried
by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tomerlin, Kibodeaux, Cline, and Simons.
NAYS: None.
The meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M.
U
Margie oyen, Ci y erk
Passed and Approved this the
20th day of February, 1980.
•
~-
J. J. Meza, Mayor
•
From the Offi~of the Fire Marshal •
CITY of LA PoRTE
INTEROFFICE MEN'~ORANDUM
T0: JIM HUDGENS, CITY ADMINISTRATOR DATE: 2-6-80
FROM: PAUL~R. HICKENBOTTOM, ASSISTANT FIRE MARSHAL
SUBJECT: PIPELINE CORRIDORS WITHIN. LA PORTE CORPORATE CITY LIMITS
AS PER THE COMMISSIONS REQUEST, I HAVE BEEN COMPILING INFORMATION
REGARDING THE PIPELINES WHICH ARE IN THE CORPORATE CITY LIMITS OF LA PORTE.
THERE HAVE BEEN TWENTY-ONE (21~ PIPELINES PLACED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS
AS OF THIS DATE SINCE ORDINANCE #915 WAS ADOPTED IN 1972. I AM ALSO TP.YING
TO ESTIMATE HOW MANY PIPELINES WERE IN EXISTANCE PRIOR TO THE PASSAGE OF
THIS ORDINANCE.
ON FEBRUARY 1, 1980, I MET WITH EXXON PIPELINE OFFICIALS RON DOLD,
BRUCE MALAER AND ROCKY WILLIAMS AT THEIR OFFICE ON FAIRMONT HERE IN LA PORTE.
THEY INDICATED THE INFORMATION I WAS ASKING FOR IS OBTAINABLE, BUT MORE
COMPLICATED THAN I HAD ORIGINALLY THOUGHT. FOR EXAMPLE: EXXON HAS
CORRIDORS THAT THEY OWN AND CONTROL WITH OTHER COMPANIES PIPELINES IN THEM,
AND EASEMENTS WITH THEIR PIPELINES IN THEM. THEY INDICATE THIS IS TRUE IN
OTHER COMPANIES.
THIRTEEN C13~ COMPANIES HAVE BEEN CONTACTED WHICH INDICATED THEY
WOULD HELP IN COMPILING A MASTER PLAN OF THE PIPELINES THEIR COMPANIES
• HAVE IN LA PORTE. EACH OF THE COMPANIES, KNOWN TO HAVE PIPELINES WITHIN
LA PORTE CORPORATE CITY LIMITS, WILL BE SENT A CITY MAP ON WHICH THEIR
COMPANY .WILL PLACE .ALL PIPELINES, CORRIDORS, AND EASEMENTS UNDER THEIR
DIRECT CONTROL. ONCE THESE MAPS HAVE BEEN RETURNED, OVERLAYS FOR EACH
INDICATED COMPANY CAN BE MADE TO SHOW ONE OR ALL THE COMPANIES WHO HAVE
PIPELINES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. THESE COMPANIES HAVE ALSO BEEN ASKED TO
INDICATE THE SIZE OF THE PIPELINES, PRODUCT TRANSPORTED, AND THE APPROXIMATE
LENGTH OF TIME THE LINE HAS BEEN IN THE GROUND.
THE COMMISSION ALSO QUESTIONED THE NUMBER OF PIPELINES THAT CAN
BE PLACED PER CORRIDOR. AFTER TALKING TO THE EXXON OFFICIALS, IT HAS BEEN
DETERMINED THAT THERE IS NO SET STANDARD AS TO HOW MANY LINES CAN BE
ESTABLISHED PER CORRIDOR. EXAMPLE: IF EXXON PUTS TWO OR MORE LINES IN THE
GROUND AT ONE TIME, UNDER THEIR GUIDELINES, THE LINES ARE PLACED ONE FOOT
APART. IF THEY PUT TWO OR MORE LINES IN THE GROUND NEXT TO EXISTING LINES,
THEY PLACE THE FIRST LINE TWO TO THREE FEET FROM THE EXISTING LINE, AND THE
REMAINIP~G LINES ONE FOOT APART. ACCORDING TO THE EXXON OFFICIALS, EACH
COMPANY HAS THEIR OWN SET OF GUIDELINES, EXCEPT WHEN THE LINES ARE PLACED
WITHIN AN EXXON CORRIDOR OR EASEMENT, THEN THEY MUST FOLLOW EXXON'S
GUIDELINES. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DOES HAVE A BLANKET TYPE
GUIDELINE ON THE PLACEMENT OF GASEOUS AND LIQUID PRODUCTS PIPELINES. I DO
NOT HAVE A COPY OF THIS GUIDELINE, BUT WILL CALL AND REQUEST THAT A COPY BE
SENT TO ME.
I WILL KEEP YOU INFORMED AS TO THE .PROGRESS OF THIS PROJECT AND
WILL GIVE YOU A DETAILED REPORT UPON MY COMPLETION.
•
•
•
•
•
~to~E~ ~T ~ats orz
Oil, Gas & Mineral
Lease Acquisitions
and Right of Way
Services
Mr. J. L. Burke
Director of Public Works
City of LaPorte
P. 0. Box 115
LaPorte, Texas 77571
Dear Mr. Burke:
530 NORTH BELT EAST, SUITE 216
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77060
November 20, 1979
Houston, Texas
(713) 931-0892
Lafayette, Louisiana
(318) 235-4567
Re: Enterprise Petrochemical Company and Hercules
Incorporated proposed four inch (4") Bayport
Pipeline, Harris County, Texas
Enterprise Petrochemical Company and Hercules Incorporated propose 'to construct
a four inch (4") nominal diameter pipeline as indicated on the enclosed alignment
sheets BP-101 and BP-102, prepared by Enterprise and Hercules; said pipeline to be
constructed for the purpose of transporting petroleum and other hydrocarbon by-products.
On behalf of Enterprise and Hercules, I ~,v~uld, therefore, respectfully request that the
City of LaPorte grant an appropriate license or permit for the installation, maintenance,
inspection and repair of this proposed line by passage of an appropriate City Ordinance.
This line is to be constructed in accordance with the specifications of the State
of Texas and U. S. Departments of Transportation. The line will also comply with ~he
requirements of City of LaPorte Ordinance No. 915, dated March 6, 1972, relating to
Pipeline Transportation. It will be buried at a min~.rrnmt depth of four feet (4') from
natural ground level within the corporate limits of the City of LaPorte except where it
crosses under existing or proposed city streets at which point it will be buried at a
minimum depth of six feet (6') as indicated on the typical plan-profile enclosed. Some
of the more pertinent characteristics of the line are as follows:
5LX-42 Pipe
Outside diameter - 4.50 inches
Maximt~n operating pressure - 2,096 p.s.i.g.
Minimum test pressure - 2, 621 p. s. i. g.
blaximLUn operating temperature - 100°F
Your early consideration of this request will be` greatly appreciated and if any
additional data should be required, please call me at telephone number 931-0892 here
in Houston.
Very y yours, /_ ; /~-
'`:.~Jalues E. Lane' ~ ~ ,~` / ~~~_
-`-~~~
Stokes & Watson ` ~ ''
Representing Enterprise Petrochemical
Company and Hercules Incorporated
JEW: set
enc.
HARRIS COUNTY,TEXA S
JOHNSON HUNTER A-35
4R
~ Cl T Y OF L A PO R TE, R/VY
o
y~
1
_o- Q I ~
,
6~~
-~ ~~
3 o
~
~s~ ~, MOB/L O I L
°°~~f
~ CORPORATION
~,
r ,~
~
O ,o
D ~~ o
~~
°~
PORT AUTHOR/ TY a
°s
. a
moo.
~
OF HOUSTON Q
~
Bo
I p l y.O p^/
~~'
,
`
{
I
~
P
\\
/'
'
~ ~~
~~ 1
-~1
~
Scale ~ t°= 20'
•
p
~ i
O MINIMUM PIPE SPECIFICATIONS
3 O
p ~
~ O
O
3 O
0 CARRIER PIPE ~
~~
"
O
~ ~ O
~ \ O 4,900
O.D. x .158
W.T. (7.24 tDc/ft.)
~
~ ~
~
~ X-42 Pip•
i > a Mox. Operating Preceure X2,098 P.5.1.8.
~c ~ Q m ,~ ~ Min. Teet Preecure~ 2,821 P. 5.1 .8.
O ~ O W O W Min. Yie ld Strengt h+ 42,000 P. S. 1.
~
4 ~ ~
C
4
Q ~ Q
~
M a'
O ~
p
.
~ ~ ~
a a ~
4'Min. ~ ~ ~
6'Min.
4 Min.
~ 4„
Free Stress Bend 69 ~- F/a / Pi e
T. B. M - ~ Prop. 4 1 h. SI.
o S/a. /4-f04
Assumed E/ev. /00.00
Scale ~ I"= 20'; H.B~V. F B 6 5 3 P I
ENTERPRISE PETROCHEMICAL COMPANY
81 HERCULES INCORPORATED
HOUSTON TEXAS
PROPOSED BAY PORT 4' PIPELINE
NDER TYPICAL- ROAD (CITY OF LA PORTE)
HARRIS COUNTY TEXAS
DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED SCALE DRAWING NUMBER
aY G.& A. G.& A. Noted
8 P - 104 R D- H A
~a,~ t1.9R.7Q 11-,~., ~ ,
•
• CITY OF LA PORTE
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
T0: ENGINEER, PUBLIC t~70RKS DIRECTOR, DATE: NOVEMBER 30, 1979
FIRE DEPARTMENT AND CODE ENFORCED2ENT
FROM: CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: FIPELINE PERivIIT REQUEST
ENTERPRISE PETROCHEMICAL CO. &
HERCULESE INCORPORATED JOIrdT VENTURE
An application has been received from Enterprise Petrochemical
Company & Herculese Incorporated Joint Venture for a four-inch
petroleum and other hydrocarbon by-products pipeline.
Please review the attached application and return your comments to
me.
Thank you for your continued cooperation.
•
•
~~...
CITY OF LA PORTE
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TQ.:"ENGINEER, PUBLIC G1ORKS DIRECTOR, DATE: NOVEMBER 30, 1979
~`~`~RE-DEPARTMENT AND CODE ENFORCED'IENT
FROM: CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: PIPELINE PER~~IIT REQUEST
ENTERPRISE PETROCHEMICAL CO. &
HERCULESE INCORPORATED JOIrdT VENTURE
An application has been received from Enterprise Petrochemical
Company & Herculese Incorporated Joint Venture for a four-inch
petroleum and other hydrocarbon by-products pipeline.
Please review the attached application and return your comments to
me.
Thank you for your continued cooperation.
• '
~,~.-
,fir
.~ ~ _ ~ / .
~," 1
._._., ~
~U ('
d ~ ,~' ~ ~ r~~!
n~~V
~~ ,~
~ ~J ,,
C
•
•
•
•
FIFE i;.aRSLL1L'.S OFFICE
CITY OF LA PORTE
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
T0: Jim Hudgens
FP.0~1: J.L. Sease & Paul R. Hickenbottom
•
DATE: 12-3-79
SUBJECT: PIPELINE PERMIT REQUEST
ENTERPRISE PETROCHEMICAL CO. &
HERCULES INCORPORATED JOINT VENTURE
After reviewing the application for one four-inch petroleum
pipeline to be constructed by Enterprise Petrochemical Co. &
Hercules Incorporated Joint Venture, we have no objections
to the granting of the request.
•
CITY OF LA PORTE
• INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO : ENGINEER, PUBLIC t1]ORKS DI RECTOR,__~ ,~._~` DATE : NOVEMBER 3 0 , 19 7 9
FIRE DEPARTMENT AND~~CODE ENFORCEMENT
FROM: CITY CLERK 4 `~`-~"`- `~~~~~
SUBJECT: PIPELINE PERNNIIT REQUEST
ENTERPRISE PETROCHEMICAL CO. &
HERCULESE INCORPORATED JOIrdT VENTURE
An application has been received from Enterprise Petrochemical
Company & Herculese Incorporated Joint Venture for a four-inch
petroleum and other hydrocarbon by-products pipeline.
Please review the attached application and return your comments to
me.
Thank you for your continued cooperation.
•
The Code Enforcement Dept. finds no problems with this Pipeline
request.
.,
C, -
L. Holle.way
•
• •
•
MEMORANDUr1
T0: Margie Goyen January 16, 1980
City Clerk
FROM: Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Pipeline Permit Request
Enterprise Petrochemical Co. &
Herculese Incorporated Joint Venture
I have reviewed the request submitted by Enterprise Petrochem-
ical Co. and Herculese Inc. for a pipeline permit.
After consulting with the Inspection Division, the Fire Marshal
and investigating the site of the proposed pipeline, I have no
objection to the request.
• Jack Burks
Public Works Director
•
~~ L~}~•
company
January 28, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
And City Commission
City of La Porte
La Porte, Texas
Gentlemen;
It is our understanding that the City of
La Porte has on its workshop agenda a rate ordinance
that would allow Houston Lighting & Power Company to
place in effect within the City of La Porte rates
identical to those approved by the Public Utility
• Commission of Texas in Docket No. 2676.
This letter constitutes the commitment of
Houston Lighting & Power Company to the City of
La Porte that if lower rates are made effective in
any other city served by the Company, those rates will
also be made effective in the City of La Porte along
with refunds, if any, ordered by the Public Utility
Commission or the courts.
matter.
we appreciate your cooperation in this
Sincerely, ~-~
Ccx4 ~
James L. W a
District M ager
JLW/jm
Attachments
cc/ Knox Askins, City Attorney
•
P.O. Box 597. 2000 Nasa 1 Seabrook, Texas 77586 (713) 474-4151
•
DOCKET f~U. 2676
APPL ICATION OF HOUSTON LIGHTING ~
• & POWER COf~IPANY FOR AUTHORITY TO ~
INCREASE RATES WITHIN AUSTIN, j
BRAZORIA, CHAMBERS, COLORADO, ~
FORT BEND, GALVES(ON, HARRIS,
L IBERTY, h1A(AGORDA, h10NTGOfdERY, ~
~JALLER AND WHARTON COUNTIES ~
ORDER
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMiSSIUN
OF TEXAS
In public meeting at its offices in Austin, Texas, the Public Utility Commission of
Texas finds that after statutory notice was provided to the public and to interested
parties, a hearing in the above-styled cause was conducted by an Examiner who issued an
Examiner's Report and an Amended Examiner's Report containing Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law, which report as amended, except for changes made herein, is adopted
and made a part hereof. The Commission further issues the following Order.
. I. The petition of Nouston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P) for a rate
increase is hereby granted in part and denied in part as set out in
• the Examiner's Report and Amended Examiner's Report with the
following changes and additions:
A. HL&P shall revise Tariff Sheet No. Dl to eliminate declining
block winter rates for residential customers and shall design
residential rates using a customer charge of $5.40 per month
including 30 kwh rather than the amount recommended by the
Examiner.
B. HL&P shall revise Tariff Sheet. No. E13 to eliminate the last
complete paragraph of tf~e Emergency Electric Curtailment Plan.
In accordance with the order herein that this Plan. be reviewed
in detai 1 by HL&P and the Commission Staff, the Staff is hereby
ordered to monitor HL&P's use of and proposals for use of this
Plan as it feels necessary and HL&P is ordered to provide
information concerning the Plan as requested by the Staff and to
• co-operate with the Staff in this monitoring function.
Intervenors to this case may make suggestions to the Staff
concerning the Staff's monitoring plans.
C. The following Finding of Fact No. 19 shall be added to the
Report as adopted herein:
19. In order to determine the amounts HL&P may pass through its fuel
clause to ratepayers it is reasonable for tl~e coal charge HL&P pays
• to Utility Fuels, Inc. to be calculated as follows:
a. The coal charge per ton shall be equal to the cost per ton of
coal paid by UFI to its .supplier plus-the actual rail charge per
ton.
Coal charge per ton Coal cost per tun as paid by
UFI + rail charge per ton
• ~ Page 2
b. The t;~,ndl ing charge per ton steal 1 he equal to the Burn of UFI's
actual operation and mainten-once costs, its administrative and
• general costs, plus its depreciation expense, less amortization
of investment tax credits, divided by tons of coal burned.
0 & M cost + administrative &
Handling charge per ton = general cost + depreciation
- amortization of I.T.C.
tons burned
c. -The inventory carrying charge shall be equal to the product of
the weighted average inventory value (including only a 90 day
maximum coal supply) tunes the then current prune lending rate
of Texas Commerce National Bank of Houston, divided by tons of
coal burned.
',Weighted average inventory value with
Inventory carrying charge = 90 day maximum coal supply x prime rate
tons burned
d. The fixed charge shall be equal to the product of the net asset
value (net book value) of existing coal handling facilities and
rail cars, less deferred Federa] Income Taxes, tunes
16.07 percent divided by tons of coal burned, provided that the
actual fixed charge so calculated shall be passed through the
fuel clause only if it is $2.602 per ton or less. If the fixed
• charge rises above $2.602 per ton, onl;~ $2.602 may be passed
thorugh the fuel clause to ratepayers.
(Net asset value of coal handling
faci 1 ities and rai 1 cars less deferred
Fixed charge Federal Income Taxes) x 16.07
tons burned
Provided: $2.602 = Maximum to be passed through fuel clause
D. The following Finding of Fact No. ZO shall be .added to the
Report as adopted herein:
20. The direct method of franchise fee allocation is reasonable and
should be used by HL&P so that no expenses derived from municipal
franchise fees will be collected from HL&P customers residing
' outside of municipalities.
E. In accordance with the Exception filed by Dow Chemical Company
concerning Total Company Electric Operating Revenues, HL&P is
hereby ordered to submit to the Commission a revised computer
• run for the Examiner's Proposed Revenue Allocations as shown on
Exhibit 4 of the Amended Examiner's Report except that Energy
Sales Revenues for the MGS class steal 1 be correctly reflected on
the Exhibit as $402,291. This revised computer run shall adjust
revenues of all classes according to kwh sales (rather than
proportionately as proposed by Dow) for the 1;1,945,000 revenue
difference resulting from use of the Examiner's recommended
Other Revenue figure rather than the nunber used by HL&P in its
earlier trial runs for the Examiner. The results of this
• computer run shall be and are hereby attached marked
Exhibit 4-Revised.
Docket too. 2676
Page 3
II. HL&P is hereby ordered to rerun i+.s cost of service study mocJifying
• it to reflect the cost allocation changes and revenue adjustments
approved herein. HL&P shall within 20 days from the date hereof
submit the results of this study to the Commission for its review,
showing how revenues will be allocated among rate classes. The cost
' of service study, when rerun, shall incorporate all changes in rates,
schedules, and service rules ordered herein. A copy of the study
shall be served upon each of the parties hereto at the tune it is
filed with the Commission.
III. HL&P shall file four copies of its tariff, revised in accordance with
the Examiner's Report and the terms of this Order, and sufficient to
generate revenues no greater than those prescribed in that Report and
this Order, with the Commission Secretary within 20 days of the date
~.
hereof. A copy of the tariff shall be served upon each of the
parties hereto at the time it is filed with the Commission.
• Intervenors shall notify the Commission Staff in writing of any
objections to the revised tariff within 10 days of the receipt
• thereof. The Commission Staff shall f~ave 20 days from the date of
that f i 1 ing to review and to approve or reject tf~e tariff. The
• tariff shall be deemed approved and shall beco+ne effective upon the
expiration of 20 days after filing or sooner upon notification by the
Commission Secretary.. In the event of rejection, HL&P shall have 15
additional days to file an amended tariff with the same review
procedures to again apply.
IV. The revised and approved rates shall be charged only for service
rendered in areas over which this Commission was exercising its
original jurisdiction as of the adjournment of the hearing on the
merits herein, and said rates may be charged only for service
rendered after the tariff approval date.
V. This Order is deemed to be final upon the date of rendition.
Approval of the revised tari f f in comp 1 i ante with this Order• shal 1 be
• deemed to be final on the date of its effectiveness either by
operation of this Order or by notification fro+n the Commission
Secretary, whichever shall first occur.
VI. All motions, applications, requests for entry of specified Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and any other requests for relief,
general or specific, if not expressly granted herein, are hereby
denied for want of merit.
•
•
•
I respectfully dissent.
PUBLIC UTILITY COh1~~lISSION OF TEXAS
/i
SIGNED: _`_'!/ . .~.,~
GEORGE M. COI~JDEN
SIGNED: ___
G~IRRETT MORRIS
~~ ~ ,
SIGNED: ___ ~ u~
H. M. ROLL i~iVS ~ ^-
DISSENT
• The revenue increase is excessive by at least $22 million because of inclusion of
15% more CWIP than recommended by the staff.
The residential customer charge should not be increased from $4.50 to $5.40 and the
relative rate of return should not be increased for the residential class.
The relative rates of return adopted in Docket No. 2001 should be adopted in this
docket for all classes so that the increase per class should equal the system increase.
This is recommended because the cost allocations proposed are not more equitable than
those used in Docket No. 2001.
.ATTEST:
PHILIP F. RICK ~S ~ -- --'
SECRETARY OF T E COMMISSION
pd
Docket ,~o. 2616
Page 4
RENDERED AT AUSTIN, TEXAS, on this ~~ ~ day of ~ lg~g.
,-.
/~
,GARRETT MORR~~
COMbiISSIUNER
•
c~v,~~c~vrrr3~
c ~-ro o c ooc~wrn
a -z f f CT ll~ V~ Cn N cn
...,5 ~ J 1 I J.
a. ~ •--. -n ~• W a a
o r ~ ~ ~
Ct ~ C '~I J
(n Vf c-t 'n ~.
N ~ -~• ~G
1-t l>7 D-
J
m~m
,V
O --'
V fi ~
J .J J J J J J J ~}
• • • • • •.
N W J O O O N O N~ J (D <
CJl O V W O OJ W V N ~l ct (D
C
'S Z77
~ ~
c+
•
N-+N1~ Cn ~
J N cr Co .A O~ O~ O -~ [D -I
OO~OOU"IJ~~U~ < O
!p c-+
o~~~~o~.AOw:flcn ~ cv
O cn ~D v v cn --+ O .~ cn ~ -~
pV00V00VWNlDO !D
.--~
~ ~ ~
J J .A (~ (D
N -' N -~ b Q~ ~ <
1 ~ ~
1 CUOtUNNC11 AQIJ l1 ~
W WO'~AN-~O~Q~V to C
~ONNOOll~vcn (D (U
v
•
•
J ( f7 i~ J -~ ~7 W
J .p ~ Q1 ~D -~ lD ~ CL fL
w 1 rv~vww~o~cnN r~ r~ v
Ql O lD Ul Q~ N O~ ~A V Ql l!1 !D
~ .1 "'S
W
.A ~D ~ -• N ~ -A lD
1
ip 1 V 00 V QJ O W Cl~ 00 Q~
V Ul Ql ~ Cl1 lp N W V Ul
~ ~
C7
fD
N d
d ~
-~ O lD
fD c+
In w .-.
J
~o n
ro m -s
< 7 fD
ro rn a
~ 'T ~
C tL] fD
!D ~G
m
x
_s
z
m
cn
v
O
v
0
N
m
0
~7
m
C
m
z
C
m
D
r
r
O
n
A
---I
~--~
O
Z
N
O
p
O
n
c_
N
O
z
r
.-.
w o
= o
~ ~
H
z m
o ~
a~ z
O
'D
O
~ N
m rn
~ ~
rn
n
O
3
v
n
m
X
S
W
'--.
--1
A
1
:C7
m
N
m
• •
MEMORANDUM
• January 30, 1980
T0: J. R. Hudgens
City Administrator
FROM: Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Line at Fairmont Park
For the past two weeks I have been investigating the problem
with the Sanitaty Sewer Main on Old Orchard between Farrington
and Valley Brook and on Finey Brook between Antrim and Catlett,
from Piney Brook approximately 400 ft. east.
The problem on Old Orchard is caused by severe deterioration.
The line is in such bad shape that it has collapsed in several
locations and when we dig it up to repair it we find, in most
cases, that there is no longer any pipe left, instead there is
only a cavity where the pipe once was.
We are not only unable to continue repairing the line but are
experiencing severe infiltration through this line.
I recommend that we replace the line with $ inch P.V.C. and
fiberglass manholes. This will solve much of our infiltration
• problems but I must advise you that we are getting a considerable
amount of infiltration through the customers service lines.
I have had Southwestern Bell Telephone and Entex Gas to locate
their lines along Spencer and after noting their location it is
my recommendation that we re-locate the sewer line in the edge
of the Flood Control Ditch. This will not only get the line out
of the back yards, but will allow us to have easy access should
we have need to service this line. It is also the most economical
means of solving our problem in this area.
I also have had the Wastewater Division personnel locating the
service lines along this main and have found that there will be
no problem with the service lines should we re-locate this main.
On Piney Brook and Catlett, the problem is not only infiltration
but the grade is too flat to allow sufficient flow to keep the
line from stopping up.
The problem is from the manhole on Piney Brook to the first man-
hole east between Catlett and Antrim, The Wastewater Division
has to rod this section of main out every day in order to keep
the main open.
San~.aar.5~ Sewer azne At Fairmont Park Pape ?..
•
I have also advised the Wastewater Division Superintendent to
check all the manholes in this area, because, we have found
• several manholes that are below grade and allowing considerable
infiltration.
I have received an estimate from a contractor to replace these
mains. Should we relocate the main behind the houses on Old
Orchard to the ditch and not have to take down fences or remove
shrugs and replace the line on Piney Brook, the cost to the City
will be between $90,000.00 and $115,000.00, including engineering
fees. Should we have to place the main back in its present locat-
ion we can count on adding about $40,000.00 to the project.
//~~ i~~
~.
'~ack Burks
Public Works Director
•
•
~`
i _
. ~ ~
• ``~
~,
. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~;
• ( bV 4 ~
.~ 4 ^
~~ ~ ~' ~, ~Q ~ v Q ti
~~~ I b ~ ~ h ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~~
r r ~ ~~
~Y V y 7
,~ Q O ,,~ ti ~~/~O ti a
a Q, ? a o `~•~ .+
~ ~__,
0
~~ ~ ~~\ ~ ~ ~' k.
~ ~ ~-
., w
~ ~
v b ;_ .r• o ~ w
` a ~ ~ O ~ ry
~ p
_ . - . ~ ~ ,~~ d I ,
~ -~ m ..
M ~ ti ~
w~ p J
~ ~ _ ~
a n
w ~
~ ~ J ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
ti -- w J
~ 1 ~~
d _ `
H
_ ~ ~ 4 .
w
t ~cr„
U ~ .r
4 tj r(
sl ~ ~ ,J
U o ~°~ ~~
~) ~ h
~, ~ J q ~O
4. • ~.
`~ ~ ~ ~ .
r--
fi , ~
~ ; . ~ ~~~
--- --- a a~- ~a n ------....~ _ ._.. ~.--
_,~^...R ...~.
• '
~~
BITER OFFICE biEbiO
T0: Jim }iudgens, City Administrator
FROi,i: Stan Sherwood, Director Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT: New Furniture for Nutrition Center
The following is a list of furniture that is needed to
support and seat 125 people. Since most of the chairs and
tables that are presently at the old Nutrition Center came from
the Civic Center, the following items are needed to replace
them upstairs at our new site.
ITE1`i PRICE QUANTITY TOTAL
1. 54" round folding tables $ 69.80 12 $837.60
2. #SP-18 Chair 13.15 125 1,643.75
3. #R-22 Folding Tables 205.95 9 1,853.55
4. #ST-90 Folding Table (Game Room)64.40 4 257.00
5. #00601 Literature Display Stand 187.75 = 1 187.75
6. #B872 Chalk Board 52.80 1 52.80
7. #339 Display Case 311.65 1 311.65
8. #DB-5 Coat and fiat Rack 91.65 1 91.65
9. #~iF-46 Filing Drawer 290.35 1 290.35
10. Sofa and Love Seat 600.00 1 600.00
11. #OS-518 Shelving 37.55 10 375.Sn
12. End Table 102.00 1 102.00
13. Corner Table 123.00 1 123.00
14. Coffee Table 150.00 1 150.00
15. Chair - 225.00 1 225..00
16. Lamp 100.00 1 .100.00
17 . ~~., ° a~~~r~..c,•c~' '2,c~-f- C(" c ~ ice. ~'
~~,~ 475.00 1 475.00
18. #3801 Tablo~ 54.90 1 54.90
19. 1`•todel #2102 Office Chair 97.10 2 194.20
' 20. #1860 Folding Tables 36.65 S 183.25
21. Rocking-Chair 125.00 2 250.00
•-.,`R4
r ~.
•
•
•
PAGE 2
item
22. rlats for Front Door
23. #SC 2E3 Serving Cart
24.. Nall Clock
25. Portable Sound System
(~4ode1 S-4)
26. #40R Double Pedestal Desk
27. 24 cubic feet freezer
PRICE UA~iTITY TOTAL
32.30 1 $ 32.30
55.90 1 55.90
20.75 1 20.75
354.00 1 354.00 ...
160.20 2 320.40
400.00 1 400.00
TOTAL $9,542.30
S\t~an Sheri~rood~
Director, Parks and Recreation
•
To City Council - City of La Porte
February 6, 1980 by Celeste Peterson
•
It is my desire to call to your attention the operations of PPG Industries
and the fact that the deadly gas, phosgene, is being produced in close proximity
to heavily traveled streets, densely populated residential subdivisions and to the
business section of the City of La Porte.
The very presence of phosgene is frightening. Production of such a substance
must be closely monitored.
Industry is very important to the City of La Porte and indeed to the entire
Bayshore area. We actively invite and solicit industrial expansion in our area.
New industry and the expansion of existing plants create new jobs and enhance our
economy. However, we expect industry to be safe and desireable.
Mr. Charles Bellon of PPG Industries stated on February 5th, that PPG has
not increased their production of phosgene since their purchase of the plant from
• Chemtron in January 1979. He also states that they have no plans for expansion
of their phosgene facilities. He does, however, confirm their option to purchase
a large tract of land adjoining their present facilities between La Porte proper
and Fairmont. Park.
I request that the City of La Porte and the citizens of the area be
aware of the danger of this installation and that City authorities be constantly
alert to any permit requests from PPG Industries.
I request that the City hold a public hearing for any permit requests from
PPG so that citizens may employ the expertise to evaluate such requests.
Again - we value the presence of industry. Industry appears to make
every effort to be good neighbors. We must continue to be alert to any
industrial installation that might endanger our lives. The strength of our
economy is secondary to the safety of our citizens.
•