Findings Of Fact Based on the testimony of the witnesses adduced at the hearing and the entire record compiled herein, I make the following: The Beker-Manatee transmission line was planned and given budget approval by Petitioner in 1974. This action was taken by Petitioner as a result of a documented request by Beker Phosphate Corporation to provide high-voltage service to the proposed Beker Phosphate Corporation mine in Manatee County, Florida. Right-of-way acquisition was begun in June, 1975, and more than one- half of the right-of-way has now been acquired by Petitioner. The original projected in-service date for the transmission line was July 1, 1976, however, completion was delayed due to, inter alia, alleged environmental problems encountered by Beker Phosphate Corporation in bringing its phosphate mine into production. Presently, Petitioner plans to complete construction and have the Beker-Manatee transmission line energized by the Spring of 1980. Additionally, Petitioner plans to construct an electrical transmission line between the proposed Keentown substation in Manatee County, and a proposed substation in DeSoto County near Arcadia, Florida, which is called the Whidden Substation. (Herein, sometimes called the Keentown-Whidden transmission line). The Keentown-Whidden transmission line was planned and budgeted by Petitioner during late 1975 as the most appropriate means of satisfying Petitioner's needs including providing reliable and adequate service to the Arcadia area; to provide service for specific customers (future) near the Keentown-Whidden transmission line and utilization of its existing facilities including existing transmission lines; to provide bulk power transfer capacity from Manatee into other parts of Petitioner's service area and to improve all transfer capacity between Tampa Bay and the lower west coast of Florida for mutual load supporting generation for emergency and economic reasons. According to its present plans, Petitioner plans to complete construction and have the Keentown-Whidden transmission energized by the summer of 1981, that is more than one year after the Beker-Manatee line is built and energized. On October 14, 1977, Respondent issued a binding letter of interpretation concluding that the Beker-Manatee transmission line is a development of regional impact within the guides of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, and pertinent regulations since it formed a part of the Keentown-Whidden transmission line. However, in support of this position, Respondent introduced testimony and statements during the hearing indicating that its decision that the subject line is a development of regional inpact is based on five factors as follows: The Beker-Manatee transmission line is a 240 KV line, That the Beker-Manatee Line connects to the Keentown-Whidden transmission line, One of the functions of the Keentown-Whidden transmission line is to transfer bulk power, That the subject line is "the" source of power to energize the Keentown-Whidden transmission line and The Beker-Manatee and Keentown-Whidden lines are inseparable because without the Beker-Manatee transmission line the Keentown-Whidden transmission come not be energized. An examination of these factors revealed that the first three factors are applicable to all 240 KV lines of Petitioner as well as all other power companies. Specifically, testimony was introduced without rebuttal that all other 240 KV transmission lines connect with the subject line as well as the Keentown-Whidden line and form a statewide transmission system in what is commonly referred to as the "Grid". And of course, a primary function of all 240 KV transmission lines is to transmit bulk power. The remaining two factors, when examined, indicate that the Respondent relied on erroneous factors and/or conclusions in reaching its determination that the subject line is a development of regional impact. In this regard, testimony was introduced to the effect that the Beker-Manatee transmission line could be energized through any transmission line within the electrical grid provided the right switching devices were activated. It was also noted that the Keentown-Whidden transmission line could be energized without the Beker-Manatee transmission line provided again that the appropriate switching devices were activated. Throughout the engineering profession, transmission lines are customarily defined by the electric utility industry and by federal and state governmental agencies involved in the regulation of transmission lines, as a line extending from an electric generating power plant to the nearest substation or from a substation to the nearest substation. For example, the Federal Power Commission and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers' Standard Dictionary of Electrical Terms (1971) define transmission lines in this manner. With this in mind, it was noted that the Beker-Manatee transmission line is a line which extends from a substation to the nearest substation and it does not cross a county line. Respondent failed to demonstrate why the subject transmission line should not be reviewed as similar lines have been throughout the electric utility industry. Consideration was given to Respondent's argument that the subject line must be viewed as an integral electrical transmission line which when completed will connect and cross portions of DeSoto, Hardee and Manatee counties. However, evidence was introduced that when the subject line is completed, it like all other 240 KV lines form a contiguous segment of the entire electrical grid throughout the United States, and in that respect, such a consideration is not a distinguishing factor for this or any other 240 KV transmission line.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is recommended that the Division of State Planning issue a binding letter of interpretation to Florida Power and Light Company holding that the proposed Beker-Manatee line does not meet the criteria of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, and Section 22F-2.03, Florida Administrative Code and therefore is not a development of regional impact. DONE AND ORDERED in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida, this 14th day of February, 1978. JAMES E. BRADWELL Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675
Findings Of Fact Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced at the hearing, the following relevant facts are found: Procedural Matters After holding noticed public hearings on March 19 and June 12, 1984, the Florida Public Service Commission, by Order Number 13676 issued on September 13, 1984, determined that there was a need for the Florida Power Corporation Lake Tarpon-Kathleen 500 kV transmission line which is the subject of this certification proceeding. Specifically, the Public Service Commission concluded that the construction and operation of the line would enhance electric system reliability and integrity and would improve the availability of low-cost electric energy within the State. It was further concluded that the Lake Tarpon substation in Pinellas County and the Kathleen substation in Polk County were appropriate starting and ending points for the proposed 500 kV transmission line. The Commission found that the proposed line would complete a 500 kV loop or grid out of the Crystal River plant, maintain system continuity to all 500 kV Substations and avoid customer blackouts. Thereafter, on April 29, 1985, Florida Power Corporation filed with the Department of Environmental Regulation its application for site certification of either of two proposed corridors for the 500 kV transmission line to be located between the Lake Tarpon and Kathleen substations. The Department of Environmental Regulation properly provided notice of the application to the statutory parties including the appropriate State agencies, the local water management district, the regional planning councils and each local government within the proposed corridors. Newspaper notice of the Florida Power Corporation application was also published Notices and reminder notices of the certification hearing were published in newspapers of general circulation within counties to be crossed by the proposed transmission line corridors. While one notice of the certification hearing was published 76 days, rather than the Statutorily required 80 days prior to the hearing, no statutory party or other Substantially interested party was prejudiced thereby. With the exception of Anne L. Thomas and Florida Satellite Network, Inc., the statutory agencies, listed parties and substantially interested persons included within the Appearances portion herein timely filed their notices of intent to be a party or their petitions to intervene. Ms. Thomas and Florida Satellite Network, Inc. were granted leave to intervene on a limited basis during the course of the certification hearing. No party proposed an alternate transmission line corridor route for consideration on or before the 50th day prior to the certification hearing. Efforts to present evidence during the certification hearing relating to an alternate corridor and/or to continue the hearing for that purpose were denied. Proposed Corridors In its application for certification, Florida Power Corporation proposes a primary corridor and an alternative secondary corridor. Both corridors originate at the Lake Tarpon substation located in Pinellas County just west of the Hillsborough-Pinellas County line and terminate at the Kathleen substation, located north of U.S. Highway 98 in Polk County. The primary corridor is approximately 44 miles in length and the secondary corridor is approximately 47 miles in length. The most westerly 5.5. miles and the most easterly 25 miles of both corridors are identical. The divergent primary segment is 13.5 miles in length while the divergent secondary segment is 16.5 miles in length. The westerly combined segments of both the primary and secondary corridors run east for a distance of 5.5 miles from the Lake Tarpon Substation to a point just east of the intersection of Gunn Highway and Mobley Road in Hillsborough County. This 5.5. mile stretch encompasses an existing Florida Power Corporation double-circuit 115 kV transmission line corridor, known as the Higgins-Fort Meade Line, and its associated 100 foot existing right-of-way. From the point where the proposed primary and secondary corridors diverge, the primary corridor continues to run east, northeast for a 13.5 mile long stretch in northern Hillsborough County until it meets up again with the easterly combined segments of both corridors. The initial 9.7 miles of this divergent primary segment is 190 feet wide and follows the continuation of the existing cleared and improved Higgins-Fort Meade line and its associated 100 foot right-of-way until it reaches Interstate 275. At I-275, the primary corridor angles northerly, widens to about 1500 feet and parallels the I-275 right-of-way for a distance of approximately 3.8 miles through Cypress Creek until it reaches the I-275/75 interchange at the Pasco Hillsborough County line. There the 13.5 mile divergent primary corridor merges with the 16.5 mile divergent secondary corridor and continues east to form the easterly combined segment. The divergent secondary corridor, leaving the primary after the first 5.5 miles, turns north and makes some thirteen subsequent turns, heading generally north and then east. Its many turns are the result of an attempt to avoid existing developments and homesites. The divergent segment of the proposed 16.5 mile long secondary corridor is located in both northern Hillsborough and Southern Pasco Counties. It varies in width, going up to 5,000 feet, and the exact location of the right-of-way has not yet been determined. The easterly combined Segment of both proposed corridors is generally 1,500 feet wide. This segment, 25 miles long, begins at the I-275/75 intersection and runs east along the Pasco Hillsborough County line to just east of the Hillsborough River where it jogs to the south to avoid homes in Crystal Springs, and it then proceeds northeasterly to the Pasco-Polk County line. The corridor then angles northeasterly through Polk County, crosses a cypress Swamp known as Fox Branch, and ultimately terminates at the Kathleen Substation. Proposed Design, Construction and Maintenance Florida Power Corporation proposes to utilize a 190-foot wide right-of-way in all areas except for that portion of the divergent primary corridor which will be located within the existing 100-foot wide right-of-way associated with the Higgins- Fort Meade transmission line. Florida Power Corporation intends to replace the Higgins-Fort Meade line with the new Lake Tarpon- Kathleen line in this area, and use of only the 100-foot wide right-of-way is necessitated by residential development which has occurred on both sides of the right-of-way if a wider right-of-way were utilized in this area of the proposed primary corridor, numerous homes would have to be displaced. The 100-foot wide existing Higgins-Fort Meade rights-of- way will remain cleared in its entirety. Except for danger trees and trees exceeding 25 feet in height which could fall on the lines, the 190-foot wide right-of-way will be cleared to a width of 150 feet, with 20 feet being left in a natural state on each side of the right-of-way to act as a buffer. At creek and river crossings, the 190-foot wide right-of-way will only be cleared for 100 feet. In this area, only vegetation that exceeds 25 feet in height will be removed. Tree stumps and root mats will be left intact to retain the integrity of wetland areas. Access roads and tower pads will be constructed within the right-of-way in wetland areas. The typical access road will be about 20 feet wide, with side slopes of two feet horizontal for every one foot vertical. Tower pads within wetland areas will be constructed to the same elevation as the access road leading to it and, depending upon the tower structure utilized, will be 130 feet wide by 113 to 155 feet long. Tower pads within the 100-foot wide rights-of-way will not exceed 100 feet so as not to extend beyond the right-of-way. The proposed tower designs for the transmission line in the 100-foot wide right-of-way will be one of two types. The first type is a single tubular steel pole with a delta-shaped conductor configuration extending from it and will be 120 to 135 feet high and about 60 feet wide. The second type consists of twin tubular steel poles with a vertical conductor configuration between them and will be 155 to 175 feet high and 32 feet wide. The maximum span between two single-pole structures is 900 feet and the maximum span between two twin-pole structures is 1,200 feet. The towers in the 190-foot wide right-of-way will be one of three types. The first type consists of a guyed vee lattice steel tangent structure, 100 to 125 feet high and approximately 64 feet wide at its widest point. It has very little depth, but is supported by guy wires that extend 60 to 75 feet to each side. The second type consists of a self-supported lattice steel tangent structure 100 to 125 feet high and approximately 64 feet wide at its widest point. It has a depth of 23 to 31 feet and requires no guy wires. The-third type is an H-frame tubular steel tangent structure 100 to 125 feet high and about 64 feet wide at its widest point. It has very little depth and requires no guy wires. The normal maximum span between all these types of towers is 1,200 feet, although it may be up to 1,500 feet in Special situations, such as river or road crossings. Once a tower type is Selected for each width of right-of-way, it will be used throughout the right-of-way of that width. The types of foundations utilized for the transmission line towers is dependent upon the type of tower design to be installed. For tubular steel structures, either a drilled pier foundation or a vibratory steel casing foundation will be used. For the self-Supporting lattice tower, a drilled pier concrete foundation will be used. For the guyed lattice tower, either a precast foundation or a drilled pier foundation will be used for the tower, and a drilled pier foundation called an auger cast pile will be used for the guys. The foundations will typically penetrate to a depth of up to 50 feet depending on the type of foundation used and the soil conditions at the tower locations. The conductors for the transmission line consist of three wires, Separated by spacers and attached to the towers by insulators. The conductor wires for the delta towers will be 34 to 100 feet high, depending upon the point in the span, and will be 1.89 inches in diameter. The conductor wires for the vertical towers will be 34 to 130 feet high, again depending on the point in the span, and will be 1.5 inches in diameter. The conductor wires for the guyed vee lattice, lattice, and H-Frame towers will be 34 to 80 feet high, again depending on the point in the span, and will be 1.3 to 1.4 inches in diameter. The minimum conductor- to-ground clearance at mid-span for all of the proposed towers will be 34 feet at maximum conductor temperature Ground wires will be used to intercept and ground lightning and will run along the tops of the towers and, for all tower types, will be .28 inches in diameter. The proposed transmission line will be designed to comply with good engineering practices, and the design codes, standards and industry guidelines contained in the National Electrical Safety Code; the American Welding Society Structural Welding Code for Steel; the American Institute of Steel Construction Code of Standard Practice; the American Concrete Institute Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete; the Southern Building Code; the American Institute of Steel Construction Specifications for the Design, Fabrication and Erection of Structural Steel or Buildings; the American Society of Civil Engineering Guides entitled, "Guide for Design of Steel Transmission Towers," "Design of Steel Transmission Pole Structures," "Guidelines for Transmission Line Structural Loading"; and the American National Standards Institute Standard A58.1 entitled, "Loads for Buildings and Other Structures." The Lake Tarpon-Kathleen transmission line will be designed for five loading conditions: an extreme wind loading condition, maintenance loads, loads during construction, contingency loads, and code loads. The line is designed to withstand a reference wind speed of 100 miles per hour in flat, open country with no obstructions, and a reference wind speed of 130 miles per hour in forested and residential areas where obstructions on the ground baffle, or diminish, the wind speed. The highest reference wind speed recorded by an accepted weather station in Tampa during the past 30 years is 67 miles per hour, and the highest ever recorded is 84 miles per hour. A reference wind speed is a one-minute sustained wind speed that corresponds to the fastest mile of wind passing an anemometer ten meters above ground. Structures designed to withstand a given reference wind speed can withstand gusts of greater wind speed. While hurricane force winds along the Gulf Coast may exceed 130 miles per hour, the proposed corridors are located from 9 to 56 miles inland from the coast. The construction loading condition allows for the possible malfunction of equipment during the process of pulling the conductors through the blocks on the transmission line towers. In the unlikely event the conductors become hung up in the blocks, the construction loading condition allows the towers to withstand the induced longitudinal load. The maintenance load criterion ensures that the transmission line towers can withstand the weight of men with equipment climbing out on the structural components during maintenance operations The contingency load criterion allows for the shifting of vertical load in the unlikely event of breakage of a piece of conductor supporting hardware for an insulator. The code load criterion ensures that the transmission line will withstand the wind load set forth in the National Electrical Safety Code. Since the code load is less severe than the extreme wind loading condition for which this line has been designed, the code load was not controlling. In addition, standing water will not cause hydrostatic loads on the transmission line towers because they are free- draining. The towers will also withstand a very severe hydrodynamic force, in excess of 25-foot deep water moving two to three times the speed of the Mississippi River, and the towers will also withstand the uplift effects of buoyancy. Florida Power Corporation proposes to construct the transmission line in Seven stages, with the total construction process taking between 12 to 18 months. At any given location along the right-of-way, construction crews will be present at intermittent intervals for a total of two to three weeks. During the first surveying stage, survey crews of three to five individuals will establish tower locations and take soil borings at depths of 50 to 60 feet for foundation design purposes, survey and stake the right-of-way and survey and stake the requirement for clearing and access roads. This surveying stage will take approximately three months. In the second stage of construction, the right-of-way will be cleared and the necessary access roads will be constructed. In those portions of the corridor where the Higgins-Fort Meade line will be replaced with the new 500 kV line, this stage will include the removal of existing towers, conductors and foundations to approximately 1 to 2 feet below grade. Vegetation in the upland areas, where not already cleared, will be removed with heavy tracked machinery and the right-of-way will be dressed for future mowing. In wetland areas, vegetation will be removed either by hand or by the use of light tracked shearing machines, leaving the stumps and root mats except where they would interfere with tower locations. Wetland areas will not be demucked and cuttings will be either buried or burned in non- residential upland areas. Access roads in wetland areas will be constructed by hauling in fill and spreading it with heavy tracked machinery. Culverts under the roads will be installed to avoid interrupting surface water flow. The fill will be compacted as soon as it is hauled in to encourage revegetation and any other measures that may be necessary to prevent erosion will be undertaken. Fill will be obtained from adjacent upland areas, other upland areas or commercial fill suppliers, but not from wetlands or areas connected to wetlands. The actual locations and sizes of culverts to be used will be determined during post- certification design of the facility and will be reviewed by the agencies having jurisdiction over the access roads. Foundations for the transmission line towers will be installed during the third stage of construction and then, during the fourth stage, the materials needed to assemble the towers will be hauled to the appropriate site, and the towers will be assembled on the ground. The tower components will be bolted together and a locking device will be used on each bolt to prevent the nut from backing off. Each tower assembly takes approximately one day or less. In the fifth stage of construction, a large crane is brought to the tower site and the assembled towers are hoisted into position and installed upon their foundations. Florida Power Corporation can erect about one tower per hour or seven to eight towers per day. In the sixth stage of construction, the conductors and overhead ground wires are installed on the transmission line towers. Temporary wooden pole structures, called guard Structures, are installed at road and utility crossings to insure that conductors do not come in contact with those facilities during installation. Three to four miles of conductor and overhead ground wire are installed at a time. Machines are located at both ends of the Section where the conductors are being pulled, one set to pull the conductors and the other set to maintain tension on the conductors. The contractor will pull the conductors to a predetermined stage which is calculated by the design engineers. Also during this stage, spacers are installed between the three wires which make up each conductor to keep them from coming in contact with one another during high wind conditions. After a section of the conductors is installed, the pulling machines advance in a leapfrog fashion to pull in the next section of conductors. The Seventh and final stage of construction, cleanup of the right-of-way, actually occurs after each contractor completes a portion of the construction process. Cleanup of the right-of way includes removal of any orating materials used to haul materials to the site, grading of the right-of-way to remove any ruts resulting from construction, and reseeding or replanting disturbed areas of the These construction techniques are commonly used in the electric power industry. The construction process will be conducted entirely within the right-of-way unless special and prior arrangements are made with the adjoining property owners. After construction is completed, the right-of-way will be maintained by mowing with bushhog equipment in the upland areas and with light tracked shearing machines or by hand in wetland areas. This owing and/or clearing will occur about once every three to four years. Of course, owners of property along the right-of-way may mow and maintain the right-of-way if they desire to do so. Herbicides will not be used on the proposed transmission line right-of-way in wetlands, on public well fields or near residential areas. A study on the use of the herbicide Rodeo (trademark) on the Central Florida-Kathleen 500 kV transmission line right-of-way is currently being conducted. After the satisfactory completion of this study, Florida Power Corporation may seek a modification of the certification for the proposed transmission line to gain approval to use Rodeo (trademark) herbicide in wetlands. Twice a year, once by ground patrol and once by air, the transmission lines and towers, including hardware, will be inspected by maintenance crews. They will look for damaged insulators (particularly after the hunting season and the lightning storm season) frayed conductors, corroded metal and non- functioning culverts under access roads. Also, a climbing inspection is performed every eight years. Maintenance procedures can and will be conducted entirely within the right- of-way. Surrounding Areas-Primary Corridor The westerly segment of the primary corridor, identical to that of the secondary corridor, encompasses the existing Higgins-Fort Meade transmission line, a business park, areas of pine flatwoods, pasture lands, palmetto prairie, cypress swamp and citrus groves, a plant nursery, a lake and several ponds. The entire western combined segment crosses 7 lakes and 2 watercourses. The initial 9.7 miles of the divergent portion of the primary corridor follows the existing Higgins-Fort Meade line and abuts a number of suburban residential subdivisions, as well as occasional cypress swamps, ponds and citrus groves. The residential subdivisions include the densely populated Northdale, Country Place, Northlakes, Crenshaw Lakes, St. Charles, Crenshaw Acres, Live Oak, Hounds Run and Maple Hill developments. There are approximately 146 homes within 100 feet of the existing 100- foot right-of-way and 381 homes within 300 feet of that right-of- way. These homes and subdivisions were built subsequent to the early 1950's construction of the Higgins-Fort Meade transmission line. The portion of the divergent primary corridor which leaves the Higgins-Fort Meade line (for a distance of approximately 3.8 miles) and parallels I-275 encompasses an extensive area of Cypress Creek. The divergent section of the primary corridor crosses 14 lakes and 5 watercourses. The eastern segment of the primary corridor, identical to the eastern segment of the secondary corridor, traverses primarily rural areas, characterized by open pasture land, pine flatwoods and fresh water marsh, cypress and swamp. As the corridor moves into Polk County, it traverses an extensive wetland system known as Fox Branch. The Fox Branch system is the first tributary to the Hillsborough River, which provides drinking water to the Tampa Bay area. The eastern combined segment of both corridors contains 9 water courses, including the Hillsborough River, and 12 lakes. Surrounding Areas-Secondary Corridor The western and eastern portions of the secondary corridor are identical to that of the primary corridor and the Surrounding areas have previously been described in paragraphs 22 and 24. The 16.5 mile long segment of the secondary corridor which diverges from the primary corridor initially passes through areas of pasture land, citrus groves, cypress swamps and several single family residences, and is adjacent to scattered lakes. After the secondary corridor crosses Van Dyke Road, it is Surrounded by four major planned Single-family and multifamily residential developments, a single family residential compound and farm and a 1.5 million gallon per day waste water treatment plant, which are all currently at various stages of development and will be described in more detail below. The divergent secondary corridor continues to cross areas of cypress swamp, open pasture land and several single family residences and abuts numerous lakes, ponds and single family subdivisions, including Whisper Run, Lake Como Club, Country Close, Foxwood, Turtle Lakes and others, as well as a cemetery and a commercial nursery. Approximately 500 feet north of the secondary corridor along Dale Mabry highway is the Florida Satellite Network, Inc. cable system head end installation consisting of a 90 foot television antenna for local channel reception and two satellite dish antennas. This facility processes and retransmits signals via cable to some 1,500 cable customers in Land O' Lakes. The divergent segment of the secondary corridor contains some 33 lakes and two water courses. Due to the opening of the I-275 corridor, the extension of County Line Road and State Road 54, and the reduction in the amount of land devoted to citrus groves, the area encompassing the divergent secondary corridor is experiencing a boom of activity and rapidly increasing property values. The divergent secondary corridor traverses at least a portion of the newly planned subdivisions of Cypress Bend, Lake Carlton Arms, Villages of Ramblewood and Cheval, as well as the Van Dyke Road Wastewater Treatment Plant planned and designed to serve these new subdivisions. At the time Florida Power Corporation selected the proposed secondary corridor, it was unaware that these developments would occur or, at least, that they would progress so rapidly. This portion of the secondary corridor also encompasses the Maloney/Zambito family residential compound and farm, and traverses a 16-acre dedicated school site. The corridor includes the northern 750 feet of property owned by Live Oak Realty, which property is presently utilized as an operating cattle ranch. A siteplan has been developed for this property which includes dwelling units and a regional shopping center within the proposed corridor. The Cypress Bend development has recently commenced construction and includes 173 single family home sites, a club house, tennis courts, racquet ball courts, a pool, 77- acres of man-made lakes, and 424 acres of cypress wetlands, for a total of 965 acres. Most of the residential lots will have either a woodland view or a view of a lake. The main entrance is currently under construction and will connect to Van Dyke Road and Lutz Lake Fern Road. About 26 lots, the main entrance and portions of the cypress wetlands are located within the divergent secondary corridor. These cannot be relocated because of developmental, economic and environmental constraints. Expenditures to date by the developers of Cypress Bend include not only the cost of land, but $300,000 for road construction, $52,000 for a 12 inch water main, $118,000 for underground electric facilities and $250,000 for engineering and planning. The Lake Carlton Arms development is a residential rental apartment complex located on 477 acres and is currently under construction. It will have 1,912 units in 155 buildings, 4 clubhouses, and includes a 16 acre school site, a fire station, a 9 acre commercial site, open spaces, a number of man-made lakes, and 203 acres of wetlands and conservation areas. Construction of the lakes and site work is complete and construction of Phase I, consisting of 956 units on the south side of the development, is nearing completion. Construction of future phases will take place along the man-made lakes in the northern portion of the development. Expenditures to date total more than $24,000,000, over and above the cost of the land. The school, which will serve all of the Surrounding developments, 84 units in 7 buildings, and open spaces, as well as access for another 24 units in 2 buildings, will be located within the proposed secondary corridor. They cannot be relocated because of developmental constraints. If the right-of-way is ultimately located so as to avoid the Lake Carlton Arms development, it will then traverse the Villages of Ramblewood development. The Villages of Ramblewood is a single family residential subdivision located on 658 acres immediately to the north of the Lake Carlton Arms development and the Van Dyke Road Wastewater Treatment Plant. It is proposed for 908 single family lots with 230 acres of cypress wetlands and conservation areas. Construction of the roads and utilities is currently underway, and expenditures to date total more than $2,000,000 over and above the cost of the land. Two of the villages consisting of a number of lots are located within the divergent secondary corridor. They cannot be relocated due to environmental and developmental constraints. If the right-of-way is located so as to avoid them, it will necessarily be required to traverse the Lake Carlton Arms development and the Van Dyke Road Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Cheval development is located on 855 acres just northeast of the Lake Carlton Arms Development and to the east of the Villages of Ramblewood. It is a multi-use development, currently under construction, and will have 193 large single family home sites, 537 multi-family units, including patio and town homes, 88-acres of man-made lakes, tennis and equestrian villages, an 18-hole golf course, and a club house with tennis courts and a pool. It will also have a 57 acre equestrian center which will include stables, a grand prix jumping area, 2 polo fields, grandstands and parking facilities, and will be the focal point of the development. Phase 1 of the development is near completion, and expenditures to date total more than $16,000,000. Three large single family lots, the stables and about half of one polo field are located within the divergent secondary corridor. They cannot be relocated in a manner that will maintain the integrity of the overall development plan. The Van Dyke Road Wastewater Treatment Plant, located on 22 acres adjacent to the northwest corner of the Lake Carlton Arms development, is now nearing completion after a 3- year permitting and construction process. It is a 1.5 million gallon per day oxidation ditch-type wastewater treatment plant that can be expanded to a 2 million gallon per day capacity. It includes an operations building, 2 large oxidation ditches with 18 feet high concrete walls, other utility buildings, paving, roadways and storage ponds. Expenditures to date total bore than $3,000,000 and its total cost will be $4.5 million. Its operation is a condition precedent to the viability of surrounding developments. The entire plant is located within the divergent secondary corridor and it cannot be relocated. The right-of-way cannot traverse the plant site for safety reasons since the use of large cranes will be required to maintain and expand the plant. While the right-of-way could perhaps be located so as to avoid the plant site, it could not be done without traversing a portion of the Villages of Ramblewood development. The Maloney-Zambito family complex, located on 194 acres between the Cypress Bend and Lake Carlton Arms developments, is a family complex that includes a dairy, a thoroughbred horse farm, and several residences. A portion of the property has been divided into 3-acre lots which will be used as homesites for several family members. In addition to the residences that now exist on the property, the Maloney family is currently constructing a new home on one of the 3-acre lots. All of the property is located within the proposed secondary corridor. If the right-of-way is located so as to avoid the Cypress Bend development, it will likely result in the displacement of one or more residences on the Maloney Zambito property and will disrupt the family complex. Impacts of Proposed Corridors upon the Public-Land Use, Land Value and Other Considerations. Land Area Preempted. The primary corridor is 44 miles long and the secondary corridor is 47 miles long. Because Florida Power Corporation intends to utilize its existing 100- foot right- of-way along the Higgins-Fort Meade line if the primary corridor is certified, it will only need to acquire 28.8 miles of additional right-of-way to complete the primary corridor. The secondary corridor will require the preemption of sufficient land to locate a 190-foot right-of-way across some 41.5 miles. Joint Use of Land. The primary corridor will follow the existing Higgins-Fort Meade facility for a distance of 15.2 miles. Other linear facilities, including a draining ditch and an electrical distribution line, currently share this existing right- of-way. The primary corridor will also follow the I-275 right-of- way for approximately 3.8 miles and the County- Line right-of-way for about 2.5 miles. Thus, existing linear facilities are followed for 21.5 miles of the primary corridor's total 44 mile length. Joint uses of existing linear facilities are encouraged by state, regional and local comprehensive plans. The secondary corridor will only align itself with approximately 6.5 miles of existing linear facilities. Displacement of Residences. A greater number of occupied residential homesites presently exist adjacent to the proposed divergent segment of the primary corridor. Because the 100-foot right-of-way for the Higgins-Fort Meade transmission line was in existence prior to the construction and development of nearby homes, and because future development has been and is now precluded within that right-of-way, no displacement of homes will be required in the primary corridor. However, if a right-of-way wider than 100 feet is utilized in the dense residential areas along the existing line, numerous homes would have to be displaced. Location of the corridor in the divergent secondary segment could well result in the displacement of both existing residences and those currently under construction or development, as well as a wastewater treatment plant and commercial businesses. When the secondary corridor was initially chosen by Florida Power Corporation, the area contained relatively low density development and the potential of locating most of the right-of-way outside the boundaries of existing and known planned developments. However, that scenario has now changed and is continuing to change on a rapid basis. Since there is no existing right-of-way within the divergent secondary segment, it is reasonably probable that new homes will be placed within the secondary right-of-way, and thus require displacement if the secondary corridor is certified. Population projections indicate that the numbers of residents within the two corridors will be nearly equal in the future. Impacts on Existing and Future Developments. The area along the existing Higgins-Fort Meade line, at least within the divergent primary segment, is basically already fully developed, and future development will not be disrupted any more by the location of the primary corridor there than it is by the existing right-of-way for the Higgins-Fort Meade line. Almost all of the developments along the divergent primary segment were placed there after and were planned with reference to the Higgins-Fort Meade line and its 100-foot right-of-way. The area along I-275 is primarily a wetland area unsuitable for future development. While there is now no existing development along the easterly combined segments of both corridors, it is conceivable that there could be future development in that area. Because of the rapidly developing nature of the divergent secondary segment, the fact that there is no existing protected right-of-way and the large numbers of lakes and wetlands located within that area, it will be very difficult to locate a right-of- way within that secondary segment so as to avoid dividing properties, displacing homes or leaving properties with limited developable uplands. Future development could be severely disrupted by the placement of the secondary corridor in the 16.5 mile area which diverges from the primary corridor. Land Values. Testimony was offered concerning several studies on the impact of transmission lines upon property values. None of the studies were Site-specific to the Lake Tarpon-Kathleen transmission line and the literature on the subject is inconclusive as to the effect of transmission lines on adjacent property values. A study conducted in Hernando County concluded that, depending upon the type of property involved, there is a 24 percent to 44 percent loss in value of property located adjacent to a transmission line. The study from which such conclusions were drawn contains deficiencies in that, in some instances, only one sale was recorded, sales were not verified to assure they were the result of arm's length transactions, median values were used when there was only one or a small number of sales and the study was Site-specific to Hernando County. Land use impacts, and their effect upon land use values, have already occurred in the divergent primary section as a result of the existing Higgins-Fort Meade transmission line and I-275. The values of residential properties along the existing transmission line already reflect the location of such a line. Florida Power Corporation has no intention of removing that line or abandoning that right-of-way even if the proposed primary corridor were not certified. The potential adverse impact upon land values if property cannot be developed for residential use within the divergent secondary segment could be great. Planned developments would need to be reduced in size or scope, thus making the property less desirable and less valuable for purchase or development. Visual impacts. Along the 15.5 miles where the Higgins- Fort Meade line presently exists, there should be no significant new visual intrusion. Though the towers for the proposed line will be higher than those within the existing corridor, they will also be sleeker and less intrusive. The visual intrusion of lattice towers and other transmission facilities already exists in the immediate area of the westerly and divergent segments of the primary corridor. The visual intrusion in other areas will be mitigated by alignment of the line with the I-275 right-of-way and by the sparsely populated rural nature of the lands in the combined easterly segment of both corridors. Placement of the transmission line in the proposed divergent segment of the secondary corridor will result in a new visual intrusion for residents of existing and nearly completed subdivisions located therein. Because of the meandering design of the secondary corridor, the transmission lies could form a virtual semi-circle around some lakes and developments, thus creating a greater visual intrusion than a single set of lines or towers located in only one direction from the adjacent property. Noise. The transmission line, no matter where it is located, will generate some noise as a result of a process called corona, and also, to a lesser extent, as a result of wind and insulator scintillations. Corona occurs when a foreign substance like water gets on the conductor wires and causes the level of the electrical field to exceed the electrical strength of air. This causes a burst of energy that heats and applies force to the air and moves air molecules around as sound waves. Under normal fair weather conditions, which occur in this area 90 percent of the time, the noise levels produced by corona will be less than ambient and unmeasurable. During rainy weather, which occurs about 10 percent of the time, the median noise level will be 40.7 to 42.3 dBa at the edge of the right-of-way, with diminishing levels thereafter. Under certain unique conditions, the noise level could rise an additional 3 or 4 dBa, but never as much as an additional 7.5 dBa. To put this in perspective, under normal conditions, the noise level will be more quiet than a rural nighttime ambience, but during rainy weather, the noise level will be roughly equal to a quiet urban nighttime level. Direct comparison is difficult because different noises have different annoyance levels. Some studies have indicated that noise produced by the corona process is more annoying than other types of noises because of its crackling and popping and conclude that a penalty of somewhere around 5 dB should be added to corona noise for comparison purposes. If the penalty were added, the noise level would be roughly 44 to 48 dBa on median, which is much like a quiet urban daytime noise level. The noise levels expected will be Substantially below the maximum level permitted under Hillsborough, Pasco and Pinellas Counties' noise ordinances, with or without the penalty. Studies of other transmission lines indicate that noise levels of less than 52.5 dB receive little or no complaints. Radio and Television Interference. The bursts of energy that occur during the corona process can, under certain circumstances, cause interference with radio and television reception. Because F.M. radio transmission uses a frequency modulation which is immune to amplitude noise, the proposed transmission line will have no effect on F.M. radio reception. A.M. radio does use an amplitude modulation which can be susceptible to transmission line noises. However, during fair weather conditions the proposed transmission line will not interfere with A.M. stations which meet FCC Type A signal service, which include those stations providing strong enough signals that they would be free of naturally occurring atmospheric interference 90 percent of the time. During foul weather, there may be some interference with some Type A stations at the edge of the right- of-way. However, such interference during stormy weather could occur even in the absence of the transmission line and the interfering effect of the line will not be substantially different than other atmospheric interferences. Television transmission uses frequency modulation for sound and amplitude modulation for the video or picture. Thus, the picture can receive interference from transmission lines in the form of a band of snow or ghosting on the screen. However, under fair weather conditions, the Lake Tarpon-Kathleen transmission line will cause no interference with television stations servicing the area. During foul weather, there could be some minimal interference with only Channel 3, and only in the worst case situation where the transmission line is operating at its maximum voltage and the receiving antenna is located immediately adjacent to the edge of the right-of-way or is oriented in a direction such that it receives the maximum amount of transmission line noise. Such worst case conditions are unlikely to occur and, if they do, Florida Power Corporation has agreed to correct interference problems arising therefrom. Microwave receivers, such as satellite dishes, experience no interference from corona. If a receiving station is located near a transmission line and utilizes a high gain antenna with large amplifiers to pick up weak stations, there is some potential for interference. Florida Satellite Network, Inc. does operate a standard television reception antenna atop a 90 foot high radio tower in order receive 9 local television signals. The tower is located approximately 500 feet north of the northern boundary of the secondary corridor. The evidence was insufficient to establish whether or not the proposed transmission line, if placed in the secondary corridor, would create interference during foul weather conditions. As noted above, Florida Power Corporation agrees to investigate and correct all valid complaints of radio and television interference caused by its transmission lines. Human Health and Safety Lightning Strikes. Lightning, an electrical discharge that begins in the clouds and progresses to the ground, is generally attracted and diverted to the tallest object. Transmission line towers are often the tallest structure in an area and they are often struck by lightning. Since the large surges in voltage in current caused by lightning can damage transmission line equipment, power companies attempt to protect their investments by placing static wires, or overhead ground wires, above the conductors to interrupt the lightning and route it through the tower structure to an extensive grounding system at the base of the structure. This process creates no significant risk to people or residents adjacent to the right-of-way and, in fact, may attract and ground lightning strikes that would otherwise strike elsewhere in the area. Electric Shock. Electric shock is the sensation a person feels when current passes through the body. It can range from a very low perception to a startled reaction and, at high levels, it can be fatal. Electric and magnetic fields associated with transmission lines can cause electric currents to be induced in objects. If one touches a conductive object within or adjacent to the transmission line right-of-way, a small amount of current could flow from the object through his body to the ground. Whether this produces an electric shock depends on the magnitude of the current. Common thresholds are one milliamp for steady state preception, two milliamps for startled reaction, and 4.5 Quo 9 milliamps for safe let-go levels, the threshold being dependent on body limb size and weight. Florida Power Corporation proposes to construct and operate this transmission line to comply with and exceed the National Electrical Safety Code, 1984 Edition (NESC). The NESC requires that induced currents be less than 5 milliamps. This line will produce maximum induced current in the largest objects found within pedestrian access areas of about 2.87 milliamps during normal load conditions; and of about 3.49 milliamps during emergency load conditions. Emergency load conditions occur very infrequently (once a year) and last no more than 3 to 4 hours. The line will produce maximum induced currents in the largest objects found in residential and secondary streets of about 4.10 during either normal or emergency load conditions and will produce maximum induced currents in the largest objects found on major highways of about 4.29 during either normal or emergency load conditions. It will produce progressively lower induced currents the further the distance from the line. There could conceivably be some higher induced currents in fences within the right-of-way or large metal buildings located adjacent to the right-of-way, but Florida Power Corporation routinely grounds such objects. Surveys of utilities operating 500 to 765 kV lines demonstrate that there have been no reports of injury from and very few complaints concerning electric shocks. While perceptible shocks could occur, they will be brief and result in no physiological harm. It is estimated that Florida Power Corporation will receive one complaint based on perceptible, but not harmful, electrical shock for every 35 years of operation of this line. Shock problems can arise for honey bee hives located in or near the right-of-way due to the electrical characteristics present in the bee hive and the bees when they are located within an electrical field. The problem can be eliminated by placing over the hive a grounded screening device, such as chicken wire or a metal plate. Florida Power Corporation has agreed to inform affected beekeepers of this problem and the solution thereto Spark Discharge. When induced current becomes trapped and builds up in objects that are well insulted from the ground, a grounded object coming in contact with it can create a spark, such as that which occurs when a person walks on carpet and then touches a door knob. While these sparks may create a nuisance, they do not cause physiological harm. There is some concern that a spark discharge could contain sufficient energy to ignite gasoline vapors when there exists an optimum mixture of vapor and air. Scientists have produced such a result under contrived conditions, but there is no evidence that this has occurred in practice. There is little likelihood of such an incident occurring because of the number of things which would have to occur simultaneously in order to create the necessary conditions. Falling Conductors. In the unlikely event that a subconductor breaks and falls to the ground, it will establish a spark, known as a fault. The increase in current will be detected by relays at both ends of the line and circuit breakers will immediately de-energize the line and disconnect that line from the rest of the substation. The total time between a conductor approaching the ground and establishing a fault condition to the time that the system is turned off will be about 60 thousandths of a second. Biological Effects of Electric and Magnetic Fields. When energized with electricity, transmission lines produce both electric and magnetic fields. On an electromagnetic spectrum, telephone and power lines would be at the bottom with respect to intensity, followed by television and radio waves, microwaves, infra red, ultra violent, x-rays and gamma rays. Whether or not low frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) associated with transmission lines and other sources of electrical energy may interact with humans, animals and plants to cause harmful biological effects has been the subject of inquiry debate within the scientific community for a number of years. The record of this proceeding contains the testimony of experts and documentary evidence concerning the biological effects of EMF, as well as the statements from members of the public expressing apprehension and fear about the health hazards associated with transmission line EMFs. For the Lake Tarpon-Kathleen transmission line, the maximum (which occurs for only a few hours a day) electric fields within the right-of-way during normal load periods will be between 6.79 and 7.37 kilovolts per meter depending upon the tower configuration utilized and the width of the right-of-way. During emergency load conditions (which occur only once a year for three or four hours) the electric fields will range between 8.07 and 8.84 kilovolts per meter. At the edge of the rights-of- way, the maximum electric field strengths are 1.90 (190-foot right-of-way), 3.43 (100-foot right-of-way, delta configuration) and 1.56 (100- foot right-of-way, vertical configuration) for normal loads and 1.85, 3.52 and 1.41, respectively, for emergency loads. The maximum magnetic fields within the right-of-way during normal loads will range between 96.0 milligaus (190-foot right-of-way) and 67.0 milligaus (100-foot right-of-way). During emergency loads, these same figures range between 709 and 470 milligaus. At the edge of the rights-of-way, the range of maximum magnetic fields during normal loads are 24.0 (190-foot right-of-way) and 37.0 (100-foot right-of-way), and during emergency loads 154 and 242 milligaus. While electric fields can be shielded by physical objects, such as trees and houses, magnetic fields cannot be shielded unless the physical objects have strong magnetic properties. The field values listed above are maximum theoretical values and would be affected by variations in current flows and shielding by other objects. Also, the fields could be slightly higher along portions of the divergent secondary corridor because the numerous angles and turns could result in a convergence of fields from more than one direction. Dr. Andrew Marino, a bio-physicist, is of the opinion that electric fields are stressors of biological organism's which contribute to the incidence of all types of diseases. He concludes that the electric field at the edge of a right-of-way should be no greater than 50 volts per meter, thus necessitating a right of way width in this case of 400 feet on each side of the centerline or a total width of 800 feet. Dr. John Norgard, an electrical engineer, felt that the electric field at the edge of the right-of-way should be no greater than 434 volts per meter, thus necessitating a minimum right of way width for this line of 330 feet. Though not qualified as an expert in the health effects of EMF, Karen Anthony, DER's transmission line siting coordinator, had no real concerns regarding the health effects of electric fields associated with transmission lines. However, she perceives a need for caution with respect to magnetic fields and adverse health effects and would prefer a right-of-way width of 190 feet so as to reduce the edge of right-of-way magnetic field strength by 13 milligaus during normal load conditions and by from 75 to 88 milligaus during emergency loads. This preference for a 190-foot right-of-way is not contained in a DER existing or proposed rule and no standard for magnetic fields or other evidence of known adverse health effects from magnetic fields was offered during the course of this proceeding. Dr. Morton Miller, a research biologist, concludes from his own experiments and a review of the Scientific research that, in spite of numerous attempts to do so, no deleterious biological effects have been found from the interaction of EMFs and biological organisms. Dr. Jerry C. Griffin, a medical doctor, does not believe that there are any demonstrated or accessible adverse health effects from EMF exposure to the fields expected from this transmission line. While there is a potential risk to wearers of one type of cardiac pacemaker, this same risk exists from exposure to the EMF's associated with common household appliances. Dr. H. B. Graves, a research biologist, does not believe that exposure to the electric and magnetic fields associated with this transmission line will cause adverse health effects in plants, animals or persons. Dr. Graves was also chairman of the Florida Electric and Magnetic Fields Science Advisory Commission which authored a report published in March of 1985, entitled "Biological Effects of 60-Hz Power Transmission Lines." The study had the participation of DER and the United States Department of Energy and was funded by the Florida Power Coordinating Group. It was the conclusion of this report that it is unlikely that human exposure to 60Hz EMFs from high voltage transmission lines presents a public health problem. Other reputable scientific groups have reached the same conclusion. The Florida Commission did concede that ambiguities in currently available scientific knowledge do exist and thus it can not be concluded with absolute certainty that there is no chance that a public health problem exists. New scientific developments should continue to be monitored. An analysis of the totality of the evidence presented in this proceeding on the EMF issue results in the finding that this transmission line will not cause or lead to adverse biological effects. Impacts of Proposed Corridors upon the Environment Water Resources, Vegetation and Wildlife. Water Resources. The primary and secondary corridors traverse or contain a variety of surface water resources. These water resources are characteristic of the central Florida area and include natural and manmade ponds and lakes, flowing streams, rivers, cypress swamps, mixed hardwood swamps, freshwater marshes and other kinds of wetlands, including areas which are only seasonally inundated. The largest wetland areas crossed are those associated with Cypress Creek near I-275 and with Fox Branch, a tributary to the Hillsborough River. The major receiving waters for these lakes and watercourses are (from west to east) Double Branch, Rocky Creek, Hillsborough River, Cypress Creek and South Branch. All lakes and watercourses crossed by the proposed corridors are designated as Class III waters by Chapter 17-3, Florida Administrative Code. There are no Outstanding Florida Waters within the proposed corridors. There are three public drinking water supply well fields located near the divergent secondary corridor. There are no springs in either corridor. The proposed primary corridor contains a fewer number of waterbodies than the proposed secondary corridor, and many of the water bodies within the primary corridor are already within the existing Higgins-Fort Meade right-of-way. Florida Power Corporation has committed to utilize a number of construction, operation and maintenance techniques in wetlands to avoid any potential adverse hydrologic and water quality effects. For example, in wetlands clean fill will be used, no stump removal or demucking will occur, felled timbers will be placed beneath roads to bear traffic and minimize soil compaction, roads will be constructed to a height of only one foot above water level to allow for surface flow and culverts will be installed to maintain sheet flow. Roadways will be rapidly revegetated to provide stability. Because of the low flow velocities in affected wetland areas, the effects of increased turbidity during construction should be minimal and temporary. The construction and maintenance of the transmission line will have no measurable effect upon groundwater. Since all borings and drill holes will be grouted, there will be no disturbance of the separation between the surficial and the Floridan aquifers and groundwater flow will not be impeded by soil removal. Because it is impractical to delineate site-specific designs for activities within wetlands during the corridor certification process, Florida Power Corporation has agreed to a post-certification review process for approval of site-specific dredge and fill activities. Compliance with the stipulated conditions of certification as set forth in Appendix A will provide DER and SWFID with reasonable assurances that water quality standards will be complied with. The Fox Branch System. As noted, Fox Branch is a tributary of the Hillsborough River and is comprised of some 2,450 acres of forested wetland. It drains the northwest flow of the Lakeland Ridge, an urbanized area of relatively high elevation located north of the City of Lakeland. The proposed corridor crosses the Fox Branch system at its widest point and the right- of-way could not be located to avoid the wetlands. While the 1,500-foot wide corridor includes a total of about 135 acres of wetlands associated with Fox Branch, only about 15.86 acres would be included within the cleared 150-foot wide right-of-way. Only 0.65 percent of the total wetlands will be cleared and only about 2.2 acres or 0.09 percent of the total wetlands will be filled for access roads. The conditions of certification attached as Appendix A require post-certification review by the appropriate agencies of all jurisdictional dredge and fill activities. The proposed construction techniques, conditions of certification and post-certification review of construction across Fox Branch are adequate to protect the water resources of that area. Vegetation. In areas outside the existing Higgins-Fort Meade right-of-way, the proposed 500 kV transmission line will result in some loss and disturbance of plant life. The vegetation communities which occur in both corridors are typical to those found in similar areas throughout central Florida. No unique or endangered species of plant life have been observed in either corridor. While canopy and tall wood vegetation will be cleared along the proposed rights-of-way, plant communities will not be totally destroyed. Rather, the clearing and maintenance will force a shift from the existing successional stages of vegetation to an earlier successional stage. The divergent secondary segment of the corridor contains a greater number of unaltered and undisturbed wetlands, but the divergent primary segment includes the more extensive, mature and diverse vegetation community associated with Cypress Creek, though this waterbody has been previously disturbed by I-275. If proper construction and maintenance techniques are followed, as proposed and as set forth in the conditions of certification, any adverse impacts upon vegetation communities should be minimized. Wildlife. Since both proposed corridors contain many areas of swamp, marsh, lakes, ponds, streams and forested wetlands, there are numerous species of wildlife which inhabit these areas. Both corridors contain similar habitat types and the value of any particular area for supporting wildlife habitat is primarily determined by the size of the area and the degree to which the area is developed or otherwise disturbed. There are no particularly unique habitats located within the divergent segment of the primary corridor and there are no known endangered or threatened wildlife species residing therein. Because the divergent secondary corridor is longer and more undeveloped at this point in time, it contains a larger amount and greater diversity of undisturbed wildlife habitat than does the divergent primary segment. Also there are two endangered or threatened species which actually reside within or adjacent to the divergent secondary corridor. These are the Southern Bald Eagle and the Florida Sandhill Crane. There are two apparently active bald eagle nests located south of the southern edge of the secondary corridor. One is approximately 1,000 to 1,100 feet south and the other is approximately 1,500 to 1,600 feet south of the edge of the corridor. While the corridor in this area does not cross any open water, there are lakes and ponds to the north of the corridor in which the eagles may feed, and the corridor lies between the nests and these lakes and ponds. The potential for injury to the eagles from collision with the transmission line is slight due to the visual acuity of an eagle and the fact that only about 0.07 percent of the bird population in general dies as a result of collision with power lines. There are no federal or state laws prohibiting a transmission line within a certain distance of an eagle's nest, though the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service does have a guideline indicating that activities within 1,500 feet of an eagle's nest should be reviewed to minimize effects. Florida Power Corporation has agreed to a condition of certification which calls for such a review and has agreed to consult with the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission regarding the type and timing of construction activities should the right-of-way be located within 1,500 feet of a bald eagle's nest. Active eagles' nests do presently exist near other transmission lines in Florida. Though difficult to distinguish from the migratory, unthreatened Greater Sandhill Crane, the non-migratory, threatened Florida Sandhill Crane has been sighted within or near the divergent segment of the secondary corridor. While there is a potential for a disturbance of this threatened species from the construction and existence of a transmission line, there was insufficient evidence to establish that the secondary corridor contains critical habitat features or that the Florida Sandhill Crane actually nests within or near the proposed corridor. As noted above, collisions with transmission lines have had no significant effect upon other bird populations. Nonprocedural Requirements of Agencies. If the conditions of certification attached hereto as Appendix A are imposed and met, the location, construction and maintenance of the transmission line will comply with the non- procedural requirements of state, regional and local governmental agencies. Variances or exceptions from local zoning ordinances may be required in some instances, and Florida Power Corporation provided notice in its application of those specific regulations from which variances, exceptions or exemptions may be required. However, insufficient evidence was adduced during the certification hearing to permit a factual finding as to the actual types of zoning variances or exceptions which may be required. The exact location of the rights-of-way and the placement of structures within-the rights-of-way will be determinative of the need for local zoning variances or exceptions. Comprehensive Plan Considerations. Transmission lines are generally compatible with the various types of land uses which will be traversed by both the primary and secondary corridors. However, the primary corridor is much more consistent with the various local comprehensive plans than is the proposed secondary corridor. This is primarily due to the fact that the primary corridor, both in its westerly segment and in its divergent segment, follows existing rights-of way, including the Higgins-Fort Meade transmission line and I-275, thereby coordinating linear facilities and minimizing conflicting land uses. Placement of the 500 kV line and towers within the right-of-way for the existing Higgins-Fort Meade line will present only incrementally greater land use impacts as opposed to completely new impacts, both aesthetic and environmental, were the line to be located within the divergent secondary segment. Both the Pasco County and the Hillsborough County comprehensive plans encourage harmonious surrounding land uses, the preservation of viable neighborhoods and the promotion of joint uses of land. Location of the line in the primary corridor, because of the prior existence of the Higgins-Fort Meade line, will be consistent with the objectives contained within the Hillsborough County comprehensive plan, known as the Horizon 2000 Plan. The Hillsborough County plan does contain a policy of protecting residential areas from encroachment by undesireable and incompatible uses and the permission of only those activities which directly serve the residential area affected. The proposed 500 kV line will not service the residents in the primary corridor. However, since the residential areas existing along the Higgins-Fort Meade right-of-way developed subsequent and in spite of the existence of that right-of-way, it is found that the location of the new line within the proposed divergent primary corridor does not constitute the encroachment of an undesirable or incompatible use. Likewise, it is found that the proposed 500 kV line and associated facilities will not constitute a "blighting influence" within the prohibition of Hillsborough County's Policy 2.3.1.1.3. Construction and maintenance of the proposed transmission line as planned and in accordance with the conditions of certification will not be inconsistent with either the Polk County Comprehensive Plan or the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council's growth policy. As noted above, proper construction and maintenance will not adversely affect the flow regime, the recharge capabilities or the filtering capabilities of the Fox Branch wetland system. Cost Considerations. Florida Power Corporation estimated the costs of the location and construction of the Lake Tarpon-Kathleen transmission line in both the proposed primary and secondary corridors. The estimated costs include costs for right-of-way acquisition, right- of-way preparation, road construction, tower construction, angles and other structures and conductors. The estimated costs include a 19 percent markup for indirect costs. The estimated costs do not include the acquisition of improvements that may be within the rights-of-way, severance damages to adjoining lands or the costs of acquiring the land through eminent domain proceedings. These latter costs were not included because they vary from parcel to parcel and are difficult to estimate. They will, however, clearly be incurred and will be substantial. Florida Power Corporation estimates that the cost of locating and constructing the line in the primary corridor will range between $24,386,000 and $32,994,000 if the delta towers are used, and between $24,071,000 and $32,568,000 if the vertical towers are used. The estimated costs for the secondary corridor are between $26,459,000 and $35,800,000. The prime difference in costs between the two corridors are the costs associated with the acquisition of the rights-of-way. The evidence establishes that the estimated costs for right-of-way acquisition within the divergent segment of the secondary corridor are greatly understated. This is due to the noninclusion of costs associated with eminent domain proceedings and costs for severance damages. Since some 12.7 miles more right-of-way must be acquired in the secondary corridor, the amount of these costs will greatly increase the overall secondary corridor costs estimated. Also, the trend toward more development in the secondary corridor will increase land values with the passage of time. In addition, the estimated cost for the primary corridor did not include a credit for the salvage value of the components of the Higgins-Fort Meade line which will be dismantled. In any event, the cost of the project will be at least $2 million to $3 million less if the primary corridor rather than the secondary corridor is utilized, and the differential in costs in favor of the primary corridor is most likely much greater. The issue of whether Florida Power Corporation has either abandoned or overburdened its existing Fort Meade-Higgins right-of-way in the 9.7 mile long divergent segment of the primary corridor has been fully briefed and the easement documents were received into evidence. Obviously, if the 100-foot right-of-way cannot be utilized without acquiring new easements or enlarging and enhancing existing easements, the cost of the primary corridor will be greatly in excess of that estimated by Florida Power Corporation. Florida Power Corporation did include some costs in its estimate for the acquisition of additional easement rights within the divergent primary segment. The Higgins-Fort Meade transmission line right-of-way was established in 1951. Florida Power Corporation acquired a number of express easements by grant, almost all of which allow Florida Power Corporation to improve, repair and rebuild the lines and increase the number of lines and voltage. The rights to the right-of-way continue as long as Florida Power Corporation uses them or until use is abandoned. In those few instances where there is no express easement, Florida Power Corporation has acquired prescriptive rights to the easement. In October or November of 1984, Florida Power Corporation de-energized the Higgins-Fort Meade double-circuit 115 kV transmission line. No lines or structures have been removed. At all times, it has been Florida Power Corporation's intent to either use the existing right-of-way easements for an upgraded transmission line or to sell the easements to another power company. Florida Power Corporation has never intended to abandon its 100-foot right-of-way within the primary corridor and did not do so by de-energizing the line in late 1984. There was insufficient evidence adduced to conclude that the replacement of the existing line with a 500 kV line would overburden existing easements to the extent that additional compensation would be required. Preference of Florida Power Corporation. Primarily because of the rapidly developing nature of the area surrounding the proposed secondary corridor, the consequences of that factor upon land use and cost considerations, and the prior existence of the Higgins-Fort Meade rights-of-way, Florida Power Corporation prefers that all segments of the proposed primary corridor be certified for the location of the Lake Tarpon-Kathleen 500 kV transmission line.
Recommendation Based upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law recited herein, it is RECOMMENDED that the Governor and Cabinet, sitting as the Siting Board, grant certification for the location of the primary corridor and the construction and maintenance of the transmission line within that corridor as proposed in the application and in accordance with the conditions of certification attached hereto as Appendix A. It is also RECOMMENDED that, as a further condition of certification, Florida Power Corporation be required to seek any necessary interest in state lands, the title to which is vested in the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, from that Board prior to engaging in any activity on or affecting that land, pursuant to Section 403.531(3), Florida Statutes, (1983). Respectfully submitted and entered this 29th day of January, 1986, in Tallahassee, Florida. DIANE D. TREMOR Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 29th day of January, 1986. COPIES FURNISHED: Honorable Bob Graham Governor State of Florida The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Honorable Doyle Connor Commissioner of Agriculture The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Honorable George Firestone Secretary of State The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Honorable Gerald Lewis Comptroller The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Honorable Jim Smith Attorney General The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Honorable Ralph Turlington Commissioner of Education The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Honorable Bill Gunter State Treasurer and Insurance Commissioner The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Carlos Alvarez, Esquire Carolyn S. Raepple, Esquire Richard S. Brightman, Esquire Hopping Boyd Green & Sams Post Office Box 6526 Tallahassee, Florida 32314 H. A. Evertz, III, Esquire Florida Power Corporation Post Office Box 14042 St. Petersburg, Florida 33733 John Bottcher, Esquire Douglas MacLaughlin, Esquire Department of Environmental Regulation 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32301 C. Laurence Keesey, Esquire Department of Community Affairs 2571 Executive Center Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Ralph Artigliere, Esquire Central Florida Regional Planning Council Lane, Trohn, Clarke, Bertrand & Williams, P.A. Post Office Drawer J Lakeland, Florida 33802 J. Edward Curren, Esquire Ms. Patricia Dorris Southwest Florida Water Management District 2379 Broad Street Brooksville, Florida 33512 Frederick B. Karl, Esquire Karl, McConnaughhay, Roland & Maida Post Office Drawer 229 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Elizabeth L. Eddy, Esquire Carolyn J. House, Esquire Hillsborough County Post Office Box 1110 Tampa, Florida 33601 David Smolker, Esquire Pasco County 4025 Moon Lake Road New Port Richey, Florida 33552 Dorothy Trogolo, Esquire Assistant County Attorney 7530 Little Road New Port Richey, Florida 33553 Mark F. Carpanini, Esquire Polk County Post Office Box 60 Bartow, Florida 33830 Ronald E. Cotterill, Esquire Cotterill, Gonzalez & Fisher 126 Flagship Drive Lutz, Florida 33549 Alton B. Parker, Esquire Steve Reynolds, Esquire MacFarlane, Ferguson, Allison & Kelly Post Office Box 1531 Tampa, Florida 33601 William M. Register, Jr., Esquire Register and Park 625 Twiggs Street Tampa, Florida 33602 Mr. Gerald Rabin 2708 East Stone Terrace Lakeland, Florida 33803 Ms. Debra A. Worley Big Lake Como Lake Association Post Office Box 488 Lutz, Florida 33549 Michelle Russell, Esquire Gerald A. Figurski, Esquire Martin & Figurski Post Office Box 786 New Port Richey, Florida 33552 Joseph A. McGlothlin, Esquire Enola R. Brown, Esquire Lawson, McWhirter, Grandoff & Reeves Post Office Box 3350 Tampa, Florida 33601 Mr. Donald W. Rairigh Paradise Lakes Condominium Homeowners Association Post Office Box 750 Land O' Lakes, Florida 33539 Timothy G. Hayes, Esquire Cotterill, Gonzalez & Fisher 126 Flagship Drive Lutz, Florida 33549 James V. Lau, Esquire Mary A. Lau, Esquire Lau, Lane, Piper & Asti, P.A. Post Office Box 838 Tampa, Florida 33601-0838 Margaret J. Bowles, Esquire Taub & Williams Post Office Box 3430 Tampa, Florida 33601 Robert S. Wise, Esquire 304 Northwood Drive Lutz, Florida 33549 John E. Lund, Esquire Cicero, Lund & Williams, P.A. 707 Franklin Street Mall Tampa, Florida 33602 John Radey, Esquire Aurell, Fons, Radey & Hinkle Post Office Drawer 11307 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Lynn H. Townsend, Esquire Holland & Knight Post Office Box 1288 Tampa, Florida 33601 Ms. Anne Thomas 3416 Almeria Avenue Tampa, Florida 33629 Charles R. McCoy, Esquire Department of Natural Resources 3900 Commonwealth Blvd. Suite 1003 Tallahassee, Florida 32303 Dan R. Stengle, Esquire Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission 620 S. Meridian Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Philip S. Bennett, Esquire Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Bldg. MS 58, Room 562 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 J. Roger Howe, Esquire Public Service Commission Fletcher Building 101 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Van B. Cook, Esquire Pinellas County 315 Court Street Clearwater, Florida 33516 Bennett L. Rabin, Esquire Harold H. Goldman, P.A. 10020 South Federal Highway Port St. Lucie, Florida 33549 Mr. Will James Shephard 14037 N. Dale Mabry Highway Tampa, Florida 33618 Ms. Nancie Poole 17 Eagle Lane Lutz, Florida 33549 Mr. John E. Greenslade 2901 Barcelona Street Tampa, Florida 33629 Lucius M. Dyal, Jr., Esquire Shackelford, Farrior, Stallings & Evans Post Office Box 3324 Tampa, Florida 33601 S. Cary Gaylord, Esquire Brigham, Moore, Gaylord, Schuster & Sachs 501 E. Kennedy Blvd. Tampa, Florida 33602
The Issue On December 13, 1989, Florida Power Corporation (FPC) filed a wetland resource permit application with the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) for a project to construct, operate and maintain a 69 kilovolt (kV) electrical transmission line in Osceola County. The application described the placement of power line poles in jurisdictional wetlands. On September 28, 1990, DER issued its notice of permit denial, DER File No. 49-173789-4. The ultimate issue for determination is whether FPC is entitled to the permit. Ancillary issues include the scope of "cumulative impacts" to be considered; the scope of "secondary impacts"; whether alternative sites must be considered; whether FPC's clearing of the right of way constituted dredge and fill activity; and whether mitigation is required, and if so, whether the mitigation offered by the applicant is adequate.
Findings Of Fact FPC, whose headquarters are located at 3201 34th Street, South, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33733, is required by Florida Statutes and regulations promulgated by the Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) to provide electric utility service in the vicinity of the proposed transmission line. DER, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2900 is an executive agency directly responsible for prevention of pollution of the air and waters of this State. Pursuant to that obligation, Sections 403.91-403.929, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 17-312, F.A.C., DER regulates proposed dredging and filling activities in waters of the State. FPC, pursuant to its statutory and regulatory mandate, transmits electricity through 33 counties within the state, providing actual service to customers in 32 counties. FPC's electrical transmission lines range in voltage capacity from 69 kV (69,000 volts) to 500 kV (500,000 volts). Considering other utilities, there are approximately 7,000 miles of 69 kV electrical transmission lines within the state, over 1,855 miles of which are operated and maintained by FPC. The Project The electrical transmission line at issue in the instant proceeding will traverse approximately 10 miles. It intercepts two areas of jurisdictional wetlands; however, the main point of contention in the permitting proceeding is the six acres of wetland vegetation which have been cleared in the vicinity of where the transmission line corridor intersects the main crossing of Reedy Creek. The original application for this project was 14 miles long; however, FPC and DER agreed to modify the application by separating the northern-most four miles of the project and submitting it as a separate application. The northern segment starts at the Intercession City substation and proceeds easterly along an existing transmission line corridor in the right of way of SR 17/92 to Old Tampa Road and then turns south terminating at the Poinciana Industrial Park. The proposed transmission line which is the subject of this proceeding starts from the Poinciana Industrial Park and proceeds south, then crosses Reedy Creek in a northeast to southwest direction and continues south, ultimately terminating at the Poinciana substation. There are references in the application to a 72 kV line. 72,000 volts is the maximum operating voltage. 69,000 volts is the normal daily load. Direct dredge and fill impacts associated with the proposed construction include 301 cubic yards of fill, which includes the wooden transmission poles as well as crushed rock backfill at the base of those poles. This fill material would be placed over .00846 acres. This fill amount equates to an area analogous to a 20 foot by 20 foot room. Initial placement and continued maintenance of the poles and lines require clearing. This enables access by equipment and prevents vegetation from interfering with the lines. Clearing is essential for the safety and reliability of the electrical power distribution system. The wood electrical transmission line poles will be spaced approximately 300 foot apart in an area of vegetation clearing 60 feet wide. The major jurisdictional area north and south of the Reedy Creek crossing is approximately 4,400 feet long. The Applicant will, after construction, undertake corridor maintenance on a three to five year cycle. An area will be kept clear 50 foot square around each wooden pole structure along the proposed transmission line. Vegetation will be maintained at ground or water level for 17 feet on either side of the wooden utility poles. The outer 13 feet on each side will be allowed to regenerate except for fast growing trees and other vegetation with the potential to reach 30 feet prior to the next regularly scheduled maintenance period. Fast growing trees within the 13 foot outer area on either side of the corridor will be girdled or treated with herbicides by specific and selective application. The only herbicides to be used will be those that are EPA approved for use in the State of Florida. All exotic or nuisance target species will be removed from the entire right of way as part of FPC's maintenance program. The Application Process FPC submitted a wetland resource permit application for this project on December 6, 1989, received by the DER Central Florida District on December 13, 1989. DER requested additional information on January 12, 1990, and the Applicant submitted responses by letter dated April 20, 1990. On May 18, 1990, DER submitted a second request for additional information, which was responded to by FPC at a meeting with DER Central District staff in Orlando on June 5, 1990, and by a follow-up letter dated June 20, 1990. Neither of DER's requests for additional information required information relative to alternate routes for the proposed transmission line; however, a letter from DER to FPC dated June 20, 1990 states that mitigation would be required since an alternative route was not presented and impacts could not be reduced any further. The application was deemed complete on June 22, 1990. Subsequently, FPC proposed a preservation mitigation of 1:1 ratio by offering for preservation a 6-acre area of Reedy Creek Swamp near the Intercession City substation. FPC waived DER's 90 day statutory time clock in which it has to act on complete permit applications until October 1, 1990. The DER Central District Office issued a notice of permit denial regarding FPC's project on September 28, 1990. The maintenance plan described in paragraph 6, above, includes a departure from FPC's past practices. The plan and specifics of the 13-foot border areas were provided to DER during the hearing on December 3, 1991. Without objection by DER, the hearing proceeded on the application thus modified. Reedy Creek Swamp and the Project Context Reedy Creek Swamp is located in Orange, Osceola and Polk Counties. It is the only large mixed wetland forest system in Osceola County and is one of the largest systems in central Florida. It provides valuable forested wetland habitat for numerous plant and animal species. The proposed dredging and filling activity which is the subject of this application occurs in the South Reedy Creek basin. It is part of the Reedy Creek and its associated floodplains and uplands that drain south-southeast of Interstate-4. South Reedy Creek basin, as described in the instant proceeding, consists of over 92,000 acres of upland and wetland habitats. Approximately 31,448 acres of contiguous forested wetland are contained within that 92,000 acres. Based on the limited nature of the project's corridor, the six acre disturbance has been correctly characterized as de minimis. Since the turn of the century the South Reedy Creek basin has been the subject of extensive logging and silviculture impacts through either clearcutting or selective timbering which continues to this day. The basin is also the subject of an ongoing effort by the South Florida Water Management District for land aquisition and management. Approximately 7,000 acres of the basin have been bought or are under plans to purchase for protection. Commercial and environmental interests command the basin's resources. Clearing the Way FPC's clearing of the six acres of forested wetland was accomplished from March 12 through June 7, 1990. Clearing occurred during the processing of the dredge and fill application in order to take advantage of dry conditions and to facilitate bringing the electrical transmission line into service in accordance with FPC's established schedule. All vegetation in the wetland area was removed at ground or water level and the material was then either burned on site or removed to upland locations. Charles Duncan, FPC's chief inspector for transmission line construction, made regular spot investigations of all construction and assured that the hand clearing and low pressure rubber wheeled and tracked vehicles used by FPC did not result in significant soil disturbance. It is unrefuted that between June and November 1990, well after FPC's clearing was completed, considerable silvicultural activity occurred immediately adjacent to the corridor, both east and west. John Vogel, an expert in forestry and the effects of clearcutting, provided photographic evidence of those silvicultural entities' use of the corridor and identified the adjacent property owner as the party actually responsible for that activity. These facts, and DER employee Don Medellin's tacit admission that what he saw on his June 7, 1990, site inspection clearly could have been accomplished by parties other than FPC, leads to the specific finding that no FPC-initiated dredging and filling has occurred within the corridor. Dredging and filling will occur when the poles are placed. The evidence submitted by FPC, including rainfall and flow discharge information for the relevant time period, closely corroborate Mr. Duncan's eye witness accounts that clearing was conducted during a period when the wetland areas were extremely dry. Mr. Duncan further noted that the dry conditions precluded the burning of all of the collected and stockpiled debris beyond the week of June 7, 1990, and those conditions account for some of Mr. Medellin's observations of stockpiled material during his visit to the site on June 7, 1990. Considering the site conditions at the time of clearing and the absence of running water within Reedy Creek itself, there were effectively no water quality consequences to the creek from the clearing activity. Silt screens were constructed on the site on May 1, 1990, and according to Dr. Miles Smart, an expert in water chemistry and limnology, that precaution adequately safeguarded water quality within Reedy Creek during subsequent rain events. DER witness, Don Medellin, confirmed that the Department had no knowledge of any water quality violations having occurred during the FPC construction activity. The Public Interest Criteria Much, if not all, of the Department's opposition to the proposed project is based on the clearing of vegetation as opposed to pole placement and filling associated therewith. In this case the impacts of the clearing are already known. In the traditional dredge and fill case, the applicant provides evidence, testimony and test results predicting the impacts of the proposed construction activity, whereas in the instant case, the Applicant has the benefit of providing reasonable assurances by documenting the consequences of its acts. In the instant case, FPC provided a detailed analysis of biological and water quality ramifications from its clearing. DER presented several witnesses who contested the positive or neutral effects that the proposed transmission line corridor would have on wildlife, citing nest parasitism, predation, fragmentation, and reduction in patch size as examples of adverse impacts that the proposed line could impose on wildlife. DER witness, Dr. Francis Putz, testified that the project could cause unraveling of the forested wetland and sunscalding of newly exposed trees along the edge of the corridor. However, no DER witness presented any quantitative data or analyses that would indicate that any of the possible adverse consequences mentioned above were, in fact, occurring or reasonably likely to occur in Reedy Creek as a result of FPC's project. It is undisputed by either party that clearing of the proposed transmission line corridor resulted in a change to that specific six acre area from a forested wetland to a herbaceous/shrub wetland. Furthermore, it is undisputed that FPC's proposed maintenance practices will maintain that change over the expected 30-year operational life of the transmission line. However, different is not synonymous with adverse. The structural change to the wetland has not had, and will not have, any deleterious consequences to water quality within Reedy Creek. Dr. Miles Smart, the only expert in water chemistry and limnology to testify, presented testimony, based on samples of water quality in Reedy Creek and available historical water quality data, that water quality approximately a year and a half after initial clearing was no different than the ranges observed over the ten year period for which historical information was available. In most cases, water quality was the same or extremely close for the sampled parameters which included water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, alkalinity, turbidity, concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorous, total kjeldahl nitrogen and orthophosphate nitrogen. FPC's proposed maintenance practices which include the use of EPA approved herbicides for use in control of target species, will pose no problem to water quality. A study of twenty-two transmission line rights of way in the State of New York found virtually no water quality problems as a result of maintenance of those transmission lines. It was uncontroverted that FPC has never experienced water quality violations as a result of its management practices, nor has it been the focus of any enforcement or noncompliance action with respect to any previous clearing or construction activity it has undertaken. The clearing created no impediment to flow or impounding. The continuing use of silt screens and hay bales by FPC during pole installation will reduce the likelihood of erosion or shoaling. Extensive ground cover currently present in the corridor and FPC's proposed preservation of this herbaceous/shrub vegetation will further minimize any possible shoaling and erosion. Vegetative surveys conducted approximately a year and a half after the initial clearing show that the corridor has revegetated with 85 percent mean herbaceous plant cover in the corridor. Species composition of vegetation is similar in the corridor and no new species have been introduced nor have any been eliminated as a result of the clearing activity. Based on primary productivity and decomposition rate studies, FPC's clearing activity and the vegetative change that has resulted predictably should increase net primary productivity threefold over what exists in the adjacent forest, primary productivity being simply biomass accumulated over a period of time. Several DER witnesses testified to the possible introduction of nuisance or invader species as a result of FPC's clearing activity and subsequent maintenance of the corridor. However, FPC's proposed maintenance practices will eliminate those target species which inhibit the growth of other species, resulting in a wetland community having similar shrub and herb strata to that of the adjacent forest. DER admitted that any proliferation of nuisance species can be controlled with proper management techniques and has required such control as mitigation for clearing associated with an electrical transmission line project by Florida Power and Light Company in Lee County. Left to natural processes, the cleared corridor would eventually return to a forested area similar in species composition to the adjacent forest within several years. This rapid regeneration comports with experiences in other transmission line projects and in the silviculture industry. Qualitative analysis of other utility corridors in the Central Florida region confirm this natural process of succession. One of those projects, the Tampa Palms Corridor Improvement Project, constructed in a large forested wetland similar to the Reedy Creek Swamp, revealed that in 25 years after clearing, trees had regenerated to heights of 10 to 50 feet with corresponding diameters at breast height ranging from 2.7 to 30.5 centimeters. John Vogel, an expert in forestry and the effects of clearcutting, provided unrefuted testimony and photographic evidence of a clear cut site in the South Reedy Creek basin where after a period of 8 years rapid revegetation and reforestation was occurring, resulting in a fully stocked pre-commercial stand of timber. Several DER witnesses indicated that FPC's manner of cutting trees at ground or water height could have adverse effects on the ability of tree species to regenerate. However, this was refuted by the evidence of tree coppicing ( sprouting within the cut-off stumps) within the corridor with some canopy species having coppices over six feet tall in the 18 month period since FPC's initial clearing. DER employee, Donald Medellin, indicated at hearing that the clearing and proposed maintenance activity of FPC may impact a limited number of plant species listed as threatened. The Applicant's onsite analysis established that Tillandsia, a species listed in Chapter 581, Florida Statutes, as endangered, does exist in the adjacent forest in large numbers. No species referenced by Mr. Medellin appear on any federal endangered or threatened plant species list. Certain referenced plants appear on various state lists; however, none of these lists preclude the clearing of such vegetation with permission of the landowner. FPC's proposed maintenance activities for this project would not threaten the continuing existence of any of those species. The loss of some individual plants as a result of FPC's initial clearing was inconsequential, and continued maintenance of the corridor will not impact the species' continuing existence in the area. The change from forested to herbaceous wetland was demonstrated to have had no adverse effect on the conservation of fish and wildlife in the South Reedy Creek basin. An extensive quantitative analysis undertaken by J. Steven Godley established that aquatic organisms (i.e., fish, aquatic amphibians, and reptiles), invertebrates, mammals, and birds have not been negatively impacted by FPC's initial clearing of the transmission line corridor. It was uncontroverted that the project has occasioned a twofold increase in the number of aquatic organisms in the corridor as compared to the adjacent forest. Even though wildlife surveys conducted over 1,000 manhours revealed no measurable impact to any species of wildlife, Mr. Godley constructed a theoretical listing of several species of vertebrates indigenous to the Reedy Creek Swamp system which were likely to use the swamp system in an average year or at least a part of their life cycle, in order to assess the possible impact of the corridor on those species. Mr. Godley's unrefuted analysis revealed that the vast majority of all species of the various groups (fish, amphibian, reptiles, mammals, birds) are expected to be either positively affected or not affected at all by FPC's proposed project. DER witness, Dr. Herbert Kale, testified that some bird species such as red-eyed vireos, warblers, woodpeckers and thrushes could possibly be impacted due to the loss of forested canopy since they are cavity nesters, and because of nest parasitism by the brownheaded cowbird. Dr. Kale readily admitted, however, that the transmission line swath was small and was not fatal to any of those interior forest bird species. Moreover, his testimony regarding the nest parasitism was inherently contradictory, since the cowbirds breed in winter during a period when the other species are actually in Central and South America. The wetland change occasioned by FPC's project will not adversely affect endangered or threatened wildlife species. The only reptile likely to occur in the Reedy Creek Swamp that is either threatened, endangered or a species of special concern is the indigo snake, which will likely be positively impacted by the corridor, as it feeds on aquatic organisms in the swamp. No listed mammals will be impacted by the corridor. Three species of wading birds, the wood stork, little blue heron and snowy egret, will be positively affected by the transmission line corridor as they, too, will be provided excellent feeding habitat. DER's witness, Dr. Kale, agreed that the change will provide additional habitat for marsh wading birds. The only other possible endangered species that may occur in the swamp is the bald eagle. Since bald eagles prefer large water bodies, they are unlikely to occur. They would benefit, however, from the enhanced feeding habitat. Existing literature regarding the ecological impacts of clearcutting and electrical transmission line corridors on wildlife is consistent with the quantitative evidence submitted by FPC. Existing scientific literature generally reflects that transmission line rights of way cause edge effect, defined as a transition between two or more diverse communities. This edge causes an increase in species number and diversity for wildlife in the corridors, as compared to the adjacent forest. This is particularly true of bird species. For small mammals there is either a nonsignificant difference in species numbers in the corridor as compared to the adjacent forest, or there is a larger small mammal diversity within the corridor as opposed to the adjacent forest. The same applies for larger mammals and game species. The applicant's witnesses touted edge effect as essentially positive, while DER's witnesses described the phenomenon as a negative impact, since any new species are already abundant in other habitats. No finding is made generally on this issue, but rather in this case it is concluded that edge effect is not so significant as to constitute a negative consequence of the project. Based on the weight of empirical evidence and opinion testimony presented, wildlife species residing in the South Reedy Creek basin have been and will continue to be either positively affected or not affected at all by FPC's proposed project. Moreover, the overall productivity of the wetland from the standpoint of vegetation and wildlife, when balanced across all plant and animal species, has not and will not be negatively affected. Although the opportunities for recreational activities are limited in South Reedy Creek basin due to the inaccessibility of the site, those activities such as hunting, fishing, and bird watching are unchanged or have improved as a result of the small localized change to a herbaceous/shrub wetland. The need for the electrical transmission line was unrefuted. FPC must meet minimum service standards in its provision of electric power as set out by the PSC. In order to meet these service standards, FPC decided, through its internal system planning and modeling, that a new 69 kV electrical transmission line was required between its Intercession City and Poinciana substations to provide a more reliable source of power to the towns of Davenport and Haines City as well as the Parker-Poinciana 55,000 unit residential development, as these areas have experienced problems with low voltage. The demonstrated need for this facility and the public benefit which DER has admitted it will provide, when balanced with minimal changes to the forested wetland system, lead to the finding that this project is not contrary to the public interest. Cumulative Impacts DER failed to present any evidence disputing the hydrologic and biologic validity of the boundaries of the South Reedy Creek basin or the location of existing and proposed electrical transmission lines in that system. The only other projects suggested by DER for cumulative impact analysis were several projects consisting of construction of berms, roads and pipelines, as well as proposed developments of regional impact (DRI's). However, these projects were not shown to be similar in construction or amount of impact to FPC's proposed electrical transmission line, except for their linear nature. Unlike this project, roads, berms, pipelines and residential developments remove wetlands. It was not established that all the project applications considered by DER for cumulative impacts were within the South Reedy Creek basin. Instead, several DER witnesses alluded to the loss of forested wetlands allegedly occurring throughout the state. The evidence was anecdotal and unreliable. DER cited an analysis showing a three percent decline in forested wetlands, but the study combined both South Carolina and Florida acreages. Of the existing and proposed transmission lines within a 10 year planning horizon, very few (only three) will directly cross any portion of the South Reedy Creek basin. Those proposed electrical transmission lines will be co-located along existing rights of way and will have little, if any, impact on the forested component of the South Reedy Creek basin. It was undisputed that as a general proposition, the construction and operation of electrical transmission lines vital to the provision of electrical service does not stimulate subsequent development in an area but, in fact, follows development where electrical services are projected to be needed. Logging has occurred extensively in this area in the past and there is no evidence that the 60 foot corridor has induced additional logging activity, as asserted by DER. Consideration of Alternative Routes and Methods Having identified the need for a new transmission line, FPC conducted an intensive route selection analysis taking into account environmental, property (real estate), economic, and construction considerations. In this case, FPC considered two routes to address the electrical needs of this area: the recommended route, which is the subject of this proceeding, and an alternate route to the east and along an existing roadway. The alternate route would still have crossed Reedy Creek and its contiguous wetlands at some point in order to connect to the Poinciana substation. Both of the proposed corridor routes are within FPC's service territory. A consideration in choosing the recommended route was its proximity to existing and proposed substations. The alternate route would have necessitated more vegetative clearing in the future, as its location was not near proposed substations in this area. Moreover, the recommended route was aligned through the narrowest portion of the South Reedy Creek basin through what was an old tram railbed used by the logging industry. Major property owners in the area of the proposed line expressed their preference for the recommended route. The landowner for most of the proposed corridor south of the Reedy Creek crossing granted easements at no cost to FPC. FPC fully participated in the give and take of the permit application process for this project with DER. It was unrefuted that FPC employee, W. Jeffrey Pardue, met with a DER employee prior to submittal of the application during which meeting the two routes were discussed. The only concern about the project expressed by DER at that meeting was construction of access roads. In response to this concern, and prior to application submittal, FPC's transmission line was redesigned to consist of only wooden pole structures requiring shorter span construction and allowing less right-of-way clearing, since the transmission line wires would not move as much due to wind or other weather conditions. Wood pole construction will also allow for the use of low pressure, high flotation, equipment for construction and maintenance of the transmission line, thereby obviating the need for access roads. Mitigation: The policy applied In order to appease DER's demand for mitigation, FPC entered into negotiations with DER and offered the preservation of six acres of existing wetlands located east of its Intercession City substation adjacent to State Road 17/92, an area vegetatively similar to the area affected. Mitigation is the reduction or elimination of actual or anticipated adverse effects caused by a wetland project. Mitigation, as evolved in DER's permitting processes, can be the creation of new wetlands to replace those destroyed, the enhancement of an existing wetland, or preservation of an existing wetland other than that impacted by the project. Because preservation as a mitigation measure does not replace lost wetlands, DER has consistently required a preservation ratio of more than 1:1, most often 10:1, and sometimes substantially more than 10:1. The requirement is based on a case by case analysis of the quality of the wetland impacted, the extent of the impact and the quality of the wetland offered for preservation by the applicant. Clearing, without more, is not considered a dredge and fill activity and therefore has not, alone, required a DER permit. Clearing has not, therefore, been the subject of mitigation requirements in the past. Until the recent past, DER has not applied its mitigation policy to clearing associated with construction and maintenance of electrical transmission lines. Most of those lines have been placed along roadways and other existing corridors with little additional impact to jurisdictional areas. DER has required mitigation for other linear configured projects such as pipelines and the unique "Maglev" project, a high speed elevated train proposed to be constructed from the Orlando Airport to a tourist center in Orange County. DER is presently requiring power companies in three power plant or transmission line siting cases to address the secondary impact of clearing. Until the review of impacts is complete, the DER staff cannot predict what and how much mitigation will be required in those cases. Prior to the instant case, DER Chief of the Bureau of Wetland Resource Management, Janet Llewellyn, could identify only one instance of mitigation for clearing associated with an electrical transmission line: the Florida Power and Light Company line in Lee County addressed in paragraph 21, above. The "mitigation" required in that case is already proposed in FPC's maintenance plan. DER in this case has adequately justified its policy of considering secondary impacts of clearing related to the construction and maintenance of electrical transmission lines. Those impacts are legitimately assessed when the need for mitigation is being considered. The nature and extent of secondary impacts from clearing are properly part of the discourse and review of the nature and extent to which mitigation will be required. The need for mitigation, however, is not reached when no adverse impacts are found. Here, the applicant has successfully demonstrated by the substantial weight of evidence that neither the clearing already completed, (albeit precipitately) nor the planned pole and line construction and future right of way maintenance will violate water quality standards or otherwise offend the public interest criteria of Section 403.918, F.S. The application of DER's mitigation policy is unnecessary in this case.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is, hereby RECOMMENDED: That the agency enter its final order granting the application for permit #49-173789-4. DONE and RECOMMENDED this 19th day of February, 1992, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. MARY CLARK Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 19th day of February, 1992. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER The following constitute specific rulings on the findings of fact proposed by the parties. Petitioner's Proposed Findings Adopted in paragraph 1. Adopted in paragraph 2. Adopted in paragraph 3. Adopted in paragraph 4. Adopted in paragraph 5. Adopted in paragraph 6. Adopted in paragraph 7. Adopted in paragraph 11. Adopted in paragraph 12. Adopted in paragraph 13. Adopted in paragraph 9 and paragraph 10. Adopted in paragraph 14. Rejected as unnecessary. Adopted in paragraph 15. Rejected as unnecessary. Adopted in paragraph 16. Adopted in paragraph 17. Adopted in paragraph 18. Adopted in paragraph 19. Adopted in substance in paragraph 20. Adopted in substance in paragraph 21. Adopted in substance in paragraph 22. Adopted in substance in paragraph 23. Adopted in substance in paragraph 24. Adopted in substance in paragraph 25. Adopted in substance in paragraph 26. Adopted in substance in paragraph 27. Adopted in paragraph 28. Adopted in paragraph 29. Adopted in paragraph 30. Adopted in paragraph 31. Adopted in paragraph 32. Adopted in paragraph 33. Adopted in part in paragraph 34, except for the proposed finding that forested wetlands are increasing, which finding is not supported by reliable, nonhearsay evidence. Adopted in paragraph 35. Adopted in paragraph 36. Adopted in paragraph 37. Adopted in paragraph 38. Adopted in paragraph 39. Rejected, except for the conclusory finding that mitigation is not necessary here because of no finding of adverse impacts. See paragraph 44. The proposed findings related to the error of the policy generally are rejected as contrary to the evidence. Respondent's Proposed Findings Adopted in paragraph 7. 2.-3. Adopted in paragraph 4. 4.-5. Adopted in part in paragraph 7. Rejected as unnecessary. Rejected as contrary to the evidence (as to any implication that dredging and filling was done by the applicant); otherwise adopted by implication in paragraph 11. Adopted in substance in paragraph 11. 9.-10. Adopted in substance in paragraph 7. Adopted in substance in paragraph 39. Adopted in substance in paragraph 7. Adopted in substance in paragraph 4. Adopted in substance in paragraphs 6 and 7. Adopted in substance in paragraph 5. Adopted in substance in paragraph 6. Adopted in substance in paragraph 5 and conclusions of law #3. Rejected as contrary to the evidence. The clearing conducted by FPC did not constitute dredge and fill activity. 19.-22. Adopted in substance in paragraph 11. 23.-24. The conclusion that logging activity is a secondary impact of the FPC is rejected as wholly unsubstantiated by competent evidence. Adopted in paragraph 8. Adopted in part in paragraph 8, otherwise rejected as contrary to the weight of evidence. Rejected as unnecessary. Adopted in substance in paragraph 24. Adopted in paragraph 10. Adopted in paragraph 16. Rejected as unsupported by competent, credible evidence. 31(a). Rejected as contrary to more substantial evidence and, as to recreation mitigation, unnecessary. 32.-33. Rejected in substance as unsubstantiated by the weight of evidence. Rejected as unnecessary. Rejected as contrary to the weight of evidence. 36.-38. Rejected as unnecessary. FPC will remove the nuisance species as part of its maintenance plan. 39.-47. Rejected as contrary to the greater weight of evidence. 48.-50. Rejected as unsubstantiated by competent evidence. 51.-52. Rejected as contrary to the weight of evidence. Adopted in paragraph 17. Rejected as unnecessary. The construction activity could have, but did not cause water quality violations. See paragraph 13. 55.-58. Rejected as unnecessary. 59. Rejected as contrary to the evidence. The logging activity was occurring long before and during the relevant period and was not caused by the FPC project. 60.-76. Rejected as irrelevant or contrary to the weight of evidence. Adopted in paragraph 32. Adopted in paragraph 36. 80.-87. Rejected as irrelevant. 88. Adopted in part in paragraph 42. That mitigation is required is rejected as contrary to the evidence. 89.-90. Adopted in paragraph 39. Rejected as unnecessary. Adopted in part in paragraph 42, otherwise rejected as an enforcement issue and irrelevant here. Adopted in paragraph 40. Adopted in substance in paragraph 40. 95.-106. Rejected as unnecessary. COPIES FURNISHED: Frank E. Matthews, Esquire Michael P. Petrovich, Esquire Hopping, Boyd, Green & Sams O. Box 6526 Tallahassee, FL 32314 Douglas MacLaughlin, Esquire Office of the General Counsel Dept. of Environmental Regulation Twin Towers Office Building 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400 Carol Browner, Secretary Dept. of Environmental Regulation Twin Towers Office Building 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400 Daniel H. Thompson, General Counsel Dept. of Environmental Regulation Twin Towers Office Building 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400
Findings Of Fact The proposed transmission line corridor is for the purpose of locating two 500 kV transmission lines scheduled to be placed in service in 1985. These lines will be part of a transmission expansion plan to provide a 500 kV transmission network along the Florida east coast from Georgia to southeast Florida. This transmission network will allow the import of coal-generated electricity from the Southern Company in Georgia and transfers of coal-generated electricity from future generating facilities located in Duval County and Putnam County. This transmission corridor is referred to as the Duval-Poinsett Transmission Corridor. The northern terminus of the corridor is to be located in Duval County and the southern terminus of the corridor is to be located in Orange County. The length of the corridor is approximately 175 miles. Within the corridor there will be placed a 330 foot wide right-of-way for two 500 kV transmission lines constructed upon tubular steel H-frame structures with an approximate span between structures of 1,320 feet. Although the width of the right-of-way would normally not exceed 330 feet, that width could extend to 380 feet where angle structures in the line are required. Similarly, in some places the right-of-way may be narrower than 330 feet. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 403.537, Florida Statutes (1981), the Florida Public Service Commission, by order dated June 29, 1981, concluded that: The two proposed Duval-Poinsett 500 kV transmission lines will enhance electric system reliability and integrity. The two proposed Duval-Poinsett 500 kV transmission lines will improve the availability of low-cost electric energy within the State of Florida. The Duval Substation and the Poinsett Substation are appropriate starting and ending points for the proposed line. The Public Service Commission then determined that the proposed transmission line is needed. Notice of the final certification hearing as scheduled for November 23, 1981, was published in the Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 7, No. 42, October 16, 1981; The Daytona Beach Morning Journal, on September 24, 1981; The Florida Times Union, on September 23, 1981; The Sentinel Star, on September 23, 1981; and The Palatka Daily News, on September 24, 1981. Pursuant to motion, the final hearing as scheduled for November 23, 1981, was subsequently continued to January 11, 1982. Pursuant to that continuance, notice of the final certification hearing as continued was published in the Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 7, No. 51, December 18, 1981; The Daytona Beach Sunday News Journal, on November 22, 1981; The Florida Times Union, on November 21, 1981; The Palatka Daily News, on November 20, 1981; and The Sentinel Star, on November 12, 1981. All parties to this proceeding had actual notice of the proceeding. For the purposes of this Recommended Order the corridor for which FP&L seeks certification will be broken into six segments as follows: the Duval-to- Rice Segment; the Palatka Area Segment (Rice Substation to Putnam-Flagler County line); the Flagler County Segment; the Volusia County Segment; the Seminole County Segment; and the Orange County Segment. In addition, a corridor segment from Interstate IV in Volusia County, south through Brevard County, and west to the Poinsett Substation in Orange County, was proposed by certain parties in this proceeding and will be referred to herein as the "Geneva Alternate Corridor." The corridor as proposed is approximately one mile wide except that, in some places, the applicant has proposed, in agreement with certain parties, that the width be less than one mile. During the progress of this proceeding, both prior to and during final hearing, in the process of litigating the disputes between the parties, certain changes to the location of the corridor as set forth in the application have been proposed by parties and accepted by the applicant. Thus, the alignment of the corridor now specifically sought by the applicant differs from that originally proposed in the application. The corridor as now proposed and recommended by the applicant is set forth in Composite Attachments II and III to this Recommended Order. The six segments listed above and depicted by Composite Attachments II and III are generally described as follows: Duval to Rice Segment - that part of the corridor as proposed from the Duval Substation through Duval, Clay and Putnam Counties to the Rice Substation. Palatka Area Segment - a corridor proceeding southwest from the Rice Substation, in a southerly direction to the west of the City of Palatka and in an easterly direction south of Palatka, to the Flagler County line. Flagler County Segment - that part of the proposed corridor alignment through the central portion of Flagler County. Volusia County Segment - that part of the proposed corridor through the central region of Volusia County crossing the Volusia-Seminole County line west of Lake Ashby. Seminole County Segment - that part of the proposed corridor through the eastern region of Seminole County. Orange County Segment - that part of the proposed corridor through the eastern region of Orange County to the termination at the Poinsett Substation. There are no unique physical features within the proposed corridor that would reasonably preclude from an engineering point of view the location of a transmission line right-of-way and the construction of two 500 kV transmission lines with associated access/maintenance roads. Placement of two 500 kV transmission lines within the corridor as proposed does not conflict with any local government comprehensive plan. A right of way can be located within the corridor as proposed without the displacement of any existing home. However, the possibility does exist that homes or other structures could be built after the final certification hearing in this cause in such a manner as to necessarily subject it to displacement in the location of a right of way. Similarly, it is possible that negotiations with property owners pertinent to the ultimate location of the right of way could result in the removal of a home for economic, environmental or other land use reasons. Taken as a whole, the impact of the proposed corridor on property values adjacent to or in the vicinity of the right-of-way will be minimal. Where the highest and best use of land is agriculture, there will be almost no impact on property values because almost none of the land will be withdrawn from its agricultural use. For land whose highest and best use is timber production, the right-of-way with its transmission lines will not Significantly interfere with such production and can serve as a firebreak and all-weather access. Thus, it is possible that the value of the entire timber tract which becomes subject to a transmission line right-of-way would not be significantly diminished. Semi-rural lands with development potential which have not been subdivided will be very slightly impacted with regard to land value because the development of property within an existing right-of-way can take into account such a right-of- way and significantly negate its impact on land value. There will be an impact on the land value of suburban homesites one to ten acres in size. This impact would typically be minimal except in a situation where the remaining property in a parcel after placement of the right-of-way is no longer suited for a homesite. It is reasonable to assume that in placing a transmission line right-of-way 175 miles in length, it would not be reasonably possible to avoid all such suburban homesites. The corridor as proposed in this proceeding successfully keeps such contact with suburban homesites to a minimum. The most significant diminution in property values from placement of a transmission line right-of-way occurs in high-valued urban areas. No such areas are included within the corridor as proposed. A 500 kV transmission line is an extra high voltage line. The highest electrical field strength on the right-of-way of the proposed 500 kV transmission lines measured one meter above the ground will be approximately ten kilovolts per meter and the field strength will diminish with distance from the line. The maximum magnetic field associated with the proposed transmission line under normal loading conditions will be approximately 0.4 gauss. Under emergency loading conditions, the maximum magnetic-field could be as high as 0.8 gauss. Testimony and evidence establishes that the electric and magnetic field forces encountered in the vicinity of the transmission line at ground level will have essentially no biological effect and will be no stronger than similar forces encountered in the normal course of modern daily life. The minimum clearance of the conductors will be 35 feet and in all cases will conform to the criteria contained in the applicable National Electric Safety Code. These criteria reasonably eliminate the possibility of harmful shocks resulting from electric field induction. If perceptible electric shocks are encountered, they can be eliminated by grounding the object offering the shocks. During fair weather, the audible noise at the edge of the right-of-way produced by the transmission lines will be at or less than ambient levels. The maximum foul weather ambient noise level in Florida is approximately 52dB(A), and the average level of foul weather ambient noise is approximately 42dB(A). Under foul weather conditions the maximum audible noise level produced by the proposed transmission lines at the edge of the right-of-way will be approximately 50.6dB(A) and the average audible noise will be approximately 47dB(A). This is a low noise level. This noise level will diminish with distance from the line. During worst foul weather conditions, the audible noise of the proposed transmission linens might be by someone within a home at the immediate edge of the right-of-way with the windows open. With the windows closed, the attenuation through the structure should be sufficient to reduce the audible noise level of the transmission lines below that of the ambient level within the home. In fair weather, inside a home at the immediate edge of the right-of-way the transmission lines will not be audible, even with the windows open. No electromagnetic interference from the proposed transmission lines will occur for FM radio and two-way communication facilities using frequency modulated inter-communication systems. Under fair weather conditions, there should be little or no interference with Type A stations (as defined by the Federal Communications Commission) at the edge of the right-of-way. Under foul weather conditions, a receiver more than 150 feet from the edge of the right-of- way receiving a Type A station will not experience interference from the proposed transmission lines. However, within 150 feet from the edge of the right-of-way, such a station could experience interference from the proposed transmission lines. Under fair weather conditions, there should be no interference of the Type B stations as defined by the Federal Communications Commission, at receivers more than fifty feet from the edge of the right-of-way. Under foul weather conditions, a Type B station could potentially receive interference from the proposed transmission lines up to 650 feet from the edge of the right-of-way. There should be no significant electromagnetic interference with the audio portion of television signals from the proposed transmission lines. No interference is expected beyond the edge of the right-of-way to the video portion of the signals for Grade A television stations as defined by the Federal Communications Commission. There is a potential for interference with minimum Grade B stations during the worst foul weather conditions out to distances of 200 to 400 feet from the edge of the right-of-way in Channels 2 through 6. Otherwise, it is not expected that any electromagnetic interference with the video portion of the signals for Grade B stations in Channels 7 through 53 would occur outside the right-of-way. The transmission lines will not create electromagnetic interference with radio communications or radio navigation systems required in the operation of the Daytona Beach Regional Airport. No harmful radio interference is expected from the proposed transmission lines at the Volusia County Civil Defense Communication Center. Physical shielding of the transmission lines could potentially shield out the radio signals from the station, but it is extremely unlikely that such interference would occur. With the exception of those stations located immediately adjacent to or underneath the transmission lines, there should be no impact on Citizen's Band radios. The range of the Southern Bald Eagle, which is on the Federal Endangered Species List and the State Threatened Species List, extends throughout the area of the proposed corridor. A reasonable guideline is that development should not occur within 1500 feet of an active eagle's nest after a site specific determination has been made that the proposed development will not impact the nesting eagle. Only one Southern Bald Eagle's nest has been identified within the proposed corridor. It is on the extreme northern boundary of the corridor south of Palatka. Considering the location of that nest, there is sufficient flexibility within the proposed corridor to place the actual transmission lines at least 1500 feet from the nest. There are two other endangered or threatened species to which special attention should be paid with regard to the construction of a transmission line and associated facilities. These are the Red Cockaded Woodpecker and the Scrub Jay. The range of the Red Cockaded Woodpecker extends throughout the proposed corridor. No known locations of Red Cockaded Woodpeckers occur within the proposed corridor. Such woodpeckers are likely to occur where there are mature pine trees over 45 years of age. Such trees may occur within the proposed corridor. Red Cockaded Woodpeckers excavate cavities within such trees wherein which they nest. A colony is a grouping of such cavity trees occupied by a single clan of of Red cockaded Woodpeckers. Colony areas typically range from 5 to 30 acres and are generally round or oval in configuration. To avoid any negative effects upon a Red Cockaded Woodpecker clan, the transmission line should go around the colony. A site-specific evaluation could indicate that less stringent mitigative measures would be satisfactory to avoid adverse impact on a particular woodpecker clan. The range of the Florida Scrub Jay encompasses several areas within the proposed corridor. The Scrub Jay is typically found in scrub oak, myrtle oak, and live oak less than 25 feet tall. Construction and maintenance of the proposed transmission lines will not significantly affect the Florida Scrub Jay nor the Scrub Jay habitat, because substantially less than all the scrub jay habitat located within the corridor will ultimately be cleared within the proposed right-of-way. Existing low-growing vegetational species will be allowed to remain on the right-of-way to a significant degree with the exception of the access/maintenance road area and a small working area around the structures. It is possible that the construction of the proposed transmission lines with their associated access/maintenance roads could result in violations of water quality standards. The evidence indicates that such violations do not normally occur however. In order to mitigate the possibility of such a violation, the applicant has proposed as a condition of certification to which condition the Department of Environmental Regulation has agreed, that prior to construction in any area over which DER has dredge and fill jurisdiction as defined in Chapter 17-4, Florida Administrative Code, the applicant will submit detailed site specific information to DER as required in the Dredge/Fill Joint Application, Department of Army/Florida Department of Environmental Regulation for Activities in Waters of the State. The provision of this information is sufficient to allow the identification of potential water quality violations before such violations actually occur and to thus avoid any actual water quality violations. Because of the nature of the construction of transmission lines of the type proposed in this application and because of the mitigative measures proposed by the applicant, no significant adverse impact on wetlands crossed by the proposed transmission lines is expected. The removal of vegetative canopy over a wetland which can result in a possible increase in a solar impact on the organisms living within the wetland will be Substantially mitigated because all brush and vegetation less than fifteen feet tall will be allowed to remain except for fast-growing species which will be cut if over five feet tall. Root mats will be left intact in wetland areas thus avoiding possible damage to trees. The impoundment or draining of water in a wetland can occur if the access/maintenance roads are not properly constructed and culverted. As proposed in this application, the placement of access/maintenance roads in wetland areas will be constructed so as not to significantly affect the surface regime of the wetlands within the proposed corridor. There will be no significant adverse impact to aquifer recharge capabilities resulting from the construction of the proposed transmission lines. With the exception of the Palatka Area Segment, the Department of Environmental Regulation has stipulated and agreed that the corridor as presently proposed meets the requirements for certification set forth in Chapter 403, Florida Statutes (1981). Residential development in the Duval-Rice Segment can be essentially avoided. That segment has no unique agricultural land nor any known archaeological sites. In the southern portion of the Duval-to-Rice Segment is the Etonia Creek Wildlife Sanctuary, a privately owned property designated a sanctuary by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. There is adequate land within the proposed corridor for the placement of a right-of-way outside the boundaries of the sanctuary. There are no major water bodies located within the Duval-to-Rice Segment. The Falling Branch Ravine area can be avoided in the placement of the right-of-way. The Palatka Area Segment is opposed by the Department of Environmental Regulation and the City of Palatka. Putnam County argues in favor of the Palatka Area Segment as proposed. That segment as proposed would place the right-of-way for the transmission lines through a stretch of the St. Johns River Swamp. This is a riverine hardwood swamp of environmental value. There has been no showing that this particular riverine hardwood swamp is of any more significant value than any other similar swamp or wetland area traversed by other segments of the proposed corridor. The Palatka Area Segment of the corridor as proposed by the applicant would require a river crossing of the St. Johns approximately one-half mile wide entailing two tower locations in the water. There are two known archaeological sites in this segment of the proposed corridor which are avoidable by the right-of way. Timbering activities are currently occurring in the riverine hardwood swamp south of the City of Palatka in the vicinity of the proposed corridor. A 330 foot right-of-way within the proposed corridor south of the City of Palatka would encompass approximately 120 to 125 acres of the riverine hardwood swamp. That is less than three percent of the total riverine hardwood swamp in that location. Actually less than 100 to 125 acres of the swamp will be directly impacted by the construction of a proposed transmission line because all of the right-of-way will not be cleared in the construction of a transmission line. No evidence was presented which would establish the significance of the impact on the St. Johns River or the St. Johns River Swamp of the construction of the proposed transmission lines and a right-of-way through the proposed corridor. The City of Palatka proposes to site a sewage treatment plant within the proposed corridor outside of the Palatka city limits. This plant would require approximately ten to twenty acres. Necessary federal and state approval has not been received by the City. No evidence was presented from which it could be concluded that the proposed transmission lines would interfere in any manner with the plans of the City of Palatka for the siting of its sewage treatment plant. The Palatka Area Segment as proposed would have little impact on existing residential areas and would not require the displacement of any homes. The Department of Environmental Regulation has argued in favor of an alternative to the Palatka Area Segment as proposed which would entail a river crossing of the St. Johns north of the City of Palatka rather than south of the City. This alternative segment proposed by the Department of Environmental Regulation as an alternative would transit riverine hardwood swamp and parallel the drainage of Rice Creek. It would require a crossing of the St. Johns River one and one-half miles wide and potentially require as many as fourteen tower locations in the river proper. It would require the displacement of at least one home on the east bank of the St. Johns River and would result in the surrounding of several existing homes with transmission lines. The alternate segment as proposed by DER contains unique farmland to the east of the St. Johns River. There is one known archaeological site in the alternate segment proposed by DER. The alternate proposed by DER is approximately 6.15 miles shorter than the Palatka Area Segment proposed by the applicant and the cost of placing the proposed transmission lines within a right-of-way in the corridor proposed by DER is approximately 2.24 million dollars less than in the Palatka Area Segment proposed by the applicant. No party to this proceeding presented any evidence for the purpose of showing that the Flagler County Segment was not suitable for certification in accordance with Chapter 403, Florida Statutes (1981). One party to this proceeding, The Container Corporation, chose not to address the factual issues in this proceeding, but did object to the adequacy of notice as to the corridor segment that crossed its property in Flagler County. The Flagler County Segment crosses the Haw Creek drainage at the narrowest point possible. One of the large wetland areas traversed by the Flagler County Segment has already been subjected to significant drainage practices north of State Road 205 and the transmission lines would not be expected to significantly accelerate that impact. The Flagler County Segment contains two cemeteries which can be avoided in the placement of the right-of-way. There are three unavoidable water crossings in the Flagler County Segment and approximately ten miles of abandoned railroad-bed which, if paralleled, could provide access to the proposed transmission lines. The Flagler County Segment traverses a relatively small amount of planted land and contains fewer homes than any proposed alternative. The Department of Environmental Regulation, the Department of Veteran and Community Affairs, the Department of Natural Resources, and the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission have recommended certification of the Flagler County Segment as proposed by the applicant. The Volusia County Segment of the corridor is opposed by the Geneva Citizen's Association, the owners of Seminole County, Inc. and Seminole County, which parties support an alternate corridor proceeding from I-4 in Volusia County south through Brevard County and west to the Poinsett Substation in Orange County. The Volusia County Segment contains fewer wetland acres than any of the other possible corridors discussed herein. Further, those wetlands are dominated by cypress wetlands rather than hardwood swamp wetlands which would dominate in other possible corridors. The Volusia County Segment closely follows ridgelines thus facilitating a right-of-way with a minimum of wetland crossings. The segment contains more planted pines than the other possible alternatives discussed. Planted pines are not a particularly productive wildlife habitat. There is essentially no development in the Volusia County Segment of the proposed corridor. There is a field of unique agriculture land in the Volusia County Segment which would not be spanable by the transmission line. The Volusia County Segment intrudes upon the Volusia Water Recharge Area, which is an environmentally endangered land, by about one-third of a mile. No evidence was presented to show that the placement of a transmission line right- of-way and the construction of a transmission line as proposed would have any impact upon such a recharge area. There is one unavoidable stream crossing in the Volusia County Segment. The Seminole County Segment is opposed by Seminole County, Geneva Citizen's Association, and the Owners of Seminole County, Inc., in the same manner as they opposed the Volusia County Segment. There are no known archaeological sites within the Seminole County Segment of the proposed corridor, nor are there any unique agricultural lands within the Seminole County Segment. There is existing development in the Seminole County Segment in the area east of the community of Geneva in Seminole County. It is possible to place a 330 foot right-of-way through the Seminole County Segment of the proposed corridor without displacing any homes. Properties in the Geneva area of Seminole County which are suitable for sale as five-acre tracts are worth approximately $6,000 per acre. No evidence was presented from which it could be found as a matter of fact that any change in the value of those properties would occur from the construction of the proposed transmission lines. Geneva is a small rural community. In 1980 the census figures for the Geneva-Chuluota area exceeded 3,800. The Seminole County Segment of the proposed corridor encompasses only a small part of that area for which the 1980 population census exceeded 3,800. The population density for the area is very light. Although part of the area within the Seminole County Segment is a recharge area for the aquifer, no evidence has been presented from which it could be found that construction of a transmission line will negatively impact such a recharge area. The predominant zoning category of Seminole County within the Seminole County Segment of the proposed corridor is A-1 Agricultural. There are no unique agricultural lands within the Orange County Segment of the proposed corridor. The segment does contain wetland areas, but not in significantly greater or lesser amounts than in any other corridor that might be chosen. The Orange County Segment as proposed encompasses minimal development and has fewer stream crossings than any alternative considered in this proceeding. The Department of Environmental Regulation, the Department of Veteran and Community Affairs, the Department of Natural Resources, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, the St. Johns River Water Management District and Orange County have stipulated and recommended that the Orange County Segment of the proposed corridor meets the requirements for certification pursuant to Chapter 403, Florida Statutes (1981). There was raised in this proceeding another alternate segment referred to as the Geneva Alternate Segment which begins in Volusia County south of Interstate 4 proceeding to the east of Lake Ashby, south through Brevard County, and then west to the Poinsett Substation in Orange County. Proponents of this alternate segment are the Geneva Citizen's Association, the Owners of Seminole County, Inc., and Seminole County. One of the primary purposes of this alternate was to avoid placing the corridor in the Geneva Area in Seminole County. The applicant has not adopted this alternate as part of its request for certification of a corridor. The Department of Environmental Regulation, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, the St. Johns River Water Management District, and Brevard County oppose the Geneva Alternate Segment. The Geneva Alternate Segment does not have as much residential development as the Volusia County Segment, Seminole County Segment and Orange County Segment combined. The Geneva Alternate Segment traverses approximately one and one-half miles of the St. Johns National Wildlife Refuge and approximately one and one-half miles of the Tosohatchee State Preserve and approximately ten to twelve miles of the Farmton Wildlife Management Area. The construction of a transmission line is not consonant with the purposes of a national wildlife refuge or a state preserve. Construction of a transmission line is not necessarily inconsistent with the purposes of a wildlife management area. There are sixteen unavoidable water crossings in the Geneva Alternate Segment. There are eight unavoidable water crossings in the corridor as proposed by the applicant for which the Geneva Alternate Segment is a replacement. There are approximately seventeen miles of unavoidable wetlands in the Geneva Alternate with eleven to twelve miles of these being continuous. In the corridor proposed by the applicant south of Interstate 4, there are approximately one and one-half miles of unavoidable wetlands which are numerous and scattered. The corridor south of Interstate 4 as proposed by the applicant is approximately 2.96 miles shorter than the Geneva Alternate Segment. It will cost approximately 4.7 million dollars less to construct the proposed transmission lines within the corridor south of Interstate 4 as proposed by the applicant than it would cost to construct the same lines in the Geneva Alternate. The Geneva Alternate Segment parallels exfsting transmission lines for all but approximately eight miles of its length. The applicant notified all counties and municipalities through which the proposed corridor passes that a variance or special exception from local ordinances which would be applicable to location, construction and maintenance activities within the right-of-way would be sought in this proceeding pursuant to Rule 17-17.64(2)(e), Florida Administrative Code. The applicant and the Department of Environmental Regulation jointly propose certain conditions of certification which are attached hereto as Attachment I. Except as otherwise noted in the Findings of Fact herein, the testimony and evidence in this cause establishes that the proposed transmission lines, if constructed along a right-of-way in the corridor as finally proposed by the applicant and depicted in Attachments II and III hereto, pursuant to the Conditions of Certification proposed jointly by the applicant and DER, would have no significant adverse effect on the environment, public health, safety or welfare. In general, neither would the Geneva Alternate Segment, as proposed, have any significant adverse effect on the environment, public health, safety or welfare with certain exceptions. By traversing the St. Johns National Wildlife Refuge and the Tosohatchee State Preserve, the Geneva Alternate Segment creates a conflict with environmental land use not found in the corridor as proposed by the applicant.
Recommendation Having considered all matters of fact and law presented in this proceeding and being otherwise fully apprised, and based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth herein, it is RECOMMENDED: That certification, pursuant to the Transmission Line Siting Act, Chapter 403, Florida Statutes (1981), be GRANTED to the Florida Power and Light Company for the location of the transmission line corridor, the construction of the transmission lines, and the maintenance of the transmission lines and right- of-way as proposed in the application and specifically delineated in Attachment III hereto. That such certification be made subject to the Conditions of Certification attached hereto as Attachment I and that, pursuant to the requirements of Section 403.531(3), Florida Statutes (1981), that Florida Power and Light Company shall be required to seek any necessary interests in State lands, the title to which is vested in the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, from the Board, prior to engaging in any activity on or affecting such lands. ENTERED this 31st day of August, 1982, in Tallahassee, Florida. CHRIS H. BENTLEY, Director Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 31st day of August, 1982. COPIES FURNISHED: Carlos Alvarez and Carolyn S. Raepple, Esquires 420 Lewis State Bank Building Post Office Box 6526 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Ronald E. Clark, Esquire Putnam County Attorney Post Office Drawer V Palatka, Florida 32077 Tom Cloud and Kaye Collie, Esquires Orange County Legal Department 201 East Pine Street Orlando, Florida 32801 George Kenneth Gilleland, II Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission First Floor - Farris Bryant Bullding 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Louis Hubener and John C. Bottcher, Esquires Department of Environmental Regulation 638 Twin Towers Office Building 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Dawson Alexander McQuaig, Sr., General Counsel City of Jacksonville, City Hall - 13th Floor Jacksonville, Florida 32201 Paul Sexton, Esquire Public Service Commission Legal Department Fletcher Building 101 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Warren O. Tiller and Daniel Vaughen, Esquires Volusia County Legal Department Post Office Box 429 DeLand, Florida 32720 Robert A. Chastain, Esquire General Counsel Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 531 Mayo Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Nikki Clayton, Esquire Seminole County Legal Department Seminole County Courthouse North Park Avenue Sanford, Florida 32771 Toby P. Brigham, Esquire Brigham Reynolds Byrne Muir and Gaylord The Reinhold Corporation 203 Southwest 13th Street Miami, Florida 33130 Frank Bird Gummey, III and Reginald E. Moore, Esquires City of Daytona Beach Post Office Box 551 Daytona Beach, Florida 32015 Laurence Keesey, Esquire Department of Veteran and Community Affairs 2nd Floor - Howard Building 2571 Executive Center Circle East Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Hubert D. Pellicer, Administrative Assistant to Flagler County Commissioners Post Office Box 936 Bunnell, Florida 32310 Eugene Frazier Shaw, Esquire Clay County Attorney Post Office Box 838 Green Cove Springs, Florida 32043 Ernest Lee Worsham, Esquire St. Johns River Water Management District Post Office Box 1429 Palatka, Florida 32077 John W. Williams, Esquire Department of Natural Resources 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Room 1003C Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Noah C. McKinnon, Jr., Esquire Flagler County Attorney Post Office Drawer 9670 Daytona Beach, Florida 32020 William A. Leffler, III, Esquire Cypress Isles Homeowners Post Office Box 2298 Sanford, Florida 32771 Abbot M. Herring and Thomas Speer, Esquires Geneva Citizens Associations and Owners of Seminole County, Inc. 201 West First Street Sanford, Florida 32771 Roger A. Kelly Fishback Davis Dominick and Bennet 170 East Washington Street Orlando, Florida 32801 (Attorneys for Hogan and Thompson) Robert M. Rhodes, Terry E. Lewis and James C. Hauser, Esquires Messer Rhodes and Vickers 701 Lewis State Bank Building Post Office Box 1876 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 (Attorneys for Dimension Investment Corp) Frederick W. Leonhardt, Esquire 100 Seabreeze Boulevard-Suite 130 Post Office Box 2134 Daytona Beach, Florida 32015 (Attorney for Sun Country, Rima Ridge, Lone Pine and George Anderson, et al.) Florence T. Robbins, Esquire Greenberg Traurig Askew Hoffman Lipoff Quentel and Wolff, P.A. Brickell Concourse 1401 Brickell Avenue Miami, Florida 33131 (Attorney for Mario Gluck, Trustee)
Findings Of Fact Procedural Matters. Filing of the Application and Notices. FPC filed the DWS transmission line Application on July 2, 1992. The Notice of Receipt of Transmission Line Certification Application, the Notice of Certification Hearing on Proposed Transmission Line Corridor, and the Reminder Notice of Certification Hearing were published in newspapers of general circulation in Volusia and Seminole Counties, and in the Florida Administrative Weekly in accordance with the requirements of Section 403.527, Florida Statutes (1991), and Rule 17 Florida Administrative Code Stipulations. DCA, GFWFC, ECFRPC, DOT, Volusia County, Seminole County, City of Lake Mary, and City of Sanford have entered into stipulations with FPC regarding the certification of the DWS transmission line. These state, regional, and local agencies have agreed that the location of the DWS transmission line corridor and the construction and maintenance of the transmission line as set forth in the Application will, under the provisions contained in the stipulations, comply with the nonprocedural standards of each agency and/or be consistent and in compliance with the local government comprehensive plans and land use regulations of the local governments. It was further agreed that the Siting Board should adopt Conditions of Certification substantially in compliance with those set forth in Attachment A to this Recommended Order. No party filed an alternate corridor for consideration in this proceeding. Summary of Need for DWS Transmission Line. The Determination of Need for the DWS transmission line was issued by the PSC pursuant to Section 403.537, Florida Statutes, by Order No. 24993, dated August 29, 1991. The several reasons cited in the Determination of Need Order for why the DWS transmission line is needed in the Central Florida area are summarized below: First, the DWS transmission line is needed to enable FPC to continue to meet its reliability criteria in the Greater Orlando area. Specifically, the DWS transmission line is needed to maintain reliability in case of a single contingency outage of either the Sanford-North Longwood 230 or the North Longwood-Winter Springs 230 Secondly, the DWS transmission line is needed for transmission of electrical power if additional generating units are added to the FPC DeBary power plant site or, in the absence of new generating units, to facilitate the flow of power from north of the DeBary power plant south to the Greater Orlando area. Project Design. The DWS transmission line will consist of a single overhead 230 circuit and will proceed from the FPC DeBary power plant site located in Volusia County south to the Winter Springs Substation in Seminole County. The total length of the DWS transmission line corridor is 19.1 miles. The transmission line corridor extensively follows existing transmission line rights-of-way, roadways, and other linear facilities. From the St. Johns River south to the Winter Springs Substation, the DWS transmission line will replace an existing transmission line or be located within an existing transmission line right-of- way. The transmission line corridor ranges in width from 350 feet to one mile. As part of this certification, FPC is seeking approval for the conversion of the Lake Emma Substation located in the City of Lake Mary from 115-kV to 230 kV to 230 from the DWS transmission line. An entire detailed site plan review package for the Lake Emma Substation was included as Appendix C to the Application. Location of the Preferred Corridor, Land Use, and Biophysical Environment. DeBary Power Plant to St. Johns River The proposed corridor begins in the vicinity of the FPC DeBary power plant in Volusia County and proceeds south to Konomac Lake, the cooling pond for the Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) Sanford power plant. The corridor is approximately 0.5 miles wide along this portion and follows the CSX Railroad and two existing transmission line rights-of-way in this area. At the southern end of Konomac Lake, the corridor expands to one mile wide to encompass several linear facilities, including U.S. Highway 17/92 and several existing transmission line rights-of-way. South of the FPL Sanford plant, the corridor follows the existing FPC Turner-North Longwood (TNL) transmission line right-of- way to the St. Johns River. From the FPC DeBary power plant to the St. Johns River, the corridor crosses unincorporated portions of Volusia County. Predominant land uses in this portion of the corridor are characterized by utilities such as the FPC DeBary power plant, a wastewater treatment plant, and the FPL Sanford power plant. This portion of the corridor also includes numerous linear facilities, including the CSX Railroad, U.S. Highway 17/92, and numerous transmission line rights-of- way. Low and medium-density residential housing, including a portion of the Orlandia Heights Subdivision, is also located along this portion of the corridor. The types of natural land cover in the portion of the corridor from the DeBary power plant to the St. Johns River include areas of sand pine scrub, pine flatwoods, wet prairies, and improved pastures. Much of the natural land cover has been disturbed by development. Major waterbodies crossed by the corridor in this area include Konomac Lake, which is a manmade cooling pond, and the St. Johns River. St. Johns River to the Winter Springs Substation. After the corridor crosses the St. Johns River, it enters Seminole County. From the St. Johns River, the corridor proceeds south and crosses U.S. Interstate 4 (I FPC TNL transmission line right-of-way along this portion of the corridor. Land uses in this portion of the corridor include undeveloped land, low-density residential development, transportation corridors, and utilities. Just south of the St. Johns River, the natural land cover is composed of cypress and cleared marsh and pasture. Where the corridor approaches the I there are some areas of mixed wetland hardwood forest. The St. Johns River is the only major waterbody in this area of the corridor. After the corridor crosses I a portion of the City of Sanford. The corridor widens to 2,500 feet in this area to allow flexibility for siting around the proposed Seminole Mall and the I corridor include undeveloped land, utility corridors (FPC DeBary-Altamonte Springs/DeBary-North Longwood (DA/DL) and TNL transmission line rights-of-way), transportation corridors (I Pine/mesic oak, citrus groves, improved pasture, and xeric oak comprise the natural land cover in this portion of the corridor. No major waterbodies are crossed in this portion of the corridor. The corridor enters the City of Lake Mary after it crosses 25th Street (CR 46A). Just south of 25th Street, the corridor narrows to 600 feet to avoid existing and proposed development and follows Rinehart Road south to Lake Mary Boulevard. The predominant land uses in this portion of the corridor are utilities (DA/DL and TNL transmission line rights-of-way and the Lake Emma Substation) and transportation (Rinehart Road). Other land uses include commercial, industrial, and institutional land uses. Natural land cover is comprised of improved pasture, longleaf pine/xeric oak, and xeric oak communities. The corridor crosses Lake Emma and some other small, unnamed waterbodies in this portion of the corridor. South of Lake Mary Boulevard, the corridor enters unincorporated Seminole County. The corridor follows Rinehart Road, and then the FPC DA/DL and TNL transmission line rights-of-way south to the area of the FPC North Longwood Substation. In the vicinity of the North Longwood Substation, the corridor widens to 3,800 feet to allow flexibility in siting the DWS transmission line around the substation area. Land uses in this portion of the corridor include transmission line rights-of-way, commercial, industrial, and residential development. Remnants of a mixed hardwood forest make up the predominant natural land cover in this area. No major named waterbodies are crossed by the corridor in this area. After exiting the FPC North Longwood Substation area, the corridor narrows to approximately 800 feet, turns southeast, and proceeds along the northern portion of the City of Longwood to U.S. Highway 17/92. Predominant land uses along this portion of the corridor are the FPC North Longwood Substation, several transmission line rights-of-way, industrial development, undeveloped land, and some low-density residential development. Natural land cover is characterized primarily by small areas of wetland hardwood forest that are located on the edge of the Spring Hammock Conservation and Recreation Lands (CARL) property. No named waterbodies are crossed by the corridor in this area. From U.S. Highway 17/92, the proposed corridor turns south and proceeds through portions of the Cities of Winter Springs and Casselberry, and then turns east and proceeds to the Winter Springs Substation, the termination point of the proposed corridor. The corridor ranges in width from 350 to 400 feet in this area and follows the North Longwood-Rio Pinar (NR) 230 transmission line. FPC intends to locate the proposed DWS transmission line on a structure with the NR transmission line along this portion of the corridor. Because the corridor is relatively narrow in this area, the existing NR transmission line is the predominant land use within this portion of the corridor. Other land uses adjacent to the existing transmission line include a wastewater disposal facility, medium and high-density residential development, and some industrial development. The types of natural land cover along this portion of the corridor include small areas of sand pine, improved pasture, disturbed pine flatwoods, and disturbed oak. Gee Creek is the only named waterbody crossed by the corridor in this area. Exclusion Areas. Pursuant to Condition of Certification S agreed to exclude certain areas within the proposed corridor from consideration when locating the DWS transmission line right-of-way. A map showing the general location of these "exclusion" areas is set forth in Appendix 5 to the Conditions of Certification. (See Attachment A to the Recommended Order.) Proposed Design, Construction, and Maintenance of the DWS Transmission Line. Structures. Four typical structures will be used for the DWS transmission line. Double-circuit, single-pole structures with conductors in a vertical configuration will be used where the transmission line will be collocated with another transmission line or be designed to have a double- circuit capability. A single-pole structure with conductors in a vertical configuration will be used where only a single-circuit structure is required for the DWS transmission line. A triple-circuit, single-pole structure with the upper transmission line conductors in a vertical configuration and the underbuilt transmission line conductors in a delta configuration will be used where the DWS transmission line will be located on the same structure with two other transmission line circuits. Typical span lengths between structures will range between 600 to 1,000 feet. Typical structure heights will range from 80 to 135 feet where the DWS transmission line is either located in a single- circuit configuration, designed to have a double-circuit configuration, or located in a double-circuit configuration with one other transmission line circuit. Where the DWS transmission line is located with two other transmission line circuits, structure heights will range from 160 to 170 feet. Collocation of the DWS Transmission Line. From the DeBary power plant site to the southern portion of Konomac Lake, the DWS transmission line will be constructed within or immediately adjacent to an existing linear facility such as transmission line or railroad rights-of-way. From the southern portion of Konomac Lake to the St. Johns River, the DWS transmission line will be within or immediately adjacent to an existing linear facility right-of-way or will replace an existing transmission line which will be removed. From the St. Johns River to the North Longwood Substation, the DWS transmission line will replace an existing transmission line which will be removed. From the North Longwood Substation to the Winter Springs Substation, the DWS transmission line will be located with one or more existing transmission line circuits on a single transmission line structure. Phases of Construction. Construction of the DWS transmission line will take place in several phases: right-of-way clearing, access road and structure pad construction, dismantling of existing transmission lines (where applicable), foundation placement, structure erection, conductor and shield wire stringing, and clean-up. Clearing. Very little clearing will be required for the DWS transmission line since the majority of the right-of-way will be within or adjacent to an existing transmission line or other linear facility rights-of- way. Where clearing is required, rotary mowers will be used in upland, non- scrub habitats. In upland scrub habitats and wetland areas, restrictive clearing will be used. Restrictive clearing will be done using hand-clearing tools or low-ground pressure machinery. Restrictive clearing includes the removal of vegetation from areas extending from the transmission line centerline to 15 feet on each side of the outer conductors and in work areas approximately 100 feet by 150 feet around structure sites. In addition, where access from an available adjacent road is required, a path approximately 20-25 feet wide may be cleared for such access. Access Road and Structure Pad Construction. While access roads and structure pads are required for the construction and maintenance of the DWS transmission line, no new access roads are anticipated for the proposed transmission line. Access to the DWS transmission line will be from adjacent public roads or via existing access roads. Some of the existing access roads may need upgrading. In particular, the access road south of the St. Johns River will need to be upgraded. In some wetland areas, temporary construction matting in lieu of access road upgrade can be used. Design requirements for access roads and structure pads are described generally in the Application and Condition of Certification S Dismantling Existing Transmission Lines. Where the DWS transmission line will replace an existing transmission line, dismantling of the existing transmission line will be required. Dismantling of the existing transmission line involves removing the conductors and shield wires, disassembling the insulator assemblies, and removing the existing transmission line structure. Foundation Placement. Depending on the soil conditions at structure sites, three types of foundations are possible for the DWS transmission line structures. Direct embedded foundations are constructed by augering a shaft in the ground, placing the foundation in the ground, and backfilling around the foundation shaft with either crushed rock or concrete. Concrete-filled caisson foundations are constructed by augering a hole, placing reinforcing steel and anchoring bolts in the shaft, and filling the shaft with concrete. Vibratory- driven foundations are constructed by driving the foundation pole into the ground with a vibratory hammer. Any excavated material from foundation construction will be dispersed around the foundation site or, if in a wetland area, removed and disposed of in a suitable upland area. Structure Erection. Transmission line structures will be assembled on the ground and then placed into the foundations using cranes and other support vehicles. Once the structures have been raised, insulator assemblies and hardware components will be attached. Conductor and Shield Wire Stringing. Standard wire pulling and tensioning equipment will be used to string the conductors and shield wires on the DWS transmission line structures. Clean-up. Clean-up activities will take place through all phases of the construction process. Duration of Construction. Along a typical mile of the DWS transmission line, each phase of construction is expected to last one to two weeks. The entire construction of the DWS transmission line should take approximately 18 months. Transmission Line Load Design. The DWS transmission line is designed for a nominal operating voltage of 230,000 volts with a maximum operating voltage of 242,000 volts. The maximum current rating (MCR) for the DWS transmission line is 1,980 amperes. Transmission Line and Right-of-Way Maintenance. Transmission lines typically require minimal maintenance. Annual inspections of the DWS transmission line will be made by air or ground to ensure the safe operation of the transmission line. Maintenance activities in the right-of- way will be consistent with the initial clearing, if any, of the right-of-way. Restrictive clearing practices will continue to be used to maintain the right-of-way in upland scrub and wetland areas. Herbicides approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will be used on targeted species and will be applied by a licensed applicator pursuant to Condition of Certification S Compliance with Codes and Engineering Standards. Construction of the DWS transmission line will comply with applicable construction and material codes, including the National Electrical Safety Code (Ed. 1990), the DOT Utility Accommodation Guide (May 1990), and the electric and magnetic field standards of Chapter 17 line will also comply with applicable engineering and material standards issued by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), American Society of Testing Material (ASTM), and the American Concrete Institute (ACI). Construction of the Lake Emma Substation. The DWS transmission line will provide power to the existing Lake Emma Substation. This connection will require that the Lake Emma Substation be converted from 115 capacity. Conversion of the Lake Emma Substation will involve relocation of the boundary fence, followed by foundation construction and equipment installation. The site plan review package for the Lake Emma Substation conversion was included in the Application and approved by the City of Lake Mary and the SJRWMD, agencies with jurisdiction over the Lake Emma Substation site. The SJRWMD has agreed that the stormwater management system as proposed to serve the Lake Emma Substation conversion is consistent with the applicable nonprocedural standards of the District. Construction on the Lake Emma Substation conversion will last approximately nine months. Stipulations Concerning the Design of the DWS Transmission Line. FPC entered into stipulations with DER, DCA, GFWFC, DOT, DNR, ECFRPC, Seminole County, Volusia County, the City of Casselberry, the City of Lake Mary, and the City of Sanford regarding Conditions of Certification applicable to the location and construction of the proposed transmission line and Lake Emma Substation conversion. All of the Conditions of Certification regarding the design or location of the proposed transmission line and Lake Emma Substation construction are encompassed within the ranges of design and location proposed in the Application. Appropriate Conditions of Certification affecting the location and construction of the DWS transmission line and Lake Emma Substation are included in Attachment A to this Recommended Order. Impacts of the DWS Transmission Line Upon the Public. Impacts on Existing Land Uses. The location, construction, and operation of the DWS transmission line in the proposed corridor will have minimal impact upon adjacent land uses. South of the St. Johns River, the DWS transmission line will replace an existing transmission line or be located within existing transmission line rights-of-way. North of the St. Johns River, the DWS transmission line will be either within or adjacent to an existing linear facility right-of-way, or replace an existing transmission line. Collocation of the DWS transmission line will minimize the need for additional right-of-way and minimize disruption to existing land uses. To further minimize the impact to adjacent land uses, FPC has agreed to exclude certain areas of the proposed transmission line corridor from consideration for right-of-way location and transmission line construction. These exclusion areas, which are set forth in Condition of Certification S include certain residential developments, community facilities, public lands, and environmentally sensitive areas. There are no known significant archaeological sites within the corridor. To ensure that significant archaeological artifacts are not disturbed, a survey of archaeologically sensitive areas will be conducted prior to the construction of the DWS transmission line. Construction Noise: Noise from the construction of the DWS transmission line will be that typically associated with trucks and other construction equipment. Construction activities will be scheduled to take place during daylight hours only. Transmission Line Noise. During fair weather, the DWS transmission line will not emit audible noise above ambient noise levels. During wet weather, including heavy fog, when water droplets may form on the DWS transmission line conductors, audible noise may be emitted from the transmission line. Where the DWS transmission line is located alone within a right-of-way, the maximum audible noise level at the edge of the right-of-way will be approximately 42.5 dBA. Where the DWS transmission line is located with one or more other transmission lines, the audible noise at the edge of the right-of-way will vary between 36.7 dBA to 47.3 dBA depending on the number of transmission lines and the width of the right-of-way. The noise from the proposed DWS transmission line in foul weather will be similar to the sound of rain falling in a field. Therefore, transmission line noise may be masked by the rain during foul weather. The audible noise from the DWS transmission line will comply with the noise ordinances of Seminole County, the City of Casselberry, and the City of Longwood. The City of Sanford has a unique noise standard which establishes individual noise standards at different octave bands. Audible noise from the DWS transmission line will, in foul weather, exceed the standard in the four highest octave bands set forth in the noise standard; however, the sound of rainfall during foul weather also will exceed the standard at those four frequency bands. Furthermore, there is no practical way for the proposed transmission line to comply with the City of Sanford noise standard. Therefore, FPC seeks and is entitled to a variance from this portion of the Sanford noise standard. Radio and Television Interference. The proposed DWS transmission line will not interfere with frequency- modulated (FM) radio reception or the audio portion of television, which is transmitted on FM frequency. Amplitude-modulated (AM) radio transmission and the video portion of television transmission may be susceptible to interference from the DWS transmission line. The amount of interference is dependent upon the strength of the signals from the radio station and television station transmitters and the strength of the interference from the transmission line. During fair weather, radio transmission from over 90% of the Type A AM radio stations would be received without interference along the edge of the right-of-way. At a distance of 10 feet or more from the edge of the right-of- way, 100% of the transmissions from Type A stations would be received without interference. Sixty-three percent of the weaker Grade B AM radio stations would be received at a distance of 10 feet or greater from the edge of the right-of- way, and 97% of the Grade B stations would be received at a distance of 15 feet or more from the edge of the right-of-way. Natural radio interference from foul weather will mask any increase in interference from the transmission line during foul weather conditions. Transmission line interference with the video portion of television reception is very rare. The proposed DWS transmission line will not interfere with the audio or video television reception from either Grade A or Grade B television transmissions at the edge of the right-of-way in either fair or foul weather. Pursuant to Condition of Certification S complaints of radio and television interference and will take appropriate corrective action for impacts to audio or television interference caused by the proposed transmission line. Other Communications Equipment. The transmission line will not cause any interference with cable television, telephone, or cellular telephone reception. Electric and Magnetic Fields. The DWS transmission line, like all electrical equipment, will produce electric and magnetic fields. Electric fields from transmission lines are measured in kilovolts per meter (kV/m) and magnetic fields are measured in milligauss (mG). Standards for electric and magnetic fields produced by transmission lines are set forth in Chapter 17 Those standards limit the electric field for a 230 more than 8 kV/m within the right-of-way and 2 kV/m at the edge of the right-of- way, and the magnetic field to no more than 150 mG at the edge of the right-of- way. Calculations to demonstrate compliance with the standards in Chapter 17 at the edge of the right-of-way and calculations for magnetic fields at the edge of the right-of-way are made using the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) computer program. The electric and magnetic fields are calculated based on the design of the transmission line, the maximum operating voltage of the transmission line, the maximum current rating for the transmission line, and the minimum conductor-to-ground clearance. The DWS transmission line will comply with the electric and magnetic field standards in Chapter 17 detailed design of the DWS transmission line will not be finalized until the right-of-way is identified following certification, electric and magnetic field calculations for 14 typical and other probable transmission line configurations were performed for the proposed DWS transmission line. These calculations are included in Appendix G to the Application. All of the transmission line configurations for which calculations are reflected in Appendix G of the Application will be below the electric and magnetic field limits established by Chapter 17 Condition of Certification S developed during the final design of the DWS transmission line that is not included in Appendix G to the Application at least 90 days prior to the start of construction. Impacts of the DWS Transmission Line Upon the Environment: Water Resources, Vegetation, and Wildlife. Water Quality. The location, construction, and operation of the DWS transmission line in the proposed corridor will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the water within or adjacent to the proposed corridor. Location of the DWS transmission line adjacent to or within existing cleared rights-of- way minimizes construction and clearing activities which could contribute to erosion and turbidity. Water quality treatment is currently provided for some existing access roads by roadside swales. Additionally, where required, turbidity barriers and revegetation will be used to control erosion and turbidity from placement of poles and associated construction. Finally, pursuant to Condition of Certification S water quality treatment methods if necessary to comply with state water quality standards. Water Quantity. The location, construction, and operation of the DWS transmission line in the proposed corridor will not have an adverse impact on water quantity. No new access roads will be constructed using methods which could impact water quantity or water flow. Where existing access roads are upgraded, specifically south of the St. Johns River, culverts will be used to maintain or improve the existing flows, and compensating storage will be provided for any fill placed in the 10 or 100-year floodplain area. Consumptive Use. No groundwater or surface water withdrawals are anticipated which exceed the SJRWMD's permitting thresholds for consumptive use of water. Should such groundwater withdrawals occur, they will comply with the consumptive use requirements of Chapter 40C Navigation. Where the DWS transmission line crosses the St. Johns River, the height of the structures will ensure that there are no impacts to navigation since the conductor clearance will be consistent with that of the existing transmission line, which is being replaced in this area. Management and Storage of Surface Waters. The management and storage of surface waters (MSSW) system proposed for the DWS transmission line consists primarily of culverts and roadside swales where access road construction will take place. The system contains appropriate components which have been determined to meet the criteria and standards set forth in Chapters 40C-4 and 40C-42, Florida Administrative Code. Therefore, the MSSW system will comply with the nonprocedural requirements of the SJRWMD. It will also operate effectively and not increase any potential for damage to offsite property nor endanger life, health, or property. Pursuant to Condition of Certification S professional engineer that it complies with the construction standards required by the Conditions of Certification for this transmission line. Lake Emma Substation. The construction of the Lake Emma Substation conversion will not adversely impact water resources adjacent to the site. Stormwater runoff from the driveway and substation site will be conveyed by curb and gutter to two separate retention areas. Both retention areas exceed the retention volume and recovery time criteria as required by the nonprocedural regulations of SJRWMD. SJRWMD and the City of Lake Mary, the two agencies with regulatory jurisdiction over the Lake Emma Substation site, have reviewed the Lake Emma Substation Site Plan Review Package included as Appendix C to the Application and agree that the conversion construction of the Lake Emma Substation will meet all applicable nonprocedural requirements. Vegetation. The location, construction, and operation of the DWS transmission line will have a minimal impact upon the vegetation within the proposed corridor. Because the proposed transmission line will be located adjacent to or within existing rights-of-way, little new clearing will be required. Additionally, no new access roads are planned, further minimizing impacts due to access road construction. Where scrub habitat is found, restrictive clearing practices will be utilized if clearing is necessary. Wetlands. Impacts to wetlands from the location, construction, and operation of the DWS transmission line will also be minimal. No new access roads will be built which could result in loss of wetland areas. Furthermore, since existing rights-of- way will be utilized for the DWS transmission line, little, if any, clearing will be required. Where clearing is required in wetlands, restrictive clearing practices will be utilized. Wildlife Habitats. The location, construction, and operation of the proposed DWS transmission line in the proposed corridor will not adversely affect wildlife or the conservation of any fish or wildlife habitats. The use of existing rights-of-way, and in some cases existing structures, greatly reduces any potential impacts to wildlife habitats. If clearing is needed, sensitive wildlife habitats such as scrub and wetland habitats will be cleared using restrictive clearing techniques, pursuant to Condition of Certification S Threatened and Endangered Species. The location, construction, and operation of the DWS transmission line will not result in harm or harassment to any threatened or endangered wildlife species. Other than the manatee habitat in the St. Johns River, none of the wildlife habitats within the proposed corridor are essential for the survival of any threatened, endangered, or other listed species. Pursuant to Condition of Certification S a survey for threatened and endangered species prior to the construction of the DWS transmission line. If any threatened or endangered species are determined to be present in the transmission line right-of-way and to be impacted by the construction of the transmission line, FPC will consult with DER, GFWFC, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine the appropriate steps for minimizing, avoiding, or otherwise addressing those impacts. Nonprocedural Requirements of Agencies. Attachment A to the Recommended Order sets forth the Conditions of Certification agreed to by the parties to this proceeding. Appendix 4 to the Conditions Certification sets forth the list of nonprocedural requirements applicable to the certification of the DWS transmission line, including the conversion construction of the Lake Emma Substation. Copies of these regulations were introduced into evidence by FPC at the certification hearing. Agencies, including DER, DCA, DOT, GFWFC, SJRWMD, ECFRPC, Volusia County, Seminole County, City of Sanford, and the City of Lake Mary, either through written stipulation or testimony, have agreed that the DWS transmission line will conform to these nonprocedural requirements if located, constructed, and maintained as set forth in the Application and in conformance with the Conditions of Certification. Furthermore, the City of Lake Mary and SJRWMD, the two agencies with jurisdiction over the Lake Emma Substation site, have agreed that the conversion construction at the Lake Emma Substation will comply with the nonprocedural requirements applicable to that facility if constructed in conformance with the site plan review package set forth as Appendix C to the Application. FPC and the agencies with regulatory jurisdiction over the DWS transmission line have identified certain variances, exceptions, exemptions, and other relief from the nonprocedural requirements that may be needed for the location, construction, and maintenance of the DWS transmission line in the proposed corridor. These variances, exceptions, exemptions, and other relief are identified in Appendix 4 to the Conditions of Certification. Evidence admitted at hearing, including the location of the proposed corridor and the design and construction of the proposed DWS transmission line, together with the Conditions of Certification attached as Attachment A to this Recommended Order, support the issuance of the necessary variances, exceptions, exemptions, and other relief. It is also the position of DER that these variances, exceptions, exemptions, and other relief are appropriate and should be granted by the Siting Board. Compliance with Comprehensive Plans. The applicable comprehensive plans for Volusia County, Seminole County, City of Sanford, City of Lake Mary, City of Longwood, City of Casselberry, and the City of Winter Springs were introduced at the certification hearing. The location of the DWS transmission line in the proposed corridor and the construction and maintenance of the transmission line are consistent with these local government comprehensive plans.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Siting Board enter a Final Order approving FPC's DeBary-Winter Springs 230 Certification subject to the Conditions of Certification set forth in Attachment A to this Recommended Order, and grant the variances, exceptions, exemptions, and other relief identified in Appendix 4 to the Conditions of Certification that may be necessary for the location, construction, or maintenance of the DWS transmission line. DONE AND ENTERED this 7th day of April, 1993, in Tallahassee, Florida. DIANE K. KIESLING Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, FL 32399-1550 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 7th day of April, 1993. COPIES FURNISHED: Pamela I. Smith, Attorney at Law Florida Power Corporation Post Office Box 14042 St. Petersburg, FL 33733-4042 Representing Applicant Richard W. Moore Carolyn S. Raepple Attorneys at Law 123 South Calhoun Post Office Box 6526 Tallahassee, FL 32314-6526 Representing Applicant Richard Donelan Gary C. Smallridge Assistant General Counsels Department of Environmental Regulation 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400 Representing DER Michael Palecki, Chief Bureau of Electric & Gas Florida Public Service Commission 101 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850 Representing PSC Lucky T. Osho Karen Brodeen Assistant General Counsels Department of Community Affairs 2740 Centerview Drive Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 Representing DCA M. B. Adelson IV Assistant General Counsel Department of Natural Resources 3900 Commonwealth Blvd. MS-35 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 Representing DNR William H. Roberts Assistant General Counsel Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street, M.S. 58 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0458 Representing DOT James V. Antista, General Counsel Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-1600 Representing GFWFC Clare E. Gray Kathryn Mennella Assistant General Counsels St. Johns River Water Management District Post Office Box 1429 Palatka, FL 32078 Representing SJRWMD Robert A. McMillan, County Attorney Lonnie A. Groot Assistant County Attorney Seminole County Services Building 1101 East First Street Sanford, FL 32771 Representing Seminole County Douglas M. Weaver Assistant County Attorney 123 West Indiana Avenue Deland, FL 32117 Representing Volusia County Gerald S. Livingston Attorney at Law Kreuter & Livingston, P.A. 200 East Robinson Street Suite 1150 Orlando, FL 32801 Representing East Central Florida Regional Planning Council Kenneth W. McIntosh, Attorney at Law Post Office Box 4848 Sanford, FL 32772-4848 Representing City of Casselberry Ned N. Julian, Jr. Attorney at Law Post Office Box 4848 Sanford, FL 32772-4848 Representing City of Lake Mary Gretchen R. H. Vose, City Attorney 2705 W. Fairbanks Avenue Winter Park, FL 32789 Representing City of Longwood William L. Colbert, Attorney at Law Post Office Box 4848 Sanford, FL 32772-4848 Representing City of Sanford Frank C. Kruppenbacher, City Attorney Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn 390 N. Orange Avenue, Suite 1300 Orlando, FL 32801 Representing City of Winter Springs Honorable Lawton Chiles Governor State of Florida The Capitol Tallahassee, FL 32399 Honorable Robert A. Butterworth Attorney General State of Florida The Capitol Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050 Honorable Bob Crawford Commissioner of Agriculture State of Florida The Capitol Tallahassee, FL 32399-0810 Honorable Betty Castor Commissioner of Education State of Florida The Capitol Tallahassee, FL 32399 Honorable Jim Smith Secretary of State State of Florida The Capitol, PL-02 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 Honorable Tom Gallagher Treasurer and Insurance Commissioner State of Florida The Capitol Tallahassee, FL 32399-0300 Honorable Gerald A. Lewis Comptroller State of Florida The Capitol, Plaza Level Tallahassee, FL 32399-0350
Findings Of Fact The proposed transmission line corridor is for the purpose of connecting a 230 kV line from the City of Tallahassee's existing system to the Georgia Power Transmission grid. The southern terminus of the corridor is in Leon County where the City's 230 kV line running north from the Hopkins' Power Plant makes a right angle turn toward the east, following Interstate Highway 10 (Section 13, Range 1 West, Township 1 North). The northern terminus of the corridor is that point where it ties to the Georgia system in Gadsden County, Florida, just south of the Florida State line in close proximity to the intersection of U.S. Highway 27 and SR 157 (Section 90, Range 1 West, Township 3 North, north of the Watson line). The corridor generally follows a center line conjunct with the Range 1 West range line, except that approximately 2.75 miles north of its southern terminus the corridor bends approximately 25 degrees to the east for a distance of approximately one-half mile before turning north for approximately 1.4 miles at which point the corridor turns west approximately 25 degrees for a distance of approximately 1.2 miles, and then turns east approximately 35 degrees for approximately 8 miles before once again turning north. The corridor encompasses several major highways, including Interstate Highway 10 and U.S. Highway 27. It also encompasses part of the Ochlocknee River, the Gadsden County, Florida landfill, part of the Tallahassee Commercial Airport, and part of the Ochlocknee Wildlife Management Area and Lake Talquin State Recreation Area. Just north of the rest stop on Interstate Highway 10, the corridor includes an area known as Riverwood Acres, a non-platted subdivision. The center line of the corridor bisects the subdivision. From its southern origin north, for approximately the first one mile of the corridor, the width of the corridor is approximately 9/16 mile. Thereafter the width of the corridor is approximately 1/2 mile. The location of the corridor is depicted in Figures 2-3, 2-6A, 2-6B, and 2-6C of the application. There being no more definitive a description of the location of the corridor than that shown in the maps comprising figures 2-6A, B, and C of the application, it is found as a matter of fact that those figures define the parameters of the proposed corridor. The length of the corridor is approximately 15 miles. The purpose of the corridor is to provide a 100 foot right-of-way for a 230 kV transmission line constructed upon H-frame wood poles, with an approximate span of 600 feet. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 403.537, Florida Statutes (1980 Supp.), the Florida Public Service Commission, by order dated March 31, 1981, found that: The construction of the proposed transmission line will enhance electric system reliability and integrity. The proposed transmission line will improve the availability of low-cost electric energy within the State of Florida. The point at which the City of Tallahassee proposes to connect to the construction of Georgia Power Company, and the point at which it proposes to connect to its own system, are the appropriate starting and ending points of the line. The Public Service Commission then concluded that the proposed transmission line is needed. Approximately 11.0 miles of the corridor's center line traverses land that is wooded and undeveloped. The remainder of the corridor center line, 3.9 miles, crosses land that reflects some type of human development or use. That includes land that is currently agricultural, in improved pasture, or simply open, cleared land. Although no residences lie within the corridor's center line, houses do lie elsewhere within the corridor. Several houses are located near the southern end of the corridor just north of Interstate Highway 10 in the area referred to as Riverwood Acres. Several houses are located near the Gadsden County Sanitary Landfill, and scattered houses are located in the corridor to the west of the Concord and to the south of the Darsey communities. Immediately beyond the eastern corridor boundary, but not within the corridor, is a developing neighborhood located in Township 1 north, Range 1 West, Section In that area residential property boundaries abut the eastern corridor boundary. Because of the objection by homeowners in the Riverwood Acres area, the width of the corridor has been slightly extended along the western and eastern boundaries so that the right-of-way may be placed with least impact upon the homes in that area. Approximately 0.05 acres of agricultural land will be directly disturbed by placement of transmission structures. It is expected that agricultural land can continue to be farmed between transmission structures. Where possible, existing road crossings or roads adjacent to the right-of-way will be utilized for maintenance and construction purposes. Where necessary, new access roads will be developed, but only to the extent needed for construction and maintenance of the line. The only major water body crossed by the proposed corridor is the Ochlocknee River. Impacts to the river should be negligible since the line structures on each side of the river will be physically located away from the river banks, and the lines and structures spanning the river will be situated well above the ordinary high water mark as defined by the United States Corps of Engineers. The uncontradicted evidence presented indicates that other streams or small water bodies crossed by the corridor will not be adversely impacted. Similarly, the uncontradicted evidence established that the two wetland areas to be crossed by the corridor center line will not be adversely impacted. A 230 kV transmission line is not considered an extra high voltage transmission line. Lines at 345 kV or larger are considered extra high voltage lines. The uncontradicted evidence establishes that there will be no significant noise impacts from the proposed transmission line operation. Except as otherwise noticed in the Findings of Fact herein, the uncontradicted evidence established that the proposed transmission line, if constructed along a right-of-way in the proposed corridor, pursuant to the conditions of certification, would have no significant adverse effect on the environment. Its impact on the environment will be minimal. Although none of the parties to this proceeding posed any objection to the proposed transmission line corridor and the transmission line to be constructed therein, three members of the public gave testimony in opposition to the site certification at the final certification hearing. The three persons were all residents of Riverwood Acres and were generally expressing the concerns of the neighborhood. Their sincere concern is evidenced by the excellent quality of their presentation. They expressed their opinion that their land value would be diminished by the construction of a transmission line adjacent or over their property. While it is difficult to consider the construction of such a transmission line as an enhancement to the property, as established by the testimony of their property will be diminished by the construction of the transmission line. These public witnesses also expressed a concern for the aesthetic damage to their neighborhood by the construction of this transmission line. It is found as a matter of fact that should the transmission line be constructed over or adjacent to these residential owners in Riverwood Acres, the aesthetic value of their environment would be diminished by the visual impact of the transmission line. Finally, these public witnesses expressed their concern and belief that the effects of the electric and magnetic fields generated by the transmission line would effect the health and welfare of the residents of the neighborhood. However, as established by the testimony of two witnesses expert in the areas of electrical engineering, radiation biology, and biophysics, the electric and magnetic field forces encountered in the vicinity of the transmission line at ground level will have essentially no biological effect, and will be no stronger than similar forces encountered in the normal course of modern daily life. These members of the public presented a thoughtful, well conceived proposed alternative routing which would take the proposed transmission line around their residential neighborhood. However, the evidence presented in this proceeding does not establish that the existence of the alternative proposed by these members of the public by itself indicates that the corridor for which site certification has been requested, will not produce minimal adverse effects on the environment, public health, safety and welfare. The Department of Environmental Regulation, the Department of Veterans and Community Affairs, the Department of Natural Resources, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, and the Northwest Florida Water Management District have all recommended that the proposed transmission line corridor will have minimal, if any, adverse effects on the environment and public health, safety and welfare. Those agencies have recommended no reason why the site should not be certified subject to the conditions proposed by the Department of Environmental Regulation, which conditions are attached to this Recommended Order. Notice of the final certification hearing was published on May 13, 1981, in the Tallahassee Democrat, a daily newspaper published at Tallahassee, in Leon County, Florida.
Recommendation Having reviewed the record of this proceeding, and based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth herein, it is RECOMMENDED that certification, pursuant to the Transmission Lines Siting Act, Chapter 403, Florida Statutes (1980 Supp.), be GRANTED to the City of Tallahassee for the transmission line corridor and the construction of the subject transmission lines as proposed in the application as amended and the evidence admitted to the record. It is further RECOMMENDED that certification be made subject to the Conditions of Certification attached hereto and the further condition pursuant to the requirement in Section 403.531(3), Florida Statutes (1980 Supp.), that the City of Tallahassee shall be required to seek any necessary interests in state lands, the title to which is vested in the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, from the Board prior to engaging in any activity on or affecting such lands. DONE AND ENTERED this 23rd day of July 1981 in Tallahassee, Florida. CHRIS H. BENTLEY Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 23rd day of July 1981. COPIES FURNISHED: Louis F. Hubener, Esquire Department of Environmental Regulation Twin Towers Office Building 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32301 C. Laurence Keesey, Esquire Department of Veteran and Community Affairs Room 204, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Paul Sexton, Esquire Public Service Commission 101 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Douglas Stowell, Esquire Northwest Florida Water Management District Route 1, Box 3100 Havana, Florida 32333 Kenneth Gilleland, Esquire Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission Bryant Building 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 John Williams, Esquire Department of Natural Resources 3300 Commonwealth Building Tallahassee, Florida Ted Steinmeyer, Esquire Leon County Attorney Leon County Courthouse, Room 203 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 John Shaw Curry, Esquire Gadsden County Attorney Post Office Box 469 Quincy, Florida 32351 Barrett Johnson, Esquire c/o Mahoney, Hadlow & Adams Post Office Box 471 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 James R. Brindell, Esquire Post Office Box 3103 Tallahassee, Florida 32303 (Representing Riverwood Acres Neighborhood Association)
Findings Of Fact Procedural Matters The Public Service Commission issued its Order Approving Electrical Transmission Line on October 30, 1987, determining the need for the Crane- Bridge-Plumosus 230 kV transmission line to provide additional service load capacity and maintain system reliability. Florida Power & Light Company (hereinafter "FPL") filed with the Department of Environmental Regulation (hereinafter "DER") its Application for Corridor Certification of the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus 230 kV transmission line corridor on July 14, 1988. That Application was deemed by DER to be complete but insufficient, and FPL's Sufficiency Response was filed on September 16, 1988. The certification hearing was originally scheduled to commence on February 6, 1989. PGA Property Owners' Association, Inc. (hereinafter "PGA") timely filed alternate corridors on December 13, 1988. Old Marsh Partners, Old Marsh Golf Club, Inc., and Old Marsh Homeowners Association, Inc., (hereinafter "Old Marsh" or "OM") timely filed alternate corridors on December 15, 1988. Several of the alternates filed by PGA were accepted by FPL on December 7 20, 1988. Several of the alternates filed by Old Marsh were accepted by FPL on January 5, 1989. FPL did not respond to several of the alternates proposed by PGA and Old Marsh (the burial alternates) because FPL considered these proposed alternates to be design modifications to FPL's corridor, a factual proposition that was accepted by this Hearing Officer prior to the final hearing in this cause but which was disproven during the evidentiary hearing. One of Old Marsh's alternates was rejected by FPL. The certification hearing was rescheduled to commence on April 3, 1989, due to the timely filing of alternate corridors and the acceptance of some of them. George H. Sands, Jeffrey H. Sands, George H. Sands and Jeffrey H. Sands d/b/a Princeton Arms (hereinafter "Sands") and Southern Land Group, Martin Downs Country Club, Inc., and Martin Downs Property Owners Association, Inc., (hereinafter "Martin Downs") timely filed alternate corridors on February 9, 1989. Two of those alternates were rejected by FPL, and FPL did not respond to one of those alternates because it considered that alternate to be within the FPL proposed corridor. By the time of the final hearing in this cause, alternate corridors proper for consideration were reduced to Alternate Corridors 2A and 2B filed by PGA and jointly proposed by PGA and Old Marsh (hereinafter "Alternate corridor" unless otherwise described). During the final hearing, settlement agreements between Sands and FPL and between Martin Downs and FPL resulted in Sands and Martin Downs voluntarily dismissing their petitions to intervene in this proceeding and voluntarily withdrawing their proposed alternate corridors in exchange for FPL agreeing to a number of additional conditions of certification of the Martin County segment of the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus corridor are set forth in Attachment A to this Recommended Order. Prior to the final hearing, all parties entered into a Prehearing Stipulation which included Attachment D. Attachment D set forth the minimum conditions for certification, which conditions were agreed to by FPL, and which conditions will apply no matter which corridor is certified. Those conditions are set forth in Attachment B to this Recommended Order. All statutory notices regarding the filing of FPL's Application, the filing of the PGA/OM Alternate corridors 2A and 2B, and the scheduling and rescheduling of the certification hearing were properly published, and all statutory notifications were properly accomplished. Description of the FPL Proposed Corridor Essentially, the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus 230 kV transmission line corridor would run from the existing site of the proposed Crane Substation in the immediate vicinity of the Martin Downs community near Stuart, Martin County, Florida, to the existing Plumosus Substation near Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida. The total length of the proposed FPL corridor is approximately 40 miles. The FPL proposed corridor is of variable width, ranging from approximately 300 feet to 1 mile wide. Crane-Mapp: The FPL proposed corridor begins at the site for the Crane Substation in Martin County and runs south to the proposed Mapp Substation siting area paralleling the Florida Turnpike so that a right-of-way could be located on either side of the Turnpike. Mapp-Hanson: From the proposed Mapp Substation siting area, the FPL proposed corridor continues to proceed south straddling the Florida Turnpike until it reaches the junction of I-95 and the Turnpike. From that point the proposed corridor runs southeast away from the Florida Turnpike and parallel with I-95 on the east side to the proposed Hanson Substation siting area. Hanson-Bridge: At a point approximately 1 mile south of the State Road 76 interchange with I-95 at the proposed Hanson Substation siting area, the FPL corridor turns west and crosses both I-95 and the Florida Turnpike until it reaches County Road 711. The proposed corridor then proceeds south along County Road 711 for a distance of 13 mi1es crossing County Road 708, County Road 706 and the C-18 Canal. As the proposed corridor begins proceeding south straddling County Road 711, it reaches the proposed Bridge Substation siting area and continues south, narrowing at one point to exclude the actual residential structures in the Foxwood development but not excluding the properties owned by the residents of that subdivision. At the proposed Bridge Substation siting area, the corridor widens to allow flexibility in connecting the proposed transmission line to an existing 230 kV transmission line. Bridge-Moroso-Alexander: From the proposed Bridge Substation siting area, the FPL proposed corridor continues to parallel County Road 711 south through the proposed Moroso Substation siting area to the intersection of State Road 710 where it connects to the proposed Alexander Substation siting area. Alexander-Steeplechase: At the intersection of County Road 711 and State Road 710 which is also known as the Beeline Highway, in the vicinity of the proposed Alexander Substation siting area, the FPL proposed corridor turns southeast and straddles State Road 710 until the Beeline Highway intersects with PGA Boulevard at the proposed Steeplechase Substation siting area. Along the Beeline Highway, the corridor narrows to exclude the residences in the Caloosa residential development but does not exclude the properties on which those residences are located. Steeplechase-Ryder: At the intersection of the Beeline Highway and PGA Boulevard, the FPL proposed corridor turns east on PGA Boulevard crossing the C-18 Canal a second time and crossing the Loxahatchee Slough. At the point where FPL's proposed corridor crosses the C-18 Canal along PGA Boulevard in Palm Beach County, the proposed corridor would be approximately 1,000 feet wide. At a point just east of the C-18 Canal, FPL's proposed corridor narrows somewhat on the south side of PGA Boulevard to exclude the residential structures in the PGA National community from the corridor. Nevertheless, the corridor width would still encompass both the north and south sides of PGA Boulevard, and on the south side it would extend through the individual backyards and actually abut the homes of the PGA National residents. FPL's corridor continues to proceed easterly on both sides of PGA Boulevard to a point where Ryder Cup Boulevard intersects the south side of PGA Boulevard. At that intersection, the corridor is widened and turns to the north to accommodate the proposed Ryder Substation location. FPL's proposed Ryder Substation siting area is located in the area adjacent to and north of the intersection of PGA Boulevard and Ryder Cup Boulevard. Ryder-Bonnette: The FPL proposed corridor continues north through the proposed Ryder Substation siting area following a dirt road past a sewage treatment plant. As it proceeds north of Hood Road along the proposed Jog Road extension, it narrows as it passes between the Old Marsh and Eastpointe residential developments. Despite the narrowing of the corridor at this point, homesites, storm water management facilities, and portions of golf courses in both of those developments are encompassed by the proposed corridor. As the corridor passes the northern boundary of Old Marsh, it again widens and continues to proceed north encompassing wetland areas, until it reaches the current western termination point of Donald Ross Road. The Bonnette Substation is proposed by FPL to be located in this area. Bonnette-Plumosus: From the proposed Bonnette Substation siting area, the FPL proposed corridor turns east and follows Donald Ross Road for approximately 2 miles, running along the Palm Beach Country Estates subdivision on the north side of Donald Ross Road and the northern edge of the Eastpointe subdivision along the south side of Donald Ross Road. Once again, the corridor narrows on the Donald Ross Road segment to exclude the actual residential structures in the Eastpointe and Palm Beach Country Estates developments but does not exclude the properties on which those residences are located. The corridor continues to run east along Donald Ross Road until it crosses the Florida Turnpike and I-95, turning north just west of the Donald Ross Road and Central Boulevard intersection. The FPL proposed corridor then runs north paralleling an existing 138 kV transmission line for a distance of 2 miles to the existing Plumosus Substation. Except for a small segment of the FPL proposed corridor located at the proposed Hanson Substation siting area in Martin County, the corridor includes the lands on both sides of the roadways it follows in order to provide flexibility to FPL in designing and constructing its proposed transmission line. The width of FPL's proposed corridor -- up to 1 mile wide -- serves the same purpose of allowing flexibility to FPL in locating a right-of-way for its transmission line facility. No specific right-of-way within the proposed corridor is contemplated at this time, and the eventual right-of-way is not the subject of this proceeding; rather, FPL can locate a right-of-way anywhere within a corridor which is certified. Description of the PGA/OM Alternate Corridor The PGA/OM Alternate corridor differs from one 4-mile segment of the FPL proposed corridor by commencing north 13 from PGA Boulevard at a point just after the FPL proposed corridor crosses the C-18 Canal for the second time. The Alternate corridor follows an existing unnamed canal for 1 mile, then parallels Sections 33 and 28 for 2 miles. Alternates 2A and 2B are coextensive with each other up to the point at which the Alternate corridor is due west of Donald Ross Road. At that point, Alternate 2A turns east at the northwest corner of Section 28 and continues easterly to reconnect with the FPL proposed corridor in the vicinity of the Bonnette Substation. Alternate 2B continues north, rather than east, at the northwest corner of Section 28 for approximately 3/4 of a mile along the west boundary of Section 21. At that point, Alternate 2B turns southeasterly following a proposed future alignment of the Donald Ross Road extension to reconnect with the FPL proposed corridor in the vicinity of the Bonnette Substation. In conjunction with the PGA/OM Alternate corridor, FPL's proposed site for the Ryder Substation would be relocated approximately 1 mile to the west so that the Ryder Substation would be located just east of the PGA/OM Alternate corridor and north of PGA Boulevard. Description of the Transmission Line The transmission line which FPL proposes to construct within its proposed corridor would be an overhead line using a single-circuit, single-pole concrete structure. The concrete poles would average 80 feet in height, but may be as tall as 100 feet. The concrete pole is 2 feet wide at its base. The wires that transmit electricity, called conductors, are connected to insulators which are attached to the concrete pole structures. Three conductors will be used for this proposed transmission line. The single concrete pole structures will have one of two types of configurations: vertical or triangular (delta). In a vertical configuration, all three of the conductors are located on one side of the concrete pole structure, and in the triangular configuration, two conductors are located on one side of the concrete pole structure, and one conductor is located on the opposite side. A ground wire is located at the top of the concrete pole structure and acts to protect the conductors from lightning strikes. The right-of-way required for the proposed transmission line will vary from 15 feet to 50 feet, depending on whether a vertical or a triangular configuration is used and on whether the transmission line structure can be placed adjacent to an existing road that can be used for access to the transmission line. Additional right-of-way up to 140 feet in width may be required for guyed corner or side tension structures. When an existing road or road right-of-way can be used for access, a 15 foot right-of-way adjacent to the road right-of-way can be used for the transmission line structures with a vertical configuration. If a triangular configuration is used adjacent to an existing road or road right-of-way that can be used for access, a 35 foot right-of-way would be required for this transmission line. Where new access roads will be required, a 35 foot right-of- way is required for the vertical configuration, and a 50 foot right-of-way is required for the triangular configuration. FPL anticipates constructing approximately 12 miles of new access roads in its proposed corridor in areas that do not have existing roads or where adjacent roads cannot be used for access, such as adjacent to the Florida Turnpike and adjacent to I-95. If the PGA/OM Alternate corridor is certified, FPL anticipates requiring a 50-foot wide right-of-way along the entire length of the Alternate corridor due to the absence of existing roads (excluding unofficial roads created by persons using all-terrain recreational vehicles) and the use of triangular configured structures. Since the segment of the FPL proposed corridor from which the PGA/OM Alternate corridor deviates follows existing roadways which FPL anticipates using for access, FPL plans to use vertical structures with a smaller 15-foot right-of-way in that corridor segment. Span lengths between structures will vary between 300 feet and 600 feet, with a minimum conductor-to-ground clearance of 24 feet. The span lengths depend upon specific right-of-way widths determined by FPL after corridor certification and on final line design also determined by FPL after corridor certification. The transmission line poles may also be used for other utility attachments, such as distribution or communication lines. Access to the transmission line concrete poles must be provided for both construction and maintenance purposes. Any new access roads to be constructed will typically be unpaved and 14 feet in width. Finger roads connecting access roads to the pole location will typically be 30 feet in width. A structure pad for location of trucks for maintenance purposes will be constructed at the location of each pole. The structure pads surrounding each concrete pole will typically be 30 feet by 40 feet. Substations Between the existing site for the proposed Crane Substation and the existing Plumosus Substation, the proposed transmission line will connect 8 proposed intermediate substations in Martin and Palm Beach Counties. Proposed intermediate substations in Martin County include the Mapp, Hanson, and Bridge Substations. The proposed Moroso Substation will be located in the vicinity of the Martin County and Palm Beach County line. Proposed intermediate substations in Palm Beach County include the Alexander, Steeplechase, Ryder, and Bonnette Substations. Most of the proposed substation siting areas are one square mile or 640 acres in size. However, Bridge is one-half mile square, Moroso is 5 miles square, and Alexander is 4 mile square. Prior to filing its Application for Corridor Certification for the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus 230 kV transmission line, FPL enlisted the aid of an advisory committee composed of representatives from agencies and local governments and two home owners. At the time the advisory committee convened, the substation locations were already identified and the geographical areas already determined. The advisory panel did not provide input into the location or size of the substation areas. Rather, the advisory panel merely looked for a corridor which would connect the already-designated substation siting areas. It is unclear how much input the advisory committee actually had into the corridor proposed by FPL in this proceeding. Only the location proposed for the Ryder Substation is at issue in this proceeding, since it is proposed to be located along the segment of FPL's proposed corridor from which the PGA/OM Alternate corridor deviates. If the PGA/OM Alternate corridor is certified, the proposed Ryder Substation siting area would be moved approximately 1 mile west of the Ryder Substation location proposed by FPL. Locating the Ryder Substation adjacent to the Alternate corridor on the east side of that corridor is appropriate from a land use perspective and will not materially affect the efficiency and reliability of electrical service to the area to be served by that substation. The actual difference in service reliability of the Ryder Substation if located adjacent to the Alternate corridor on the west side of the Alternate corridor would be an increase of 0.3 service interruptions per year, or one additional service interruption every 3 to 4 years. The difference in service reliability if the Ryder substation were located adjacent to the Alternate corridor on the east side of the Alternate corridor would be even less. Therefore, essentially the same service reliability would result. Engineering and Design The construction techniques for the proposed transmission line set forth in FPL's Application are standard construction techniques in the industry. The proposed Crane-Bridge-Plumosus transmission line will be designed for two types of load: structural and electrical. The structural load of the proposed transmission line will be designed to hold the weights of the poles, insulators, and conductors in a sustained wind of 115 mph. The electrical load for the proposed transmission line will be designed to carry 230 kilovolts with a conductor capacity of 647 megavolt amperes (MVA). Under normal operation, the proposed transmission line will carry between 250 and 350 MVA. The design and construction of the proposed transmission line will comply with all applicable codes and standards including the National Electrical Safety Code, the American Society of Testing Materials, the American National Standards Institute, the American Concrete Institute, the Southern Building Code, and the Florida Department of Transportation Utility Accommodation Guide. Transmission lines can be constructed adjacent to or within road rights-of-way, with the road drainage facility or swale between the road and the concrete pole. The maintenance finger road to access the pole structure is culverted where that road crosses the drainage facility or swale. The transmission line can be constructed, from an engineering perspective, within the right-of-way east of Old Marsh. FPL has constructed transmission lines within road rights-of-way for other transmission line projects. FPL has entered into agreements with local governments for other projects to share road right-of-way. From an engineering perspective, the transmission line can be constructed to span Impoundment 2BE (discussed hereinafter), if necessary. From an engineering perspective, the design and siting of the transmission line within the FPL proposed corridor would be more flexible if located on the north side of PGA Boulevard near PGA National. From an engineering perspective, the design and siting of the transmission line within the FPL proposed corridor would be more flexible if located south of the Beeline Highway near the Caloosa Development. From an engineering perspective, the design and siting of the transmission line within the FPL proposed corridor between the Old Marsh and Eastpointe developments offers limited flexibility. From an engineering perspective, the design and siting of the transmission line within the Alternate Corridor is preferable because line siting flexibility is increased. From an engineering perspective, location of the Ryder Substation adjacent to the Alternate corridor or in the location proposed by FPL is appropriate. Impacts to the Environment Wetlands Both the FPL corridor and the Alternate corridor may impact wetlands within the jurisdiction of DER, the South Florida Water Management District, and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. DER has not formally identified jurisdictional wetlands within the FPL corridor or within the 20 Alternate corridor. The South Florida Water Management District and the United States Army Corps of Engineers have expressed jurisdiction over certain wetlands within the FPL corridor and within the Alternate corridor. The actual extent of wetlands impacted is unknown and will ultimately be determined at the time of actual line siting within the certified corridor. Section 3.2 of the FPL Application states that FPL will provide detailed information on dredging or filling (locations and volumes) to DER after a corridor is certified, when the right-of-way is determined and engineering is completed. Mitigation for wetland impacts will be required at the time of line construction. Attachment D to the Prehearing Stipulation sets forth specific mitigation criteria as conditions of corridor certification acceptable to DER and the South Florida Water Management District for wetland impacts. Implementation of those mitigation conditions will not result in any conflicts or problems with the mitigation practices and policies of the Corps of Engineers, DER, or the South Florida Water Management District. The jurisdictional determination evidenced in PGA/OM Joint Exhibit 18A, though not a "binding jurisdictional" pursuant to DER rules, is an accurate representation of the DER jurisdictional areas in the proximity of the Loxahatchee Slough and the Alternate corridor. That jurisdictional drawing was participated in by DER personnel. That informal jurisdictional determination evidences minimal acreage of wetlands within the jurisdiction of DER within the Alternate corridor. Along the FPL corridor route, numerous altered or disturbed wetland areas exist. Road construction, land clearing, and other human activities have altered the natural state of wetlands previously associated along the FPL proposed corridor. The wetlands within the southern half of the Alternate corridor are altered or disturbed due to existing canals and ditches as well as dirt roads within and adjacent to the Alternate corridor. Over time, due to the altered hydrology and transitional vegetation within and adjacent to the Alternate corridor, the acreage of wetlands impacted due to construction of a transmission line would approximate the acreage of wetlands impacted within the FPL corridor from the same transmission line construction. Certain wetlands within the FPL corridor are comparable to the wetlands within the Alternate corridor in terms of hydrology, quality, and habitat. The FPL corridor will cross 26 water bodies, all of which are classified as Class III, except for the C-18 Canal which is classified as Class I. The FPL corridor also crosses several isolated wetlands and the Loxahatchee Slough. There will be no significant impact to water quality from the construction of the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus transmission line. Short-term turbidity caused by the removal of vegetation will be controlled through the use of erosion control practices, such as fabric fences and straw bales. Long-term water quality will be maintained by allowing the vegetation around access roads and structure pads to re-establish. Any impacts to wetlands caused by the proposed transmission line can be mitigated consistent with regulatory agency mitigation criteria and the DER dredge and fill criteria. Wildlife Species of plants or animals designated as endangered, threatened, or species of a special or regional concern by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and/or the Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals, and species based on literature surveys and agency consultations were researched for potential occurrence within the FPL and Alternate corridors. The species studied are listed in FPL's Application. None of the species were found to have breeding or viable populations in the FPL or Alternate corridors. The presence or absence of specific plant species is primarily based upon suitable habitats. None of the corridors under consideration herein is expected to have any significant impact on important plant species. Of the 48 vertebrate species identified as occurring or possibly occurring within the proposed corridors, most are characteristic of or restricted to coastal habitat or estuarine habitat. Therefore, presence of these species would be of a migratory nature. Because of the absence of these species, impact to such wildlife would be expected to be minimal. Since the FPL corridor and the Alternate corridor include areas of disturbed habitat, the probability of occurrence for threatened and endangered species and other regionally significant species is diminished. Wildlife observed actually within the Old Marsh community included the sandhill crane, a threatened species listed by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. From a wildlife perspective, the FPL corridor and the Alternate corridor are appropriate locations for the construction of a 230 kV transmission line. The Prehearing Stipulation entered into by the parties requires the identification of endangered species prior to any clearing for the construction of the transmission line. Vegetation Vegetation communities associated with the FPL corridor include hammock, wet prairie, grassland and rangeland, pine flatwoods, cypress, freshwater marsh, pinewood, pinewood prairie, forested old field and mixed hardwood swamp. Vegetation communities associated with the Alternate corridor include tropical hammock, cabbage palm, wet prairie, cypress, pine wet prairie and pine flatwoods. The majority of vegetation within the Alternate corridor is pine wet prairie. The transmission line can be constructed to avoid the tropical hammock community. The alteration of habitat and associated vegetation due to human activities and altered hydrology in both the FPL and the Alternate corridors has resulted in the transition of vegetative communities including the introduction of exotic, nuisance plant species such as Melaleuca, Brazilian Pepper, and Australian Pine to those corridors. If the hydrologic condition remains the same within and adjacent to the Alternate corridor, additional exotic, nuisance plants would invade the area. Due to changes in the hydrologic condition east of the C-18 Canal and west of the Alternate corridor, a portion of the historic Loxahatchee Slough, exotic plants such as Melaleuca and Brazilian Pepper have invaded that area. The eastern boundary of the Loxahatchee Slough, as identified through analysis of vegetation, is a north-south line approximately half-way between the eastern leg of the C-18 Canal and the western boundary of the Alternate corridor. The Alternate corridor is not located within the historic Loxahatchee Slough. The implementation of the Loxahatchee River Basin Water Resources Plan (discussed hereinafter) would result in the creation of a littoral zone, Impoundment 2BE, not currently present within the geographical proximity of the Alternate corridor and would restore the historic hydroperiod of the Slough, limiting the introduction of additional exotic species to the area. From a vegetative perspective, both the FPL corridor and the Alternate corridor are appropriate locations for the construction of the 230 kV transmission line. Construction of the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus transmission line in the FPL 25 corridor or in the Alternate corridor will produce a minimal impact to existing vegetation. In wetland areas, the vegetation root mat will be retained in the right-of-way areas not occupied by access roads or structure pads. Construction of the proposed transmission line in the FPL corridor or in the Alternate corridor will not destroy the vegetative communities, but will merely force the shift in the successional stages of those communities within the right-of-way. Hydrology Due to human activities such as road construction and channelization, the hydrology associated with the FPL corridor is altered. Further, the Hood Road and Jupiter wellfields have contributed to altered hydrologic conditions in the proximity of the FPL corridor and the Alternate corridor near Old Marsh. The construction of the C-18 Canal in the early 1950's contributed to the lowering of the water table and altered the natural hydrologic conditions, impacting the wetlands lying east of the C-18 Canal but west of the Alternate corridor. Drainage of the Slough is increased when compared to drainage patterns prior to canal construction. The altered hydrology rendered the former Loxahatchee Slough area, east of the C-18 Canal and west of the Alternate corridor, a seasonally flooded area. In the area of the Alternate Corridor the C-18 Canal has altered the natural hydrological regime, impacting the associated vegetation and habitat. Further, the area within the southern half of the Alternate corridor is subject to persistent draining due to the location of an unnamed canal and other ditches within and adjacent to the Alternate corridor. The area within the Alternate corridor immediately north of Old Marsh is subject to minimum channelization. Adjacent developments and the Hood Road and Jupiter wellfields have lowered the water table, altering natural hydrologic conditions. In the geographical area immediately south of Old Marsh, both within and adjacent to the FPL corridor and the Alternate corridor, a series of connected channels have had a drastic impact on the wetlands and hydrology of that area. This channelization has resulted in the general lowering of the water table, altering natural hydrologic conditions. Attachment D to the Prehearing Stipulation includes conditions for certification regarding culverts and construction techniques to maintain historical drainage patterns along the eventual transmission line right-of-way. Construction of the transmission line along PGA Boulevard through the Loxahatchee Slough will not significantly impact water quality or water resource hydrology. From a water quality and hydrologic perspective, the FPL corridor and the Alternate corridor are appropriate locations for the construction of the transmission line. Construction techniques used will maintain water flows, existing drainage patterns, and hydroperiods. Impacts to wetland storage volumes will be minimized through removal of vegetation within the wetlands and installation of culverts. Installed culverts will be designed to accommodate the design storm of applicable agency design criteria. Loxahatchee River Basin Water Resources Plan The Loxahatchee River Basin Water Resources Plan (hereinafter "Plan") is a regional plan extending from southern Martin County into the northeastern part of Palm Beach County. The Plan's purpose is to capture surplus water during the rainy season or during an extremely rainy year, store the water in reservoirs, and deliver that water when necessary during times of drought. Additionally, the Plan would increase the hydroperiod in the Loxahatchee Slough, offsetting the adverse impacts of C-18 Canal construction. The Plan would result in releases of water into the historic Northwest Fork of the Loxahatchee River. The Plan would also augment recharge of two impacted municipal wellfields, the Hood Road wellfield and the Jupiter wellfield. The Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District is proposing the Plan and will seek regulatory approval for the Plan. By the time of the Final Hearing in this cause, the Plan had been informally discussed and reviewed by all regulatory agencies involved. The public hearings held thus far on the Plan by the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District had brought forth no objections to the Plan. Although the Plan had not been filed with the South Florida Water Management District at the time of the Final Hearing in this cause and formal application for approval had not yet been made, it was anticipated that the Plan and applications for approval would be filed with the regulatory agencies involved around June 1, 1989. The Plan calls for reservoirs to be constructed on both sides of the C-18 Canal. The location of one of those reservoirs, Impoundment 2BE, may be partially within the Alternate corridor. Impoundment 2BE borders the eastern edge of the traditional Loxahatchee Slough. That reservoir, starting at PGA Boulevard, as currently designed, would occupy an area immediately to the east of the Alternate corridor, extending northerly along the eastern side of that corridor, crossing the corridor at the reservoir's narrowest point, then continuing parallel to the west side of the Alternate corridor into the northern portion of the Alternate corridor area. Impoundment 2BE is adjacent to, but will not be located within, the Loxahatchee Slough. Implementation of the Plan would not result in additional standing water within the Alternate corridor altering existing impacted wetlands. Hydrology of the Alternate corridor would be minimally impacted by the Plan due to the impoundment of the natural west to east water sheet flow. The location of Impoundment 2BE is subject to minimal change during the permitting review and approval process due to the nature of valuable wetlands to the west of the proposed location of the Impoundment, the location of existing and planned development to the east of the proposed location, and because the planned location maximizes the environmental benefits of Impoundment 2BE to recharge the Loxahatchee Slough. The impact of the reservoir on the wetland area incorporated as part of the proposed Bonnette Substation site is minimal because the reservoir water levels are not high enough to effectuate sufficient seepage nor will there be releases of surface water into that area. Direct releases from the Impoundment will be only through existing channels. The direct release channels are the south canal of the South Indian River Water Control District, north of the Alternate corridor, and the east channel from Impoundment along the south boundary of Old Marsh into the Eastpointe development. These two channels are the only two areas for direct releases of surface water. Impoundment 2BE will include an 8-foot berm constructed around its perimeter. The Plan includes a 16-foot wide road atop the impoundment berm to maintain berm side slopes. It is anticipated that the water level in the reservoir will average 3 feet above natural grade, and it is not expected to be higher than 4 feet. To avoid seepage impacts, the Plan includes construction of toe drains to capture seepage and deliver that seepage to a pump system, returning the seepage to the reservoir. The Plan includes an access road surrounding the toe drains which surround the berm to access and maintain the toe drains. The access road next to the toe drains will be approximately 10-15 feet wide. FPL and the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District have shared maintenance access roads in other 30 locations. A conflict would not exist between FPL and the Water Control District in sharing the Impoundment 2BE access road. The South Florida Water Management District, through the Loxahatchee River and Slough Restoration Program (hereinafter "Program"), intends to restore the historic hydrologic condition of the Loxahatchee Slough. The Program and the Plan are compatible and complementary water resource plans. Conflicts would not result due to the implementation of the Plan and the Program. Implementation of the Plan and construction of the 230 kV transmission line would not conflict from an engineering perspective. Impoundment 2BE and the line can be constructed sharing access roads, and conflicts would not result in maintaining the reservoir and the transmission line. If the Plan is implemented as proposed, much of the wetlands in the vicinity of the Alternate corridor would be significantly impacted, if not completely obliterated. Thus, the possible wetland impacts which might occur as a result of construction of the transmission line through the Alternate corridor would be minimized, or would already have occurred, if the proposed reservoir is constructed. In the event the reservoir is constructed as currently envisioned, construction of the transmission line through the Alternate corridor would have to span the reservoir at its narrowest point where it crosses the Alternate corridor. The reservoir is anticipated to be 400 feet wide at its narrowest point, and the normal span length for an FPL transmission line varies between 300 and 600 feet. Accordingly, spanning the reservoir does not pose a significant engineering problem, and the two projects could be constructed in a compatible manner. Impacts To The Public Land Use: The FPL corridor originates just south of the Martin Downs development and is adjacent to, incorporates, or is in the proximity of industrial parks, low and medium density residential development, a communications tower, borrow pits, the St. Lucie Canal, vacant and undeveloped land, trailer parks, agricultural land, the Foxwood subdivision, the Pratt-Whitney industrial complex, Palm Beach Park of Commerce, service stations, the Caloosa subdivision, a platted undeveloped subdivision, the C-18 Canal, the proposed North Palm Beach County General Aviation Airport, the Loxahatchee Slough, PGA National subdivision, the Seacoast Utility sewage treatment plant, a plant nursery, Old Marsh and Eastpointe residential developments, Palm Beach Country Estates, North Palm Beach Heights, and the Hampton residential development. The FPL corridor is aligned immediately adjacent to the edges of homes in the PGA development and includes the backyards and setbacks of those homes. The FPL corridor includes several golf course holes, buildings, and critical water management facilities within the Old Marsh development. The Alternate corridor from south to north beginning at PGA Boulevard, is adjacent to, or in the proximity of, an unnamed canal, undeveloped but disturbed land, the west boundary of Old Marsh, and more undeveloped, partially disturbed land. Numerous changes in the extent and type of development, whether commercial, industrial, or residential, occurred between the filing of the FPL Application in July, 1988, and subsequent land use review by FPL personnel conducted immediately prior to the Final Hearing in April, 1989. The Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, did not find any archaeological or historical sites recorded within the FPL or the Alternate corridors. The City of Palm Beach Gardens has annexed the geographical area bordered by PGA Boulevard, the proposed Jog Road extension, the south boundary of Old Marsh, and the Alternate corridor. The City of Palm Beach Gardens' plans to annex the Old Marsh, Eastpointe, and, possibly, the Caloosa developments. The City of Palm Beach Gardens plans to annex the area bordered by the proposed Donald Ross Road extension, west to the Beeline Highway, south to the section line just south of PGA Boulevard, and east to PGA National. The Palm Beach Gardens land use plan for the areas north and south of Old Marsh between the Alternate and FPL corridors is low density residential development. The Palm Beach Gardens land use plan for the area north of PGA Boulevard, south of the Eastpointe development, and east of the FPL corridor is low density residential development. The FPL corridor, north from Ryder Cup Boulevard where that Boulevard intersects PGA Boulevard, would bisect planned low density residential communities. Associated with the sewage treatment facility adjacent to the FPL corridor, north of Ryder Cup Boulevard along the existing dirt road, is a planned golf course to buffer developing residential areas from the sewage treatment plant and to effectuate the use of spray water irrigation to comply with DER's water reuse rule. The proposed Jog Road extension, as depicted on the draft of the Palm Beach County Thoroughfare Plan, is subject to possible relocation and realignment due to environmental concerns, absence of reserved right-of-way, and the history of the road as previously depicted within PGA National. The FPL corridor provides numerous opportunities for paralleling other linear facilities within the corridor. Linear facilities within that corridor include the Florida Turnpike, I-95, County Road 711, State Road 710 (the Beeline Highway), PGA Boulevard, the sewage treatment plant access road, the proposed extension of Jog Road, Donald Ross Road, another transmission line, and numerous overhead distribution lines. Although FPL contends that the existing linear facilities also can be used as access roads to the transmission line structures thereby minimizing the amount of land required for the transmission line right- of-way, the accuracy of that position cannot be determined until an actual right-of-way is located and the transmission line is designed. For example, I- 95 and the Florida Turnpike are limited access roads, and FPL potentially would construct its own access road outside the rights-of-way of those highways. Similarly, FPL has a preference to not use Florida Department of Transportation road rights-of-way. Further, the location of the proposed Jog Road extension is yet to be determined. The wide corridor proposed by FPL to maintain maximum flexibility for siting the eventual transmission line right-of-way and for designing the actual transmission line would allow FPL to site the transmission line far enough in distance from the existing linear facilities so that the existing rights-of-way of those facilities need not be shared by FPL. From a land use perspective, the narrower Alternate corridor also tracks linear facilities, conforming to coexisting and proposed land use patterns. The existing unnamed canal, the proposed Donald Ross Road extension, section lines, and the possible Impoundment 2BE and its maintenance road serve as such linear facilities. None of these linear facilities have restricted rights-of-way. Land use patterns are more than conceptually developed in the area of the Alternate corridor. The section line serves as an edge of a clearly established land use pattern. The annexation plans and Comprehensive Plan of Palm Beach Gardens evidence future development plans. From a land use perspective, it is appropriate to site a transmission line and allow developing residential areas to adjust and to mitigate impacts from that line. Development can build around a transmission line if the transmission line is placed in the landscape first. From a land use perspective, the Alternate corridor is more appropriate than the FPL corridor for construction of a 230 kV transmission line due to its greater distance from existing and proposed residential areas, which reduces the potential for visual impacts, adverse health effects, and reduction in property values. Old Marsh is a golf course community of 120 acres constructed in an area of pristine, natural prairie marsh wetlands. Two hundred and seventeen lots are platted within the Old Marsh development, with a maximum lot price of $250,000. Heavy vegetation, including palm and pine trees, borders the western boundary of Old Marsh. A 25-foot vegetative buffer borders the eastern boundary of Old Marsh. Old Marsh expended significant sums of money to bury all electrical distribution lines within the community to maintain the visual aesthetics of that unique, environmentally-sensitive community and to avoid injury from overhead electrical lines that may occur during a hurricane or other storm. The naturally occurring wetlands in the center and western part of the project were preserved. In the eastern part of the project, within the FPL proposed corridor, are located several golf course holes and water control facilities consisting of lakes and littoral zones. A canal system, which serves to manage the water resources for stormwater and environmental purposes, flows throughout the development. The lakes and littoral zones within the proposed FPL corridor serve as part of the project mitigation plan. The same facilities provide part of the storage volume retaining stormwater runoff, maintaining the project's water quality and reducing nutrient loading. The Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District, through the establishment of Unit of Development No. 21, constructed, operates, and maintains the water control facilities for Old Marsh. The operation and maintenance are in accordance with approved federal, state, and local permits and a judicially-approved plan. Securing permits for the Old Marsh project was extremely difficult because approximately one-third of the project land area was required to be preserved. The portion of the Old Marsh project included within the FPL proposed corridor includes land subject to conservation easements in favor of DER and the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District. Transmission line construction within the FPL corridor through the Old Marsh property would severely impact the water control facilities and golf holes which are fully constructed. Old Marsh maximized the land area available such that relocating or reconfiguring the water management facilities or golf holes is not possible. Relocation or reduction in size of the water management facilities would destroy the function of the facilities. PGA National is a resort community located in the City Of Palm Beach Gardens which includes approximately 5,700 homesites, 4 golf courses, a hotel, a sports and recreation complex, and commercial and light industrial areas. It is an "upscale" community. One of the amenities of PGA National is that electrical distribution lines within the community are buried. The lines were buried for two reasons: to maintain the visual aesthetics of the community and for safety reasons, to avoid injury from downed electrical lines during hurricanes and other storms. The cost of burial of the distribution lines throughout the community was in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, which was part of the overall development cost of the community. The homes within PGA National along PGA Boulevard are traditional, single-family homes with permanent residents. The approximate cost of a home is $300,000. From a land use perspective, the north side of PGA Boulevard near PGA National would be a more appropriate location for a transmission line than the south side. The proposed FPL corridor parallels the Beeline Highway between the Beeline's intersection with County Road 711 and the Beeline's intersection with PGA Boulevard. This segment of FPL's proposed corridor is approximately 800 feet in width. On the north side of the Beeline, at the intersection with County Road 711 is the developing Palm Beach Park of Commerce. Just below the Park of Commerce is the Caloosa subdivision. Although the FPL proposed corridor is narrowed at that point, it is only narrowed to exclude the physical structures on the residential lots in the Caloosa development; it does not exclude the backyards of those properties. North of the Beeline Highway right-of-way, the FPL proposed corridor includes a 70 foot recreation, utility, and drainage easement within the Caloosa subdivision. The northern boundary of the corridor for much of its length corresponds to the northern boundary of that easement. The easement includes a canal which is an integral part of Caloosa's drainage system and is also a source of recreation for Caloosa residents. The Caloosa canal system will also be an integral part of the proposed Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District Water Resource Management Plan. Residential lots and homes are located immediately adjacent to the 70-foot easement. The corridor also includes portions of some of the residential lots of Caloosa property owners. Caloosa is the only residential area which abuts FPL's proposed corridor along the Beeline Highway segment. South of the Beeline Highway, the FPL proposed corridor also includes additional Florida Department of Transportation right-of-way, a railroad right- of-way, other easements for underground utilities, and approximately 200 feet of vacant undeveloped land. These linear facilities run parallel to the Beeline Highway corridor. The vacant land within the corridor south of the Beeline Highway, which is not a part of any existing right-of-way or easement, contains some scattered disturbed or impacted wetlands. There are no residential developments on the south side of the Beeline Highway. The land uses of the Beeline Highway segment of the corridor include vacant or undeveloped land, agricultural land, and residential land only where Caloosa is located. There are no planned residential developments along the Beeline Highway segment other than Caloosa. The linear facilities located on the south side of the Beeline Highway provide an opportunity to efficiently plan the transmission line corridor. From a land use perspective, the south side of State Road 710 (the Beeline Highway) would be a more appropriate location for a transmission line than the north side. Sharing of rights-of-way means either actually co-locating structures within the right-of-way or, for example, locating the FPL concrete structure within an FPL easement adjacent to the existing right-of-way but overhanging the conductors in the existing right-of-way. Such sharing of rights-of-way is important from a land use planning perspective in that it represents an opportunity to avoid impacting residential property and reduces the amount of land necessary for rights-of-way. Although it is FPL's preference to obtain its own rights-of-way, it is common practice for linear facilities to share rights- of-way. A transmission line is a linear facility. Along the Beeline Highway, FPL would have the opportunity to share existing rights-of-way on the south side of the Beelihe Highway with the Florida Department of Transportation, with the railroad, and with the other utilities in the utility easements. On the north side of the Beeline Highway, FPL would have the opportunity to share the Beeline Highway right-of-way. To locate the transmission line facility within the recreation, utility, and drainage easement within the Caloosa subdivision, FPL would need the approval of the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District. It is the opinion of the Executive Director of the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District that the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus 230 kV transmission line should not be located north of the Beeline Highway in the Caloosa easement. The construction of the transmission line in that easement creates a potential for conflict between FPL's construction and maintenance of its transmission facility and the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District's maintenance of that easement and the canal system in Caloosa. Aesthetics At the PGA National community, on the south side of PGA Boulevard, there is currently a berm along the residential lot lines, approximately 4 feet in height with vegetation extending another 4 feet in height. Despite the presence of the berm, the 38-foot wooden distribution poles on the north side of PGA Boulevard are clearly visible from the backyards and patios of those residents living along PGA Boulevard as well as from the homes located across the street to the south. The transmission line structures in FPL's proposed corridor would be visible from the homes and the yards within the PGA National subdivision despite the berm and landscaping between the homes and the proposed 230 kV transmission line. Similarly, the transmission line structures would be visible from the homes and yards of the residents in the Martin Downs, Foxwood, Caloosa, Eastpointe and Palm Beach Country Estates subdivisions. Further, the entrance ways and entrance roads to those subdivisions and to the Old Marsh subdivision would be spanned by the proposed 230 kV transmission line. Although there are existing distribution lines along the roadways adjacent to those subdivision, those existing distribution lines utilize wooden poles approximately 38 feet high. On the other hand, the proposed Crane-Bridge- Plumosus transmission line will utilize concrete poles 80 feet or more in height, 2 feet wide at the base. The placement of the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus transmission line in the FPL proposed corridor will result in a new visual intrusion to residents of existing and planned residential communities. The visual impact of the proposed line is not the same impact as the existing distribution lines and is not merely an increased impact over the existing distribution lines; rather, the proposed transmission line utilizing tall concrete poles is a different visual impact than that currently caused by any existing wooden distribution poles. FPL does not contemplate any landscaping improvements in constructing the transmission line in order to visually block the line from the view of adjacent residences and residential property. To screen the view of a power pole such as is contemplated by FPL for this transmission line from a home 100 feet from the transmission line would require a 35-foot-high vegetative buffer. A power pole 150 feet away would require a 28-foot-high vegetative buffer. At a distance of 300 feet, a 20-foot-high buffer would be required; at 500 feet, an 18-foot-high buffer would be required. The proposed Crane-Bridge-Plumosus transmission line is not aesthetically pleasing and will have a substantial impact on the residents of subdivisions adjacent to it. Electric and Magnetic Fields When energized with electricity, a transmission line produces both electric and magnetic fields (hereinafter "EMF"). The Environmental Regulation Commission of DER adopted a rule on January 18, 1989, which established EMF standards to be met at the edge of transmission line rights-of-way or at the property boundary of new substations. Although the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus transmission line will meet the standards set forth in that rule, the rule itself specifically provides that the standards contained therein are interim standards pending further research and study. The rule provides that the standards contained within that rule will be re-visited within 2 years and further provides that there does exist evidence of potential for adverse health effects on the public and that existing knowledge is inadequate to conclude that no further action is needed. On the day following the passage of its EMF rule, the Environmental Regulation Commission passed a resolution recognizing the potential for adverse health effects on the public from EMF, and recognizing that it would be prudent to keep the long-term exposure of the population to low values of EMF by routing transmission lines outside of residential areas. That resolution specifically provided that new electric transmission lines of 69 kV or greater should be sited in a manner that would consolidate those lines with existing corridors, and, further, that new corridors should be planned in coordination with the land use plans of local governments to avoid placing corridors through residential areas. Members of the public testified in this proceeding that the recently- promulgated standards adopted by the Environmental Regulation Commission were not reassuring regarding public concerns of health hazards associated with electric and magnetic fields. The standards themselves are not a guarantee of safety. Moreover, the standards may not prove safe in the future. Of the numerous persons who testified at the two public hearings held in this cause, a substantial majority of them expressed fear for the health and welfare of themselves and their families from ENF. Burial of the transmission line within the FPL proposed corridor would alleviate the concerns of the residents of the PGA National, Caloosa, and Palm Beach Country Estates subdivisions who testified in this proceeding. Property Values Limited studies have been completed analyzing the impact of single concrete pole transmission lines on residential property values. Factors associated with power lines impacting property values include the proximity of homes to the line, the price range of the homes, the type of power line, lot sizes, and the public perception of transmission lines. The higher the price of the residence, the greater the potential impact on the residential value caused by a transmission line because purchasers of more expensive property favor and expect a more attractive visual environment. FPL's study of the impact of transmission lines on residential property values focused on communities on the west coast of Florida. That study was of little value since there was no showing of the similarity of the real estate markets in those communities and the real estate markets in Palm Beach County and Martin County. On the other hand, a Palm Beach County study indicated a devaluation of residential property as high as 32 percent when comparing sales of comparable homesites adjacent to and not adjacent to several types of transmission lines. Prior to the Final Hearing in this cause, parents of school age children had sued the Palm Beach County School Board to prevent the School Board from opening a new school facility which was built adjacent to large transmission lines. That litigation had been extensively covered by the media, and residents in at least Palm Beach County had become generally aware of the controversy regarding the impact of transmission lines on the health of children and the general population. That litigation was still pending at the time of the Final Hearing in this cause. At least in Palm Beach County there is a public perception that transmission lines are hazardous to human health. The public awareness of the controversy in Palm Beach County had caused one developer to cease sales of residential units located near transmission lines in that development. In other developments, the lots adjacent to transmission lines have been sized two or three times larger than lots located away from those transmission lines in order that the sales price of the lots near the lines could be comparable to the sales price of the lots away from the lines. Other developers have established large vegetative buffer areas or unusually wide setback areas between transmission lines and the lots nearest those transmission lines in order to offer to potential buyers an extra factor of privacy to compensate for the location of those homesites near transmission lines. In the Caloosa, PGA National, and Palm Beach Country Estates subdivisions, real estate sales have already been negatively impacted due to public knowledge of the proposed location of the FPL proposed corridor for the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus 230 kV transmission line. The numerous public witnesses testifying in this proceeding believe the property value of their homes will be severely and negatively impacted if the transmission line is constructed near their property. No one testified in this proceeding that he or she would be willing to purchase a home, or live, in the near proximity of a 230 kV overhead transmission line. The public perception of adverse health effects from overhead transmission lines, coupled with the adverse visual or aesthetic impact of transmission lines in residential areas, does have an adverse effect on residential property values. Policies of Public Bodies Just as the Florida Environmental Regulation Commission has issued a policy statement that transmission lines should be routed away from residential communities, the regional planning agency and local governments in the geographical area through which the proposed Crane-Bridge-Plumosus transmission line will be constructed have addressed similar positions. The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council reviewed the FPL proposed corridor for the Crane- Bridge-Plumosus transmission line and concluded that burial of the proposed transmission line within the FPL proposed corridor may represent the best solution to provide a balance between environmental and socioeconomic impacts. Palm Beach County, by Resolution passed on April 4, 1989, adopted the comments of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. That Resolution further strongly recommended that, based upon the policies of the County's Comprehensive Plan, as an additional condition of certification, the Crane- Bridge- Plumosus transmission line be placed underground where its right-of-way is to be located adjacent to existing or developing areas of densities of one unit per acre and above to minimize potential health, safety, aesthetic and property value impacts. The Resolution also recommended as a condition of certification that the FPL proposed corridor be narrowed to the south side of the Beeline Highway and the north side of PGA Boulevard to avoid the existing residential developments located on the north side of the Beeline Highway (Caloosa) and the south side of PGA Boulevard (PGA National). The current Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan even calls for the burial of electrical distribution facilities in new growth areas. Martin County also adopted the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council's report on the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus line and, therefore, the same comments regarding burial of the proposed line within the FPL proposed corridor as the best balance among the competing interests. The City of Palm Beach Gardens, by Resolution adopted April 21, 1988, after reviewing the FPL proposed corridor for the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus transmission line, opposed the establishment of the corridor for the proposed above-ground transmission line on PGA Boulevard. The Resolution further recited that the impact of such transmission lines pertaining to potentially adverse health consequences from both electric and magnetic fields and to the aesthetic balance of the PGA National entrance ways and the general community being destroyed far outweighed the other values that could be placed on the proposed location of the corridor. The City Council of Palm Beach Gardens prefers an alternate corridor alignment corresponding to the alignment of the Alternate corridor. The subdivision regulations of the City of Palm Beach Gardens require electrical distribution lines to be placed underground, and the City's proposed Comprehensive Plan in its current draft calls for the burial of transmission lines. Burial Burial of transmission lines has been used as an alternative engineering design where, for example, the transmission line is to go through residential areas or is to be located in the vicinity of airports. The Crane- Bridge-Plumosus proposed corridor is located in the same area as the proposed North Palm Beach County General Aviation facility on the south side of the Beeline Highway near the Caloosa residential community. Burial of the transmission line would negate the impacts to the public described above, i.e., the potential impacts from electric and magnetic fields, and the negative impacts to property values based upon the visual impact of the transmission line and the public perception of the hazardous nature of the transmission line. From a land use perspective, from a transmission line engineering perspective, and from an environmental perspective, the burial of transmission lines is an appropriate and desirable design technique. Burial of the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus 230 kV transmission line is not a design modification since the proposed transmission line has not been finally designed. This proceeding involves only the location of the corridor in which the line is to be designed and constructed, and FPL will not determine the design of the line until after this cause has reached final resolution. Rather, burial of the transmission line is an appropriate condition of certification to be considered, similar to the other design criteria agreed to previously by FPL in Attachment D to the Prehearing Stipulation as other conditions for certification of the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus corridor. The public bodies which have considered burial of the Crane-Bridge- Plumosus transmission line have determined burial to be an appropriate and desirable design condition for certification. Additionally, the witnesses who testified during the public hearing portions of this certification proceeding overwhelmingly endorsed burial of the transmission line as a condition of certification and expressed an enthusiastic willingness to pay the costs of that additional design criteria. Other Considerations During fair weather, noise from the proposed 230 kV transmission line normally will be below ambient levels. The noise from the proposed Crane- Bridge-Plumosus transmission line will comply with applicable local government noise ordinances. Radio and television interference from transmission lines is generally inversely proportional to the frequency of the radio or television transmission, the lower the frequency, the greater the potential for interference. FM radio transmissions, because of their higher frequency, have no noise interference from transmission lines. AM radio frequencies may be susceptible to interference from transmission lines. The effect can generally be corrected by simply adjusting the position of the receiver or antenna for the radio receiver. Television is broadcast using both AM and FM frequencies. The audio portion of the television is transmitted using FM frequency and, therefore, there is no transmission line interference. The video portion of television uses AM frequency and, therefore, may be susceptible to interference from foul weather on the lower television channels of 2 through 6. This interference can generally be corrected by reorienting the TV antenna. Pursuant to a condition of certification in Attachment D to the Prehearing Stipulation, FPL will investigate all complaints regarding radio and television interference and will provide appropriate mitigation for all impacts. If FPL complies with all of the conditions of certification contained in Attachment D to the Prehearing Stipulation, those conditions of certification agreed to in the settlement agreements entered into with Sands and with Martin Downs during the certification proceeding, the policies set forth in the resolutions of the public bodies discussed hereinabove, and the conditions of certification contained in this Recommended Order, then the Crane-Bridge- Plumosus 230 kV transmission line is expected to comply with all non-procedural requirements of agencies. Variances or exceptions from local zoning ordinances will likely be required, and these are expected to be obtained. Although none of the comprehensive plans of Martin County, Palm Beach County, the Town of Jupiter, or the City of Palm Beach Gardens requires transmission lines to be buried, the draft of the future Palm Beach Gardens Comprehensive Plan calls for the burial of transmission lines, and it is reasonable to believe that that provision will be retained in the final Comprehensive Plan in view of the policy statements of the City of Palm Beach Gardens discussed above. A waiver from the Martin County Comprehensive Plan prohibition on development in wetlands may be required once the ultimate right- of-way for the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus transmission line has been selected by FPL. I. Initial Costs FPL has provided estimated costs per mile for the construction and location of the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus line in its proposed corridor, including right-of-way acquisition costs, line construction costs (conductor installation costs and all other construction costs) and access road construction costs. According to FPL's estimates, the total cost per mile for the location and construction of the transmission line along the entire distance of the FPL proposed corridor averages $297,500. For the 4.0 miles of the FPL proposed corridor segment located between the beginning of the PGA/OM Alternate corridor and the Bonnette Substation (that segment where the FPL proposed corridor and the PGA/OM Alternate corridor deviate from each other), FPL estimates the total cost per mile to be $273,400, for a total cost of $1,093,600 for that 4.0 mile segment. FPL estimates the total cost per mile for the location and construction of the Crane-Bridge-Plumosus transmission line in PGA/OM Alternate corridor 2A to be $425,700. FPL adds to that cost the sum of $640,300 for "relocating" the Ryder Substation to the west of the PGA/OM Alternate corridor. Using those figures, the total cost for PGA/OM Alternate corridor 2A for the 4.1 miles from the beginning of that corridor to the Bonnette Substation is $2,385,700. For the PGA/OM Alternate corridor 2B, FPL estimates the total cost per mile to be $458,300. Adding the cost of $640,300 for "relocating" the Ryder Substation, the total cost for the 5.2 miles of PGA/OM Alternate corridor 2B would be $3,025,500. It is erroneous to include in the cost estimates for the PGA/ON Alternate corridor the figure of $640,300 for the cost of relocating the Ryder Substation. First, no relocation is involved since the Ryder Substation does not exist. What does exist is a site that FPL has selected for placement of a substation to be called the Ryder Substation. Second, PGA/OM does not propose that the Ryder Substation be relocated to the west side of the Alternate corridor, but rather proposes that the Ryder Substation be relocated to the east side of the Alternate corridor, a difference of approximately 1,100 feet less. Even FPL's experts admit that relocating the Ryder Substation to the east side of the Alternate corridor rather than the west side would only cost $490,000, rather than the $640,300 which they have computed in their cost estimates. Third, the only cost identified in the "relocation" figure is the cost of distribution lines (radial feeds) which would be increased in length and therefore be more expensive due to locating the Ryder Substation one mile west of FPL's projected load center. Although computing the extra expense for the longer lines running in one direction, FPL fails to compute the decreased costs of the necessarily shorter lines running in the opposite direction. Most importantly, there is no basis for computing the costs of the location of the Ryder Substation and adding those costs to the cost estimates for the PGA/OM Alternate corridor since FPL does not compute the cost of the seven other intermediate substations in computing the costs of the transmission line to be constructed in FPL's proposed corridor. Since the cost of the substations along the FPL proposed corridor are not computed in FPL's cost estimates, so should the cost of the Ryder Substation be similarly excluded from the cost estimates for the Alternate corridor. Only the location of the Ryder Substation is at issue in this proceeding. Even if the costs of the Ryder Substation were an issue, they are highly speculative. The cost difference estimated by FPL between Alternate 2A and the FPL corridor is approximately $1.3 million. The cost difference estimated by FPL between Alternate 2B and the FPL corridor is approximately $2 million. Estimated costs are higher for the Alternate corridor, if evaluated under present conditions, in part due to the dissimilarity between the FPL proposed corridor and the Alternate corridor in the extent of roads available for construction and maintenance access purposes. The difference attributable to access road construction is speculative for two reasons: first, until FPL actually selects a right-of-way, the extent of access roads necessary in the FPL proposed corridor is uncertain. Second, approval of the Loxahatchee River Basin Water Resources Plan and/or the other two water management plans proposed in the area east of the C-18 Canal may well reduce the extent of access roads needed to be constructed in the Alternate corridor. It appears that transmission line initial costs for PGA/Old Marsh Alternate corridor 2A would be less than for Alternate corridor 2B, primarily because of Alternate corridor 2A's shorter length. FPL estimates costs for right-of-way acquisition in the FPL proposed corridor between Old Marsh and Eastpointe to be $39,000 per mile. FPL's estimate for right-of-way acquisition does not include the cost of acquisition of improvements within a right-of-way, severance damages, or costs of litigation. FPL calculated its estimated costs based upon present conditions and factors. Final costs of line construction may be substantially different from those estimates for both the FPL and the Alternate corridors based upon an increase or decrease in construction materials costs, the ability of FPL to enter into agreements with local governments or the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District for access easements, the ability of FPL to enter into agreements with private land owners for access easements, the ability of FPL to site the line to minimize wetlands impacts and the associated costs of mitigating those impacts, the ability of FPL to site the transmission line to minimize land use impacts existing at the time of actual siting and construction of the line, and the ability of FPL to use transmission line construction techniques developed during the time between the Final Hearing in this cause and the actual line construction that may further reduce construction line costs. These costs could vary whichever corridor is certified. Further, engineering design problems are created when a transmission line corridor is designed to go through already developed property or developing property as opposed to vacant land. Design problems which occur because the transmission line is designed for developed or developing property increase. The cost of the transmission line. Generally, the cost of constructing the transmission line is reduced where there is less congestion. As to the approximate cost for burial of a 230 kV transmission line, FPL estimates the cost per mile for materials and labor to install a double circuit 230 kV transmission line underground ranges from $1.6 million to $2.2 million. Added to these costs is $1.2 million for the two terminal ends required at the beginning and ending points of each underground segment of the transmission line, however many miles long that transmission line segment might be. The FPL estimates for burial costs are based upon historic FPL costs, such as the previous burial of transmission lines under Biscayne Bay. It is likely that such a project would have been more costly than burial of transmission lines in any of the segments of the corridors proposed for the Crane-Bridge- Plumosus transmission line. Another historical cost project in which FPL buried its transmission line was a project in which FPL chose to place that line underground because burial costs were much less expensive than the cost of acquiring the right-of-way needed through the residential area. Underground placement of 230 kV transmission lines is technically feasible and has been done by FPL in the past. The decision to bury transmission lines is primarily a decision based upon cost considerations. The costs of burying transmission lines are decreasing. Typical underground transmission line design calls for the cable to be oil-insulated and encased in concrete. Other technology involving solid dielectric trunk cable which is less expensive and easier to handle than oil-insulated cables has been used throughout Europe for many years. Other utility companies have buried transmission lines at less cost than FPL's estimates. The Jacksonville Electric Authority recently constructed an underground transmission project at a cost of approximately $1 million per mile utilizing typical oil-insulated technology. The utilization of solid dielectric cable would have been even less costly.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is, RECOMMENDED that the Siting Board enter a Final Order: Approving FPL's application for certification of its proposed `Crane- Bridge-Plumosus 230 kV transmission line corridor subject to the following conditions: FPL's proposed corridor shall be modified so that it substitutes PGA/OM Alternate 2A for that portion of the FPL proposed corridor from which PGA/OM Alternate corridor 2A deviates; The Ryder Substation siting area shall be moved so that it is located adjacent to PGA/OM Alternate 2A on the east side of that Alternate corridor; The transmission line shall be buried in all other segments of the FPL proposed corridor where the corridor is within 300 feet of any existing subdivisions as specifically described in the Conclusions of Law section of this Recommended Order. FPL shall comply with all conditions set forth in Attachments A and B to this Recommended Order; and FPL shall seek any necessary interest in state lands prior to engaging in any activity on or affecting that land, pursuant to Section 403.531(3), Florida Statutes. In the alternative and as a second choice to the recommendation contained in paragraph numbered 1, approving FPL's application for certification of its proposed Crane-Bridge-Plumosus 230 kV transmission line corridor subject to the following conditions: FPL shall bury the transmission line where its proposed corridor is within 300 feet of existing subdivisions as specifically described in the Conclusions of Law section of this Recommended Order; FPL shall locate the Ryder substation in the interior portion of its proposed siting area and north of PGA Boulevard; FPL shall comply with all conditions set forth in Attachments A and B to this Recommended Order; and FPL shall seek any necessary interest in state lands prior to engaging in any activity on or affecting that land, pursuant to Section 403.531(3), Florida Statutes. Dismissing as parties to this proceeding for non-appearance at the Final Hearing the Department of Community Affairs, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, the Town of Jupiter, the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Donald Ross Landowners Association, Inc., and Box Ranch Management Corporation. DONE AND ENTERED this 30th day of June, 1989, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. LINDA M. RIGOT Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 30th day of June, 1989. COPIES FURNISHED: Honorable Bob Martinez Governor State of Florida The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Honorable Robert A. Butterworth Attorney General State of Florida The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Honorable Doyle Conner Commissioner of Agriculture State of Florida The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Honorable Betty Castor Commissioner of Education State of Florida The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399 =================================================================
The Issue The issues in this preliminary hearing are whether the South Florida Water Management District (WMD) has jurisdiction and whether Petitioners have standing. In part, the issue of WMD's jurisdiction involves sub-issues as to Petitioners' timeliness in requesting an administrative hearing.
Findings Of Fact Issuance of FPL's Permit and Waivers On May 2, 2000, WMD received an application from FPL for ROW Standard Permit to construct a parallel run of transmission lines (Parkland Transmission Line) in Sections 26, 27, 28, 29 and 35, Township 47, Range 41 East, located in Palm Beach and Broward Counties, inside the south ROW of the Hillsboro Canal. The Parkland Transmission Line was planned to carry 230 kilovolts (kV) of electricity to FPL's Parkland substation. FPL applied to place the 91-foot high poles for the transmission lines 14 feet from the top of the canal bank, on the south side of the canal, which is at least 80 feet wide. On May 5, 2000, WMD received from FPL a Petition for Waiver of Rule 40E-6.011(4), (5) and (6), which governs the placement of permanent and semi-permanent encroachments within forty feet of the top of canal bank within Works and Lands of WMD. Although not identified in the style of the Petition for Waiver, FPL also sought a "waiver from the Basis of Review Rule (L)(4)(Transmission Lines, p. 113 of Sept. 1999, Volume V, Criteria Manual for Use of Works of the District.)"3 The Petition for Waiver sought permanent waivers. The District published notice of receipt of the petition for waiver from FPL in the Florida Administrative Weekly (FAW), Volume 26, Number 21, dated May 26, 2000. However, instead of giving notice that FPL was requesting permanent waivers, the notice stated that FPL only sought "temporary relief from the Rule 40E-6.011(4), (5) and (6) . . . and the Basis of Review." In addition, while the notice described Rule 40E-6.011(4), (5) and (6) as requiring a "minimum 40 foot setback requirement from the top of bank," it did not describe the criteria in the Basis of Review, which states in pertinent part: The use of the District's Works or Lands for the construction, operation, and maintenance of transmission lines has the potential to interfere with the District's operation, maintenance and allied purposes. Applicants should acquire their own right of way and should not look to the District to utilize District-controlled Works or Lands, which were acquired for water management and other allied purposes. This policy should not be construed as a prohibition against the construction of distribution or transmission line crossings, nor is it a prohibition against use of short segments of District's right of way for the construction of local distribution facilities when such facilities will not interfere with operations and maintenance and are otherwise acceptable to the District. Finally, WMD's notice did not describe FPL's project. As a result, it could not have been ascertained from WMD's notice what FPL's Petition for Waiver was for (installation of a 230 kV overhead transmission line) or what the Basis of Review provided on transmission lines. Instead, as worded, the notice implied that both Rule 40E-6.011(4)-(6) and the Basis of Review required a "minimum 40 foot setback . . . from the top of bank." The District published notice of the July 13, 2000, Governing Board meeting (in Fort Myers, Florida) in the FAW, Volume 26, Number 25, dated June 23, 2000. This notice simply stated that the agenda of the meeting was available upon written request or via WMD's website. The meeting agenda fully described both FPL's Permit application and Petition for Waiver. It also noted WMD staff's recommendation that the both be approved. WMD's Governing Board granted both FPL's Permit application and Petition for Waiver at its meeting on July 13, 2000. An Order Granting Waiver was reduced to writing and filed on July 26, 2000, effectively nunc pro tunc July 13, 2000. The Order Granting Waiver also granted FPL's Permit application and included a Notice of Rights, which advised affected persons how to seek an administrative hearing by filing "a petition for hearing pursuant to Sections 120.569 and 120.57(1)." WMD published in the FAW, Volume 26, Number 36, dated September 8, 2000, notice of the disposition of FPL's Petition for Waiver under Section 120.542, Florida Statutes. Unlike the notice of filing the Petition for Waiver, the notice of disposition described the project as "installation of 3.7 miles of overheads parallel transmission pole line inside the south right of way of the Hillsboro Canal, Palm Beach and Broward Counties." The notice of disposition did not contain a Notice of Rights or other "point of entry" to request an administrative hearing. Except as set out in Findings 3-6, supra, neither WMD nor FPL gave Petitioners any other kind of notice of FPL's Permit application or Petition for Waiver proceedings. WMD did not determine that FPL's project was of heightened public concern, or that there was the likelihood of a request for an administrative hearing, so as to require additional notice in accordance with WMD rules. First Notice to Petitioners (Except Leserra and Smith) Petitioners all own residences in the vicinity of FPL's transmission line project. While Jeff Leserra lives south of the Hillsboro Canal and across Loxahatchee Road in Broward County, the other Petitioners all live north of the Hillsboro Canal in Boca Winds, a group of related residential developments in Palm Beach County, west of Boca Raton. Some of the Boca Winds residents--Terwilliger, Tennant, Pam Danko, Larry Rosenman, Teresa Badillo, and Mike Sturm--live in homes on property adjacent to WMD's north ROW along the Hillsboro Canal. These homes are approximately between 230 and 250 from the nearest Parkland Transmission Line pole. Moreover, in late 1999, each of these Petitioners applied to WMD for a Noticed General Permit (NGP) to extend their backyard fence enclosures between 20 and 25 feet into WMD's north ROW along the Hillsboro Canal--closer to the poles. Their applications were processed primarily by Badillo and another homeowner, Gary Fishman, who is not one of Petitioners. The applications were granted and NGPs were issued to them on May 8, 2000, just after FPL's Permit application and Petition for Waiver were filed. The homes of the other Petitioners--Jose and Amalia Gutman, Frank Longo, David Weinstein, and Ballard Smith--are not adjacent to the Hillsboro Canal. The homes of the Gutmans and Smith are approximately 370 and 390 feet from the nearest pole; Weinstein's home is approximately twice as far away; Longo's home is approximately 1,100 feet away from the nearest pole. All Petitioners use their homes as their permanent residence except for Ballard Smith, whose principal residence is in Bradenton, Florida. Prior to November 2000, Petitioners had no notice or knowledge of FPL's Permit application or Petition for Waiver proceedings. FPL began installing 90-foot high poles for the Parkland Transmission Line along the Hillsboro Canal ROW on or about November 1, 2000. By mid-November 2000, all Petitioners except Leserra and Smith has seen the poles, made inquiry of various kinds, and learned of FPL's plans to construct the Parkland Transmission Line. Leserra and Smith did not see any poles and had no knowledge about the Parkland Transmission Line until later. See Findings 49-53 and 58, infra. Initial Reaction to Transmission Poles The Boca Winds homeowners who became aware of the installation of the poles just south of the Hillsboro Canal reacted in different ways. Some instantly suspected both the ultimate use of the poles for electrical transmission and that the poles were on WMD ROW. Others suspected the former but not the latter. Several made telephone inquiries of different kinds-some to FPL, some to their homeowner association. Quickly, word spread, and these homeowners, including all Petitioners except Smith and Leserra, began organizing to oppose FPL's Permit. Meetings were held, and many members of the loosely-organized opposition were involved initially, but the group soon turned to and relied heavily on a handful of its members--primarily the Gutmans, Badillo, and Gary Fishman- -to gather information and contact FPL and WMD on behalf of the group. While none of the group was particularly knowledgeable about the legal technicalities of WMD procedures, Jose Gutman was a Florida-licensed lawyer (albeit practicing in patent law), and Fishman had handled the applications of Terwilliger, Tennant, Pam Danko, Rosenman, Badillo, Sturm, and others for WMD NGPs to extend their backyard fence enclosures into WMD's north ROW along the Hillsboro Canal. Although most members of the group did not view Jose Gutman technically as their attorney during this time, Gutman asserted attorney-client privilege as to communications between himself and members of the group beginning in November 2000, and Petitioners' objections to disclosure of these communications were sustained. A meeting between Jose Gutman, Fishman, Badillo, and other Boca Winds residents and various FPL representatives was held on November 8, 2000. During this meeting, the residents essentially complained that they had no notice and asked FPL to relocate the transmission line. FPL responded that the required notice was given and said it would respond to the request to relocate the lines. The next day the homeowners put their requests to FPL in writing. They asked for proposals for relocating the transmission line, for the projected cost of putting the line underground for the 1.3 miles in the vicinity of their homes, for EMF testing of their homes, and for a statement of safety. The Gutmans then began the process of drafting a petition for circulation to residents for signature. Entitled "Petition to Halt Construction of FPL High Power Transmission Lines on the Land Adjacent to Our Homes," the petition stated that the homeowners "hereby petition our government and [FPL] to halt construction . . . [and] relocate the lines away from our communities." The petition stated that the homeowners had no notice until November 1, 2000, and did not consent to the project. It complained about "a significant loss in property value along with the additional serious concern of health risks [namely, leukemia and cancer] to our children that will be playing within the electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) emitted." The petition requested "that our government representatives and FPL engineers promptly halt construction . . . and provide in writing proposed alternative plans for moving these transmission lines away from our communities." The petition was dated November 18, 2000, but signatures were collected after that date. Meanwhile, Jose Gutman and Fishman arranged to meet with WMD representatives at WMD's main offices in West Palm Beach on November 28, 2000. Since they had a follow-up meeting with FPL scheduled for the following day, they were surprised on their arrival to find Daniel Hronec, FPL Principal Engineer on the Parkland Transmission Line project, in attendance, apparently having been notified and invited by WMD. Gutman and Fishman essentially reiterated their complaint of lack of notice and their request to have the transmission line relocated. Discussion ensued on the permitting process used by FPL and WMD. WMD's Laura Lythgoe explained that WMD rules provide for different review criteria and notice requirements depending on the nature of the request.4 She stated that no notice to affected parties is required for ROW use permits, such as the one FPL got for the Parkland Transmission Line. She went on to explain that the procedure for requesting a variance is set out in Section 120.542, Florida Statutes, which only requires notice in the FAW. Fishman complained that the FAW notice was not specific enough. Thomas L. Fratz, WMD ROW Division Director, responded that the notice was legally sufficient. Lythgoe also pointed out that the agenda item gave specifics and was available on WMD's internet web site. In testimony at the preliminary hearing, Fishman recalled a statement being made during the course of discussion that the homeowners had 21 days to petition for a hearing and that the time had expired. Gutman did not recall such a statement being made specifically, but he conceded that the thrust of the discussion was that the proper notice was given and that the homeowners were too late. During the discussion of WMD procedures, Gutman asked for copies of certain documentation being discussed. Gutman also expressed the homeowners' need for legal advice on the subject and asked for a referral to an attorney knowledgeable in the area. WMD agreed to respond to these requests in writing. Towards the end of the meeting on November 28, 2000, Gutman asked how the homeowners could proceed with their grievance. Fratz responded that the homeowners' issue was with FPL, not WMD. Gutman replied that the homeowners could only negotiate with FPL (which they already were doing) but could petition WMD, as their government, to take action to rectify the situation. Gutman indicated that he had a petition with approximately 150 signatures for that purpose. It is not clear whether the petition and signatures were physically presented to WMD at that time, but it is clear that WMD did not direct Gutman to WMD's Clerk's office, which was just down the hall from where they were meeting, to file the petition. The next day, FPL hosted a meeting with the homeowners to respond to their requests made at the meeting on November 8, 2000, and in their letter dated November 9, 2000. FPL confirmed its response in a letter dated November 30, 2000. FPL told the homeowners that there were options for relocating the transmission line but that implementing the options would cost the homeowners between $900,000 and $1.5 million, depending on the option chosen and that a $20,000 engineering deposit would be required up-front. The option of replacing the planned overhead transmission lines with underground lines would be much more expensive--approximately $15 million--and "unquestionably prohibitive." The homeowners considered FPL's proposals to be financially infeasible and unacceptable. By letter dated December 1, 2000, WMD provided Jose Gutman and Fishman documentation in response to their request during the meeting on November 28, 2000. Included were copies of the agenda for the Governing Board's meeting on July 13, 2000, and Section 120.542, Florida Statutes (2000). The letter stated that Section 120.542 applied, not Section 403.201 (applicable to the Department of Environmental Protection), which Gutman and Fishman apparently cited at the meeting. The letter also stated that there was no requirement for publishing or other notification to affected parties for issuance of a ROW permit. Attorney Walker and the Board Meeting December 14, 2000 After the meetings and letters, the homeowners decided that it would be necessary to appeal directly to WMD Governing Board. They also decided that they needed competent legal representation to assist them. Amy Gutman contacted Governing Board member Nicholas J. Gutierrez, Jr., who advised the homeowners to bring their grievances to the next Board meeting on December 14, 2000. Gutierrez put Amy Gutman in contact with the Board's meeting coordinator, Sandra Gomez, who scheduled the homeowners to participate in the public comment portion of the upcoming Board meeting on December 14, 2000. Meanwhile, Jose Gutman took steps on behalf of the homeowners to retain counsel. After considering several candidates, Gutman eventually settled on Stephen A. Walker and his law firm of Lewis, Longman & Walker, P.A. to represent the group of homeowners (including all Petitioners except Leserra and Smith). Walker served as General Counsel of WMD from 1985 to 1991, and was a frequent practitioner before the SFWMD Governing Board. He also has appeared in cases before the Division of Administrative Hearings. It is not clear from the evidence what documentation Walker obtained from WMD's permit files before appearing on behalf of the homeowners at the Governing Board's meeting on December 14, 2001. However, it is reasonable to infer that, as former WMD General Counsel and an attorney specializing in WMD permitting with extensive experience in that field, Walker was aware of the generally applicable 21-day time limitation for seeking an administrative hearing regarding proposed agency action. Walker also was aware of the difference between petitioning to intervene in a proceeding for the issuance of a permit and asking an administrative agency to initiate proceedings to revoke a permit that has already been issued. Whether Walker communicated this knowledge is not clear from the evidence because Petitioners objected to questions seeking disclosure of attorney-client communications, and the objections were sustained. However, it can be inferred from all of the evidence that such communications probably took place. Walker and the homeowners not only appeared for the public comment portion of the Governing Board's agenda for December 14, 2001, they also conducted a protest demonstration that caused a disturbance in the hallway outside the meeting room during an earlier part of the agenda. Attempting to ascertaining the reason for the disturbance, the Chairman of the Governing Board, Michael Collins, asked WMD Ombudsman, Richard E. Williams, to attempt to gain some understanding of the reason for the demonstration and to suggest possible solutions. When it was made known that Fratz and other WMD staff already had met with the homeowners and FPL, Collins asked that Fratz be included. Williams then met with the homeowners, FPL, and some WMD staff in the nearby WMD cafeteria. When the situation was explained to Williams, he suggested that all parties agree to give him time to gather additional facts and try to mediate an "acceptable agreement" to report back to the Governing Board at its meeting in January 2001. In the meantime, it was agreed that FPL would postpone construction in the vicinity of the homeowners and that the homeowners would postpone pursuit of their grievance. This was acceptable and agreed by all involved. When FPL and the homeowners returned to the Governing Board meeting for the public comment portion, Walker appeared on behalf of the homeowners. Walker summarized the history of FPL's Permit and waivers. He asked the WMD Governing Board to do three things: (1) have staff investigate the appropriateness of the issuance of the Permit in the first instance; (2) based upon that investigation, partially revoke FPL's Permit; and (3) have Williams continue to work with the homeowners and FPL in an effort to find a solution. The Gutmans, Tennant, Terwilliger, and Badillo also addressed the Governing Board to ask that FPL's Permit be revoked. Jose Gutman advised the Governing Board that the homeowners had a petition (by then with 256 signatures) with a cover letter that would provide the Board a summary of the issues. He offered to provide the Board with copies and was directed to hand them to Darrell Bell, a member of the staff of WMD's Clerk's office, who would make sure all Board members got a copy. The other speakers expressed their concerns about EMF, aesthetics, and property values. Collins then asked the WMD's General Counsel, John Fumero, to identify the Board's options. Fumero advised that the Board could modify, revoke or suspend FPL's Permit but that, before taking such action, the Board would want to know the facts and understand the consequences of each option. Without taking a formal vote, the Board asked staff to investigate the facts and report back at the next meeting. Walker advised the Board, and Dan Hronec on behalf of FPL concurred, that FPL had temporarily stopped construction near where his clients lived while it continued work on other portions of the transmission line. Smith's First, Incomplete Knowledge Smith saw a tall concrete structure off to the left of the main entrance to Little Palm Lane when he visited his home for approximately four days in late December 2000. He denied seeing any other poles (although all of the poles behind the Boca Winds homes were installed by then). Smith explained that he spent most of his time during this visit in the house or in the backyard where the poles would be less visible. Although Smith admitted that he was outside in front of his house, where the poles would have been more visible, at times during his visit in December and that he can now see the poles and lines from inside his house through any front window on either the first or second story, Smith's testimony as to what he saw in December 2000 is accepted and credited. Likewise, Smith's testimony that he did not realize the purpose of the pole he saw or its location on WMD ROW is accepted and credited. Walker's Review of WMD Documents As part of his representation of the homeowners, Walker or one of his subordinates obtained copies of at least parts of WMD's official agency file on FPL's Permit. Walker's files contained several partial copies of FPL's Permit; there also was a Notice of Rights form (the kind attached to the Order Granting Waiver). Walker's file also contained other materials that are found in the WMD's file on FPL's Permit, such as the standard form letter that accompanies each permit transmittal. Fishman understood that Jose Gutman had asked Walker or one of his subordinates to go to WMD and undertake an investigation regarding the issuance of FPL's Permit. Gutman did not confirm Fishman's understanding, and Walker denied that he or anyone from his staff went to WMD's main office in West Palm Beach to investigate the issuance of FPL's Permit and obtain the documentation in his file. It is possible that Walker was given the documents by one or more of the homeowners. Walker also testified at hearing that he could not recall when he obtained the documentation that was in his file. However, based on the record evidence, it is reasonable to infer that this occurred prior to January 8, 2001, as Walker sent a letter to WMD on that date which described the Permit in detail and to which he attached copies of FPL's Permit, FPL's permit and waiver applications, and several items of WMD correspondence from the permit file. Failure of Mediation; Board's Meeting February 14, 2001 After the Governing Board's December 2000 meeting, Ombudsman Williams undertook to schedule separate meetings with the homeowners and with FPL, to be followed by a joint meeting with all involved. It soon became apparent that it would not be possible to conduct all the meetings and be ready to report back to the Governing Board at its January 2001 meeting. In a letter from FPL to Fratz dated January 5, 2001, FPL confirmed that FPL would continue to postpone construction in the vicinity of the homeowners until after the February 2001 meeting of the Governing Board and that, "in return for this concession, the concerned residents have agreed to hold any further action, including comment to the Board, until the February Board meeting." Williams met separately with the homeowners and with FPL, as planned. When Williams contacted Amy Gutman to schedule a joint meeting, she asked whether anything new was being proposed. When Williams said, no, Gutman told him she did not think another meeting would be productive and declined on behalf of the homeowners to participate in one. Apparently, FPL representatives met with WMD staff, and they discussed landscaping to help mitigate the aesthetic concerns of the homeowners. Having declined to participate, the homeowners were not aware of the landscaping proposals (essentially, planting cabbage palms in the ROW.) FPL's Permit and waivers made up an agenda item at the WMD Governing Board's meeting on February 14, 2001. Fratz introduced the item with a presentation. The Board then received public comment from Walker on behalf of the homeowners and from a number of homeowners. Walker, on behalf of all Petitioners except Smith and Leserra, identified three concerns of the homeowners, one of which was the lack of notice. Specifically, Walker stated that the Administrative Procedure Act was involved, that the model rules provide for a point of entry for people wanting to object to a permit, and that his clients did not get the required point of entry. At the conclusion of his presentation, Walker asked the Board to revoke FPL's Permit. When asked by one of the Board members whether there were other options available, Walker stated that he was not aware of an available alternative other than revocation. Petitioners Tennant, Frank Longo, Terwilliger, Jose Gutman, Larry Rosenman, and Badillo also addressed the Board and provided reasons why they believed FPL's Permit should be revoked. FPL then made a presentation, after which the Board discussed the issue and entertained several motions. During the Board's discussion, staff was asked about possible interference with WMD's operation and maintenance of the Hillsborough Canal as a result of the transmission line and about the safety of WMD's workers. These questions were addressed by Fratz, by WMD's Executive Deputy Director, Joe Taylor, and by WMD's Director of Field Operations (South), John Adams. They advised the Board that WMD could adequately operate and maintain the canal with the transmission lines in place and that the safety of WMD's workers would not be compromised. Fratz noted that WMD frequently received requests for waiver of the 40-foot setback from the top of canal banks, and Adams pointed out that WMD does not operate any of its equipment, including cranes with booms, along WMD ROW in winds above 35 miles per hour. After these questions were answered, Board Chair Michael Collins again asked General Counsel, John Fumero, to list the Board's options. Fumero outlined three possible courses of action: (1) to take action relative to the Permit such as revocation, modification or suspension; (2) to take no action with respect to the Permit; or (3) to direct staff to publish notice of the Permit to create a point of entry for an administrative challenge. After some questions from the Board were answered, Board member Dr. Patrick J. Gleason moved to give the homeowners a point of entry, and the motion was seconded. After further discussion, the motion was amended in two respects: (1) the Board would delegate to the executive director the authority to initiate a proceeding to suspend FPL's Permit while the administrative challenge was ongoing; and (2) the Board's action would be based upon information received during the meeting indicating that certain WMD criteria may not be met. The motion, as amended, was defeated by a 7 to 1 vote. A subsequent motion was made for FPL to install and maintain certain landscaping over a portion of the ROW to provide a visual buffer between the homes and the transmission line. That motion passed, 7 to 1. Petitioners (except Smith and Leserra, who still had no knowledge of events taking place and did not participate in the meeting on February 14, 2001) understood that the Governing Board had refused to initiate revocation proceedings at the meeting. Although some Petitioners expressed willingness to hear more about the landscaping proposal, which was new to them, Petitioners also already knew that the landscaping alternative proposed would not be acceptable to them and that they still wanted FPL's Permit revoked. After the Board's vote, several Petitioners, including Jose Gutman, Badillo, and Rosenman (as well as Fishman) talked to Walker about other avenues to pursue in their continued opposition to FPL's Permit. This discussion included advice on seeking a formal administrative hearing. It is highly likely that, even if Walker did not have all his documentation from WMD's file on FPL's Permit by January 8, 2001, he had them by the Governing Board's meeting on February 14, 2001. During the meeting, Walker introduced exhibits that he indicated were retrieved from WMD's file on FPL's permit. These included a copy of the Notice of Rights attached to the Order Granting Waiver. Walker advised the homeowners for the last time after the meeting on February 14, 2001, before his clients left the meeting. His representation was terminated shortly thereafter. Petitioners have invoked attorney-client privilege to preclude discovery of the precise substance of the discussion with Walker after the meeting on February 14, 2001- -in particular whether the various jurisdictional time limitations were discussed. However, it is reasonable to infer that Walker shared this information with the homeowners, including the information contained in the Notice of Rights attached to the Order Granting Waiver, before terminating his representation. Leserra's Knowledge and the Petition Petitioner Leserra first learned of the installation of high-voltage transmission line poles in the vicinity of his home in approximately February 2001. The closest pole was just 69 feet away from his home, across Loxahatchee Road. Leserra contacted State Representative Stacy Ritter to complain, and his office contacted WMD and obtained information concerning the project in mid to late-February 2001. A letter sent by Representative Ritter's office to Leserra on February 28, 2001, and received by Leserra shortly after March 2, 2001, stated that the line in question was located on property determined to be owned by WMD. Leserra testified that, even after receiving this information, he did not know how WMD's ownership was determined and still did not know for certain of WMD's involvement at the time. In early March 2001, a friend informed Leserra that homeowners in Boca Winds in Palm Beach County were having a similar problem with installation of high-voltage transmission lines near their homes and gave him Teresa Badillo's name and telephone number. Leserra telephoned her and was told that there was a meeting about it at WMD in February 2001. Badillo gave Leserra Jose Gutman's name and number for additional information. Badillo testified that she also told Leserra about FPL's Permit to use WMD's ROW. Leserra does not recall her saying that. Even if she did, Leserra did not even know where Boca Winds was at the time and did not know that Boca Winds was being affected by the same transmission line project that was affecting him. On March 12, 2001, Leserra wrote to FPL and WMD and threatened that he would hold WMD responsible for any adverse impact from the FPL facilities on the Hillsborough Canal. At the time he sent the letter, he had not yet been able to speak to Jose Gutman. At some point during the next four days, Leserra was able to contact Jose Gutman by telephone. Gutman explained the Boca Winds situation in detail, including the homeowners' intention to request an administrative hearing, and Leserra agreed to be a co-petitioner. Since Petitioners objected to disclosure of communication with Gutman on grounds of attorney-client privilege, it is not clear that Gutman imparted to Leserra information as to the Notice of Rights attached to the Order Granting Waiver to FPL or the deadline for petitioning for an administrative hearing. But it can be inferred that the former was communicated and that the latter was discussed. On March 16, 2001, Amy Gutman contacted Ombudsman Williams to tell him that the homeowners no longer were represented by Attorney Walker but, along with Leserra now, wanted to petition for an administrative hearing, wanted to know their rights, and wanted assistance in understanding the process to avail themselves of their rights. On March 20, 2001, Williams relayed this information to Deputy Executive Director Taylor and General Counsel Fumero for handling. The office of WMD General Counsel responded to Williams' request by sending a letter dated March 22, 2001, to Amy Gutman, on behalf of the homeowners, enclosing a copy of the Order Granting Waiver, with Notice of Rights, which "explains the various remedies that are available to anyone substantially affected by a decision of the District." After receipt of the letter with copy of the Order Granting Waiver with Notice of Rights, Amy Gutman and some of the homeowners (including all Petitioners except Ballard Smith) decided to file a petition for administrative hearing. Suzanne Terwilliger telephoned WMD office of General Counsel to get sample petitions, which were faxed to her on April 3, 2001. Terwilliger drafted a Petition for Formal Administrative Hearing (Petition) and telephoned WMD to see if it could be filed by fax. She was told Sandra Gomez would call her back. Terwilliger called again on April 6, 2001, angry that she had gotten no response from Gomez and that FPL was energizing the transmission line which had been completely installed since February 14, 2001. Told that it could be filed by fax, the Petition was filed in that manner on April 6, 2001. The Petition was filed by Terwilliger, Amy Gutman, and Leserra purportedly on behalf of unnamed residents of several residential areas in southwest Palm Beach County. On April 11, 2001, FPL filed a Motion to Dismiss asserting that the Petition was untimely, that WMD had no jurisdiction over the matters raised in the Petition, and that Petitioners had no standing. Smith's Knowledge and Joinder; Amended Petition There was no evidence that Ballard Smith knew anything at all about what transpired between the homeowners, FPL, and WMD from December 2000 through April 13, 2001. Smith visited his home in Boca Winds again during Easter weekend 2001. When he arrived, he was shocked to see the transmission line in place. On April 14, 2001, he talked to his neighbors, the Gutmans, who informed him of some of what had transpired between the homeowners, FPL, and WMD from December 2000 through April 13, 2001, including FPL's Motion to Dismiss the Petition. He agreed to give Gutman an affidavit to help oppose the Motion to Dismiss and to join the Petition. As set out in the Preliminary Statement, on May 3, 2001, the original Petitioners filed the Affidavit of Ballard Smith as part of their opposition to FPL's Motion to Dismiss. In it, Smith swore that he lived in Bradenton and was not aware of WMD's actions until April 14, 2001; he also swore that he "substantially agrees" with the Petition and "joins with the Petitioners in this Case No. 01-1504." While not clear from the Affidavit itself, Smith clarified in his testimony that he intended by the Affidavit to join in the Petition. On May 18, 2001, Petitioners filed an Amended Petition. The Amended Petition listed 13 individual Petitioners--those included in the above-caption (including Smith), plus one other who later voluntarily dismissed and was dropped. The Amended Petition states that Petitioners' interests in this proceeding are based on the following concerns: (i) the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMF); (ii) impact on Petitioners' property values; (iii) aesthetics and loss of quiet enjoyment; (iv) structural safety; and (v) interference with radio and television. Several Petitioners testified to concerns that the transmission line would interfere with the operation of the Hillsborough Canal and cause their properties and roads to flood, and Tennant testified that the transmission line interfered with her husband's fishing in the canal. The Amended Petition did not allege that these things affected Petitioners in particular, as opposed to the community in general. But they were heard without objection and by implied consent. Likewise, Tennant's testimony about her family's canoeing and kite-flying being impacted by the transmission line were heard without objection and by implied consent. EMF Petitioners Badillo, Smith, Rosenman, Weinstein, Tennant, and the Gutmans expressed concerns about EMF generated by transmission lines (although Smith disclaimed any personal interest in the issue.) The remaining Petitioners did not express EMF concerns. The only competent, substantial evidence in the record on Petitioners' medical concerns about EMF were two booklets--one produced in 1995 by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the United States Department of Energy, and another produced by the Department of Engineering and Public Policy of the Carnegie Mellon University--which FPL provides to those asking for information about EMF. These booklets did not prove that medical or health impacts on Petitioners are likely as a result of the Parkland Transmission Line. Far from proving immediate injury, these booklets at most were only enough to generate some speculation about possible medical or health impacts. Property Values and Aesthetics The Amended Petition states that the presence of the Parkland Transmission Line will adversely impact Petitioners' property values, decreasing values by 20-30 percent. This claim is coupled with claims regarding the aesthetics of the facilities. As to property values, there was no competent, substantial evidence in the record to support Petitioners' contentions. Petitioners made no attempt to substantiate their expressed concern of a drop in property values. They presented no expert evidence regarding property values, none that sales of homes in the area have been or will impacted, and none that the sale price of any home has been lower than it would have been without installation of the transmission line. As for aesthetics, the only evidence was the opinions of several Petitioners who testified that the transmission lines are unsightly. Even if this was enough to prove diminished aesthetics, at least for Petitioners closest to the transmission line, there was no evidence to causally connect diminished aesthetics to a reduction in property value, so as to be actionable in this proceeding. Structural Safety Petitioners presented no competent, substantial evidence that the Parkland Transmission Line is structurally unsound or in any reasonable danger of failure. FPL presented ample evidence to the contrary. The Parkland Transmission Line is designed to meet FPL's internal standards. FPL's internal standards are more stringent (i.e., designed to withstand heavier loads) than the present regulatory requirements for wind-loading and structural safety. FPL's internal standards are also more stringent than the voluntary standards for electric transmission facilities developed by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). The structural strength of FPL's transmission line also exceeds the requirements of both the Broward and Palm Beach County building codes. Based largely on FPL's stringent internal standards, the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC) is being revised to improve the wind-loading standards for electric transmission poles. Because the new standards are based on FPL's existing internal standards, the Parkland Transmission Line structures are designed to comply with the new NESC that is currently in the final stages of development. FPL's stringent design standards make the possibility for Petitioners to be affected by a failed transmission pole or conductor extremely remote and speculative. Petitioners have expressed a concern over the effects of hurricanes on FPL's concrete transmission poles. However, it is highly unlikely that any portion of the transmission line would fail in a hurricane. FPL's experience reveals that no concrete transmission pole has ever been lost to a Category 3 hurricane, which is a 1-in-100 storm event. Hurricane Andrew, which was a 1-in-400 year storm event, was the only hurricane known to have affected such poles. Even then, 92 percent of FPL's poles stood up. The likelihood of a storm of that magnitude hitting the area where Petitioners' homes are located is very remote. Additionally, the poles along the Parkland Transmission Line are built to FPL's post- Andrew standards and have more load-bearing capacity than the poles in place during Andrew. Petitioners questioned the credibility of FPL's evidence on the structural integrity of FPL's transmission poles and lines, contending that FPL's design calculations for wind-loading failed to increase the basic design wind speed by the terrain factor for exposure category "D." According to the "Guidelines for Electrical Transmission Line Structural Loading," ASCE Manual No. 74, Exposure D is "described as unobstructed coastal areas directly exposed to wind flowing over large bodies of water." Petitioners contend that Exposure D applies because the Hillsboro Canal "runs for miles along the transmission line." But FPL Structural Engineer, C. Jerry Wong, Ph.D., P.E., testified clearly and persuasively that the presence of the Hillsboro Canal does not place the Parkland Transmission Line in an Exposure D setting. Even if failure of a pole were to occur during a hurricane, the chance that a pole would fall and hit one of Petitioners' homes still would be remote. For all Petitioners except Leserra, the poles are too far away for that to happen. The poles, which weigh 45,000 pounds apiece, are too heavy to become airborne. Petitioners presented no competent, substantial evidence suggesting that either a pole or electric conductor could somehow become airborne and reach the property of any Petitioner except Leserra. The only record evidence on this point established that, when there is a structural failure, the pole and the conductor fall down approximately right below where the transmission line is located. The odds of one of these homes being hit by a pole or transmission line due to high winds are almost zero. Even in the case of Leserra, who is the closest to the transmission line at approximately 69 feet away, the odds of his house being hit by a pole due to high winds is less than two-tenths of one percent. Because the transmission line is designed to have higher structural capacity than required by local building codes, it is likely that any winds strong enough to have the potential to damage the line would also destroy surrounding homes. It is far more likely that Petitioners' homes would be destroyed and strike the transmission line than the other way around. In any event, if a hurricane was strong enough to topple one of FPL's transmission line poles or blow down lines, it also would be strong enough already to have destroyed Petitioners' homes. So even if by some bizarre and remote chance a pole or wires blew into one or more of Petitioners' homes, the homes probably already would have been destroyed by such a storm. Petitioners next expressed concern regarding one of the poles being struck by a vehicle, such as a fully-loaded commercial truck. For most Petitioners, even if a truck could knock down a pole, the pole would not reach their property. Only Leserra's home is close enough for there to be any possibility of this happening. Even in Leserra's case, it is next to impossible for a truck to cause one of the poles to fall. The only truck traffic near the poles is on Loxahatchee Road, which runs parallel to the pole line. The poles are separated from the road by a guard rail designed to withstand a 50 mile per hour (mph) collision. The maximum weight of a truck allowed on the road is 80,000 pounds. Such a truck would have to hit a pole at a near right angle and at over 100 mph to have any chance of causing a failure. Because the trucks travel parallel to the pole line, and there is a guardrail in the way, the chance of failure from a collision is extremely remote and speculative. In essence the truck would need to make a 90- degree turn near the pole, break through the 50-mph guard rail a few feet away, and still be traveling at over 100 mph at the time it struck the pole. Then, the pole would have to fall in the opposite direction from the impact to hit Leserra's home. The odds of something this bizarre happening are extremely remote. Finally, it is noted that FPL's Permit has an indemnity clause, which "requires that FPL hold and save the South Florida Water Management District and its successors harmless from any and all damages, claims or liabilities which may arise by reason of the construction maintenance or use of the work or structure involved in the permit." Since this makes it clear that any liability resulting from the presence of the transmission line must be borne by FPL alone, any claim that a structural failure could lead to liability for WMD is speculative at best. Flooding Concerns Several Petitioners testified to concerns about flooding in the Boca Winds subdivision by blocking of subdivision drainage culverts that flow into the Hillsborough Canal or by interference with WMD's routine maintenance of the canal. But Petitioners presented no competent, substantial evidence that flooding for these reasons would be likely. There are two box culverts leading from Boca Winds into the Hillsborough Canal. But, as required by WMD rules, the Boca Winds storm water system is designed to accommodate a 3-day long, 1-in-100 year storm event, with no external outflow. In other words, the system is designed to function without the drainage culverts in even this extreme rainfall condition. There is only a one-percent chance that a 1-in-100- year rainfall event would hit Boca Winds in any given year. In any storm of this magnitude or less, the onsite system would be sufficient to accommodate the rainfall with no flooding of the floor elevation of Petitioners' homes. The possibility that any one storm event would even require drainage into the Hillsborough Canal to prevent flooding in Boca Winds is therefore remote. The culverts leading to the Hillsboro Canal essentially provide additional drainage capacity to the internal storm water management system of Boca Winds. In addition, by slowly draining ("bleeding") water from the Boca Winds subdivision to the canal, they allow the system to recover capacity for subsequent rain events. It is highly unlikely that a transmission pole, even if it was to shear off and fall toward the canal-which is in itself an extremely remote possibility--could in any way impede the functions of either the drainage structures or the canal. Even if a pole were to fall and directly strike and crush one of the two drainage structures, it probably would not appreciably affect the culvert's ability to bleed water into the canal. The drainage into the structures is controlled initially by a weir at the inflow point, not by the pipe diameter at the outflow. Even if a pole were to somehow crush the outflow pipe, water would continue to flow into the canal at roughly the same rate. A pole falling into the canal itself would not affect the ability of the canal to provide drainage. If a pole were to fall into the canal, it would most likely do so top first. Because the pole is tapered, only a small cross section would enter the canal, which would have almost no effect on the flow of water. Even assuming that a pole were to enter the canal in its entirety, it would affect only a minimal portion of the canal cross section and would not significantly affect the flowage capacity of the canal. Even multiple poles falling completely in the canal--an extremely unlikely event--would not significantly affect the function of the canal, due to the small cross-section taken up and the distance between the poles. Most maintenance of the Hillsborough Canal is done with herbicides and from boats in the canal itself. There is rarely a need to use heavy land-based equipment to maintain a drainage canal. The Parkland Transmission Line is on the south bank of the canal, and the Permit provides for the poles to be set approximately 450 feet apart and more than 14 feet from the top of the canal bank. (In many instances the poles are much more than 14 feet from the top of the canal bank). The Permit provides that the poles are to be installed with turn structures that allow at least a 14-foot passing zone around each pole. This is sufficient for the types of vehicles used by WMD to pass around the poles, assuming there was a need to drive along the south bank of the canal. Most heavy equipment can operate from the passing pad and from the space between poles. When heavy equipment is needed, a backhoe or grade- all is typically used. Both of these types of equipment can operate unimpeded from the south side of the canal. A grade- all operating from the south bank has sufficient reach to dredge the bottom of the canal should that be necessary and is the optimal piece of equipment for such an operation. The transmission line would not affect the operation of a grade- all from the southern bank of the canal. Because of the higher elevation, a grade-all would not be used from the north bank, and a crane would be used if there were a need to conduct dredging from that direction. However, because of its location, the transmission line would not impede any equipment use on the north bank. Moreover, if any extensive dredging were done, the routine method would be to operate from a barge on the canal itself, which would also not be affected by the transmission line. There also is no way that the presence of the transmission line could affect the maintenance of the outfall structures from Boca Winds. Any maintenance of those structures would be performed from the north bank of the canal-the side opposite to the transmission line-or from boats or barges operating in the canal. Petitioners introduced evidence to prove that, in some instances, the poles may not have been installed as provided in the permit, with not enough room between the poles and the top of the bank on one side or Loxahatchee Road on the other. It was not clear from their evidence whether this may have occurred in more than two instances, or in any instance other than where the transmission line intersected the canal and changed direction near a culvert. Even if proven, these would have amounted to compliance enforcement issues, not permitting issues. It was not proven that the installation design at these locations was improper; if installation was designed properly but implemented improperly, it was not proven that installation as designed was impossible at these locations. Finally, it was not proven that the installation hampered canal maintenance. Leserra also expressed concerns about flooding of his property from a north-south drainage ditch along his property line, which conveys water from the south to a box culvert under Loxahatchee Road to the Hillsboro Canal, draining a significant area in the vicinity of Parkland. There was little evidence on the operation of Leserra's drainage ditch. The little evidence presented was insufficient to prove the likelihood of flooding of Leserra's property due to the existence of the transmission line. The evidence presented about the Hillsboro Canal in general suggests that flooding of Leserra's property due to the existence of the transmission line is highly unlikely. Indeed, there was no testimony that water in the Hillsborough Canal has ever risen above its banks, even in major rain events. Recreational Use of Canal Tennant testified that her husband regularly used the Hillsboro Canal for fishing and canoeing before the transmission line was installed. The transmission line does not physically obstruct canoeing or fishing in the canal, but her husband chooses not to canoe or fish in the canal any longer due to medical and health concerns and for aesthetic reasons. He does not enjoy those activities as much any more due to the transmission line being there both visibly and audibly. (It makes a noise described as "buzzing" or "humming.") Tennant also testified that her family used to fly kites from the dirt road in the ROW along the north side of the canal behind their home. Due to the proximity of the transmission line, this activity no longer is safe and has been discontinued.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the South Florida Water Management District enter a final order dismissing the Amended Petition for lack of standing. DONE AND ENTERED this 27th day of February, 2002, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. ___________________________________ J. LAWRENCE JOHNSTON Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 27th day of February, 2002.
The Issue The issues for determination are whether and the extent to which the properly proposed corridor (the FPL Corridor) for the St. Johns-Pellicer-Pringle 230-kV transmission line (the SJPP Line) complies with the criteria in Section 403.529(4)(a)-(e), Florida Statutes (2005)1, and whether Florida Power & Light's (FPL's) application for corridor certification should be approved in whole, with modifications or conditions, or denied.
Findings Of Fact Based upon all of the evidence the following findings of fact are determined: Parties The TLSA establishes FPL and the Department as parties to this proceeding, and the following became parties upon their timely filing of a notice of intent to be a party, which each has done: Florida Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Community Affairs (DCA), St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD), St. Johns County, and the City of Palm Coast. See § 403.527(4), Fla. Stat. The Application Project Description Generally, an electrical transmission line's purpose is to transport large amounts of electricity from a generating facility to one or more substations. At the substation, the electricity can be either increased or reduced in voltage through transformers and other electrical equipment for further safe and practical transportation, or distribution directly to customers. FPL is seeking certification of a corridor between the existing St. Johns substation and the proposed Pringle substation within which it will ultimately construct the SJPP Line on a narrow right-of-way (ROW). Once all property interests in the ROW are acquired, the boundaries of the corridor will shrink to the typical width of the 15 to 60-foot ROW. The service area for the proposed SJPP Line (the Project Service Area) is St. Johns County and Flagler County. The SJPP Line will follow Interstate 95 (I-95) in a north-south direction and will connect to the proposed intermediate Deerwood, Vermont, Anastasia, and Pellicer substations. The Project Service Area includes an area of increasing load and customer base in the area south of St. Johns and north of Pringle substations and to the west of the existing Bunnell- St. Johns 115-kV transmission line. The three objectives of the SJPP Line project are: (1) to address the need, as confirmed by the PSC, to serve FPL's increasing load and customer base in the area south of St. Johns and north of Pringle substations in a reliable manner; (2) to provide additional transmission reinforcement to the existing 115-kV transmission line between the Bunnell and St. Johns substations; and (3) to efficiently and effectively integrate and serve new distribution substations that are needed to serve projected load growth within Flagler and St. Johns Counties. The primary path for the SJPP transmission line bringing electricity into the Project Service Area will be aligned within or adjacent to existing linear features, such as existing road, transmission line and railroad ROWs. The only exception is a distance of less than half a mile in length between the proposed Vermont substation in the St. Augustine Industrial Park and I-95, where the corridor largely follows property lines. The primary path for the SJPP transmission line bringing electricity into the Project Service Area will be aligned within or adjacent to existing linear features, such as existing road, transmission line, and railroad ROWs. The only exception is a distance of less than half a mile in length between the proposed Vermont substation in the St. Augustine Industrial Park and I-95, where the corridor largely follows the property line. Need for the SJPP Line The PSC determined a new 230-kV transmission line between the St. Johns substation and the proposed Pringle substation is needed, taking into account the need for electric system reliability and integrity in northeast Florida and the need to provide abundant, low-cost electrical energy to assure the economic well-being of the citizens of the State, particularly those in northeast Florida. The PSC noted that FPL's planning studies indicate this additional transmission capacity will be needed by December 2008 to alleviate potential overloads and low voltage conditions that could result from a single contingency event. Without the addition of this transmission capability by 2008, the PSC found that up to 8,300 electric customers could experience service interruptions. The PSC recognized that the Siting Board will make the final corridor selection upon consideration of the factors and criteria specified in Section 403.529, Florida Statutes. Transmission Line Design The typical design for the SJPP Line will be a single- circuit unguyed concrete pole structure, 90 feet above grade in height, with the conductors framed in a vertical configuration. Each of the three conductors is anticipated to be a 1,431 thousand circular mils, aluminum conductor, steel reinforced alumoweld core. There will also be a smaller overhead ground wire to provide shielding and lightning protection for the conductors and provide communications capability. The maximum current rating for the line will be 1,905 amperes. In some locations, electric distribution lines and communication cables may also be attached to the structures beneath the conductors. In some locations, such as along FPL's St. Johns-Tocoi transmission line right-of-way and along Tocoi Road, a double- circuit configuration, with or without distribution underbuild, may be used. The span length between structures will typically vary between 250 and 750 feet, depending on site-specific conditions, ROW widths, and other design considerations. Both pole height and span length may vary to accommodate such things as locating poles to coincide with property boundaries or existing collocated utility facility poles, to avoid or minimize wetland impacts, to cross other utility lines, and to facilitate wide crossings of water bodies and roadways. Where the transmission line turns large angles or crosses other major linear facilities, the structures may be guyed or anchored to support the differential tension. Access roads and structure pads will be constructed only where necessary to provide access for construction, maintenance, and emergency restoration. Where constructed, the typical road top width will be about 14 feet, with a 2-to-1 side slope, and a minimum elevation of 6 inches over mean or seasonal high water. Structure pads will have variable sizes, depending on site specific requirements, but will be of sufficient size to provide access to structure locations for the large construction equipment. Access roads and structure pads will not be paved. Culverts will be installed beneath access roads and structure pads with spacing, diameter, and length to maintain preconstruction flows. The design of the SJPP Line complies with good engineering practices. The SJPP Line will be designed in compliance with all applicable design codes, including the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC), the Department's regulations on electric and magnetic fields, the DOT Utility Accommodation Manual, the St. Johns County and City of Palm Coast noise ordinances, and standards of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, American Society of Testing Materials, American National Standards Institute, and American Concrete Institute, as well as FPL's own design standards. The Project assures the citizens of Florida that operation safeguards are technically sufficient for their welfare and protection. Transmission Line Construction Surveying the ROW to facilitate acquisition of the necessary property interests is a first step towards construction. After property rights for the ROW have been acquired, the initial phase of construction is to clear the ROW. Since nearly the entire length of the FPL Corridor is collocated with existing roads and utility facilities, the need for acquisition of private property and the need for clearing have been minimized. Clearing will consist mainly of tree trimming and the removal of trees that exceed or are capable of exceeding 14 feet in height. In wetlands, trees capable of exceeding 14 feet in height that could come in conflict with the line will be removed by hand-clearing or use of very low ground pressure equipment. Low-growing herbaceous vegetation will not be cleared from wetlands. After the ROW is cleared, any necessary access roads and structure pads will be constructed. Typically, access roads and pads are only required in wet and low areas. This enables all subsequent construction activity in those wet areas to remain on the newly constructed access road and pad. The next phases of construction involve the physical transmission line construction. Initially, materials are brought to the jobsite. Next, holes are augered at each pole location and the poles are then erected using cranes or other heavy equipment. The hole is then backfilled with suitable fill. Typically, the pole is embedded into the ground approximately 16 to 20 feet. After the poles are set, the poles are framed, that is, the insulators and hardware are installed on the pole. Then through a wire pulling operation the conductors and overhead ground wires are installed. The conductors are then properly sagged and tensioned to provide the proper vertical clearances. Next, the conductors are "lipped in" to the insulator assemblies. The final stage of construction is ROW clean-up. During all stages of construction, FPL will maintain traffic on any adjacent county, state, or federal roadways in compliance with applicable DOT and St. Johns County regulations. Throughout construction, sedimentation management techniques, such as the use of silt screens and hay bales, will be employed as necessary to minimize potential impacts from erosion and sedimentation. While each phase of construction will typically take only 1 to 7 days in an area, the entire SJPP Line construction process will last approximately 13 months. Methodology for Choosing FPL Corridor On project initiation, FPL management instructed its multi-disciplinary corridor selection team to identify, if it could, a corridor for the SJPP Line that connects the St. Johns and Pringle substations and allows connections to the proposed intermediate substations. Corridor Selection and Public Involvement FPL established a multi-disciplinary team to identify and evaluate routing alternatives within the Project Study Area. This multi-disciplinary team was comprised of a transmission line engineer, a land use planner, and an ecologist. FPL's multi-disciplinary team gathered data on siting opportunities and constraints within the study area and identified 45 line segments which could be assembled into approximately 630 alternate routes for the SJPP Line. FPL also engaged in an extensive public participation program to gather input for its route evaluation study. This public participation program included an open house, mass mailings, a community survey, a toll-free telephone number and an e-mail address, a website, and meetings with regulatory agencies, community associations, homeowner groups, and individual homeowners and property owners. The public participation program provided substantive input to the route evaluation study in terms of study area boundary, siting opportunities and constraints in the area, identification of route segments to be evaluated, and weights to be assigned to the route evaluation criteria. FPL's multi-disciplinary team evaluated the 630 routes quantitatively, using 11 weighted factors, and then evaluated in more detail, using both quantitative and qualitative criteria, a few distinct routes identified from among the highest-ranking routes. Through this process, FPL's multi-disciplinary team was able to identify a route of the FPL Corridor that, on balance, is the most appropriate considering environmental, land use, engineering, and cost considerations. Once the preferred alignment was identified, the multi-disciplinary team delineated the boundaries or width of the FPL Corridor to provide flexibility for locating the eventual ROW within that corridor. Agencies' Review of FPL's Application and Resulting Determinations State, regional, and local agencies with regulatory authority over the project reviewed FPL's Application and submitted to the Department a report as to the impact of the proposed SJPP Line on matters within the agency's jurisdiction, as required by Section 403.526(2), Florida Statutes. The Department then compiled these reports and made a recommendation that the SJPP Line be granted approval subject to appropriate conditions. Stipulations Entered Into by Parties All agency parties filed stipulations with FPL in which these parties and FPL agreed to the Conditions of Certification for the SJPP line and the entry into the record of the pre-filed written testimony and exhibits of FPL's witnesses. Detailed Description of the FPL Corridor Almost the entire length of the FPL Corridor is collocated with existing linear features, such as roads and transmission lines. This collocation will minimize impacts of the new SJPP Line. The width of the FPL Corridor varies along the route to provide flexibility within the corridor to minimize or avoid impacts to such areas as existing developments and large wetland areas. From the St. Johns Substation to the Deerwood Substation The SJPP line will exit the existing St. Johns substation at SR 207 near Lightsey Boulevard and utilize the existing 110-foot-wide St. Johns-Tocoi 230-kV ROW. The FPL Corridor will be collocated within this existing ROW north and west until the intersection with I-95. Along the existing ROW and in the vicinity of the St. Johns substation, the land use is residential or vacant. At I-95, the preferred corridor will follow the eastern ROW line of the highway south to the intersection with Tocoi Road. The corridor in this stretch is 500 feet wide. Within the corridor in this stretch, the land use is vacant. There is some residential development outside the corridor to the east. At the I-95/Tocoi Road intersection, the FPL Corridor is expanded in all four quadrants following property lines to allow FPL flexibility in traversing the short distance to Deerwood substation and crossing I-95 to proceed south from Deerwood. The FPL Corridor follows Tocoi Road to enter and exit the proposed Deerwood substation, encompassing 100 feet or less in width on both the north and south sides of the road. The line will be built either on the south or north side of the road. A FPL distribution line currently exists on the south side of Tocoi Road. From the Deerwood Substation to the Vermont Substation The FPL Corridor will leave the Tocoi Road alignment at the I-95 intersection. The FPL Corridor then follows the western ROW edge of I-95 south to the FEC Railroad, where the corridor turns to the southwest for a short distance. In this section, the corridor is 500 feet wide. At the north end of the St. Augustine Industrial Park, the corridor follows property lines to the access road (Deerpark Boulevard) into the industrial park. The corridor is 200 feet wide in this section. From the north end of the access road, the FPL Corridor follows the east edge of the road south to the Vermont substation site, is 100 feet wide in this section, and includes an existing FPL distribution line. From the Vermont Substation to the Anastasia Substation The FPL Corridor exits the Vermont substation heading northeast toward I-95. In this area, the corridor will be of variable width and will include both sides of State Road 207 (SR 207). An existing 115-kV FPL transmission line already occupies the north side of the SR 207, and a distribution line is located on the south side. An existing FPL distribution line traverses north-south in this area and is also included in the corridor. In the area between the Vermont substation and I-95, the corridor is north and east of existing residential subdivisions. The corridor between the Vermont substation and I-95 is widened to allow flexibility in accommodating a number of land use and engineering considerations. These considerations include the crossing of SR 207, the existing transmission line and distribution lines, existing residential development south of SR 207, existing commercial development north of SR 207, and a large borrow pond west of I-95. The corridor will reach I-95 south of SR 207, at which point it will then follow I-95's western boundary southward. The corridor is 500 feet wide in this area where it parallels I-95 south to SR 206. The predominant land use in the area between the Vermont and Anastasia substations is silviculture. From the Anastasia Substation to the Pellicer Substation At the intersection of SR 206 and I-95, the corridor is again widened variably to include the properties on the northwest and southwest quadrants of the interchange to provide flexibility in finalizing the Anastasia substation plans and providing ingress and egress to that substation. The FPL Corridor will exit the Anastasia substation and follow the western boundary of I-95 southward. The corridor is 500 feet wide in this stretch with the exception of the location of a rest area on the west side of I-95, approximately 2.5 miles south of Anastasia substation. The corridor is of variable width around the rest area, but generally 1,000 feet wide to allow flexibility in traversing either the front or rear of the rest area. In this area, the predominant land use is silviculture. Where I-95 intersects the FEC Railroad north of County Road 204 (CR 204), the FPL Corridor turns and follows the railroad southward. The corridor is located along the east side of the railroad and is 500 feet wide. North of CR 204, the corridor is expanded along the road to allow ingress to the Pellicer substation site located south of CR 204 and east of the railroad. Land uses in this area are primarily silviculture. From the Pellicer Substation to the Pringle Substation The FPL Corridor includes the entire Pellicer site, which is already owned by FPL, along the east side of the FEC Railroad south to Pellicer Creek. The corridor in this area crosses lands owned or proposed to be purchased by the SJRWMD for conservation purposes for approximately one mile. From Pellicer Creek south to the Pringle substation, the corridor will follow the east side of the railroad bed and will be variable in width, generally 150 to 300 feet wide. At the Pringle substation site, which is already owned by FPL, the corridor includes the entire substation site. The FPL Corridor for the stretch south of Pellicer Creek falls in a currently undeveloped portion of the Palm Coast Park Development of Regional Impact (DRI) within the City of Palm Coast's jurisdiction. The development order for the Palm Coast Park DRI provides for an easement for the SJPP transmission line within the FPL Corridor. Compliance With Section 403.529(4) Criteria Ensure Electric Power System Reliability and Integrity The PSC found that there are regional transmission system limitations in St. Johns and Flagler Counties. By 2008, the existing 115kV transmission network between the Bunnell substation in Flagler County and the St. Johns substation in St. Johns County will not have sufficient capacity to provide reliable electric service to the existing and proposed substations in the area. The SJPP Line would be built to alleviate potential overloads and low voltage conditions from a single contingency event, which occurs when a single element such as a generator, transmission circuit or transformer is eliminated from the system. If the SJPP Line is not built, service interruptions affecting up to 8,300 customers could occur. In addition, the PSC found that the FPL North Region (extending from Indian River County to Nassau County) has grown by a compound annual average growth rate of 3.7 percent over the past five years. The SJPP Line is also needed to serve the increasing load and customer base in the area. Operation of the SJPP Line would be consistent with the North American Electric Reliability Council and Florida Reliability Coordinating Council transmission system standards. FPL has a responsibility to provide safe and reliable service to its customers. See § 366.03, Fla. Stat. The provision of reliable electric service is important to FPL and its customers. In the past, FPL has demonstrated the ability to plan a reliable electric system consistent with the NESC and ASCE standards. Meet the Electrical Energy Needs of the State in an Orderly and Timely Fashion The PSC recognized that FPL's planning studies indicate that the SJPP Line is needed by December 2008 to alleviate potential overloads and low voltage conditions from a single contingency event. Location of the SJPP Line on the FPL Corridor would meet the electrical energy needs of the state in a timely fashion. Comply with the Nonprocedural Requirements of Agencies Construction, operation, and maintenance of the SJPP Line in the FPL Corridor will comply with applicable non- procedural requirements of agencies. The Department has concluded that the project as proposed will comply with all applicable Department statutes, rules, policies, and procedures. Be Consistent with Applicable Local Government Comprehensive Plans The Department has concluded that the SJPP Line as proposed would produce a minimal adverse impact on the environment and public health, safety, and welfare without unduly conflicting with local statutes and local comprehensive plans. After certification of this project, FPL will acquire the necessary property interests in a ROW within the certified corridor for placement of the SJPP Line. Construction of transmission lines on such established ROWs is excepted from the definition of "development" in Section 163.3164(5), Florida Statutes. Accordingly, the provisions of the local comprehensive plans related to "development" that have been adopted by the local governments crossed by the SJPP Line are not applicable to this project. To the extent the comprehensive plans of the local governments crossed by the SJPP Line include provisions applicable to non-development activities, the proposed transmission line in the FPL Corridor would be consistent with them. The City of Palm Coast Comprehensive Plan is essentially silent on transmission lines as a land use, which is consistent with such lines being excepted from the definition of "development" regulated by the Plan. Policy A.1.8.3 of the St. Johns County Comprehensive Plan provides that "future utility facilities shall be located to promote the efficient provision of services, minimize the cost of construction and maintenance, and minimize the impact on the natural environment." Because of the thoroughness of the corridor selection process and criteria, and the appropriateness of the corridor from a land use perspective, the proposed SJPP Line is consistent with that policy. No variances or exemptions from applicable state or local standards or ordinances are needed for the project. Implementation of Legislative Intent in Section 403.521 The Need for the SJPP Line as a Means of Providing Abundant Low-Cost Electrical Energy The PSC determined that the SJPP Line is needed taking into account the factors set forth in Section 403.537, Florida Statutes. In the need proceeding, the PSC considered two alternatives, including transmission modifications to the existing 115-kV system. The PSC accepted FPL's rejection of the two alternatives "due to economics and concerns with the ability to serve additional future customers west of the I-95/US-1 corridor." The PSC found that the proposed transmission line would "assure the economic well-being of the citizens of the state by serving projected new electric load in the region, and improving the region's electric reliability by minimizing the region's exposure to single contingency events." The PSC has determined that the estimated cost of the Project is reasonable, and that the SJPP Line will assure the economic well-being of the citizens of the state by serving projected new electric load in the region and improving the region's electric reliability by minimizing the region's exposure to single contingency events. Impact Upon the Public The SJPP Line is appropriate from a land use perspective because this type of transmission line currently exists in all types of land uses in Florida, including residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and vacant land. The SJPP Line takes advantage of the opportunity to be collocated with other transmission lines, roadways, and railroad ROWs for almost the entire distance. By following these existing linear features, the FPL Corridor conforms to existing and future development patterns, and minimizes intrusion into residential areas and conservation lands. As a result, the proposed SJPP Line is in proximity to relatively few residences and only one crossing of lands either purchased or proposed for purchase under federal, state, or local land acquisition programs. Further, by collocating with other public and utility ROWs, the amount of land that will be required for the SJPP line is less than if it were not collocated. The FPL Corridor minimizes impacts to existing homes by following a route where there is very little residential development and where planned residential development is very low density. The SJPP Line as proposed will comply with all applicable non-procedural standards, including the noise ordinances of St. Johns County and the City of Palm Coast, and the standards adopted by the Department limiting the electric and magnetic fields associated with transmission lines. Impact Upon the Environment The SJPP Line Project as proposed will have minimal environmental impact. Construction of the SJPP Line within the FPL Corridor will not adversely affect the conservation of fish and wildlife, including endangered or threatened species, or their habitats. The FPL Corridor avoids or minimizes intrusion into the undisturbed wildlife habitats due to its collocation with existing linear facilities for almost its entire length. The current condition and relative value of function of the habitat in the FPL Corridor is minimal from a wildlife ecology and protected species perspective. Great care was taken in routing the FPL Corridor to avoid or minimize proximity of the corridor to known listed species locations, including routing inputs from wildlife agencies such as the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Further, due to the presence of existing linear features along much of the route, clearing of additional natural habitats and potential wetland impacts will be minimized. Construction of the SJPP Line within the FPL Corridor will not cause a significant adverse impact to the current condition and relative value of functions of the vegetative communities within the FPL Corridor. First, nearly the entire length of the FPL Corridor allows placement of the transmission line within or adjacent to existing linear features to take advantage of previous disturbances to vegetation. FPL will also minimize impacts to forested wetland vegetation through the use of restrictive clearing practices during both construction and maintenance. In the forested wetland portions of the ROW, FPL will only take out trees and shrubs that have an expected mature height greater than 14 feet and "danger trees," which are trees that could fall into the conductors and cause an outage. In these areas, vegetation will be removed by hand, usually with chain saws, or with low-ground-pressure shear or rotary machines to reduce soil compaction and damage to ground cover. The removal of vegetation in forested wetlands will not affect the vegetative root mat or soil surface conditions. The non- forested wetlands should not require any clearing. There will be some filling in wetlands associated with the placement of pole pads and access roads. However, FPL will minimize impacts on wetlands vegetation through a careful alignment of the ROW and the varying of span distances between poles. FPL will also install an appropriate number and size of culverts to properly maintain existing wetland hydroperiods along areas of fill in wetlands. Also, any unavoidable wetland impacts associated with the project will be mitigated in accordance with the Conditions of Certification. FPL has agreed to avoid the removal of listed plant species on public lands and waters, wherever practicable. When removal is necessary on public lands/waters, FPL will consult with the Department, FFWCC, and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to determine the appropriate steps to minimize, mitigate, or otherwise appropriately address potential project related impacts to listed plant species. FPL's commitment to avoid, minimize and/or mitigate potential impacts to listed plant species within public lands and waters will promote the conservation of endangered and threatened plant species populations and their habitats. The SJPP Line Project will comply with all applicable state, regional, and local non-procedural regulations, including the wetland regulatory standards applicable to such projects. Balance of Need versus Impacts The SJPP Line would effect a reasonable balance between the need for a transmission line as a means for providing abundant low cost energy and the impact upon the public and the environment resulting from the location of the transmission line corridor and the construction and maintenance of the transmission line. Conditions of Certification The design, construction, and operation of the SJPP Line as proposed in the FPL Corridor will comply with the conditions of certification set forth in Department Exhibit 1. The conditions of certification establish a post- certification review process through which the final right-of- way, access road, and structure locations will be reviewed by agencies with regulatory authority over the project for the purpose of monitoring for compliance with the conditions of certification. While the FPL Corridor has few homes in close proximity to it and very limited wetland crossings, FPL has agreed to conditions of certification that further minimize land use and environmental impacts. For example, FPL has agreed that to the extent practicable it will locate its ROW to avoid the taking of homes, to collocate the ROW within or adjacent to existing ROWs, and to vary the length of the span between poles as appropriate to eliminate or reduce wetland impacts.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Siting Board enter a Final Order approving FPL's St. Johns-Pellicer-Pringle 230-kV Transmission Line Application for Certification subject to the Conditions of Certification set forth in Department Exhibit 1. DONE AND ENTERED this 6th day of March, 2006, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S DONALD R. ALEXANDER Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 6th day of March, 2006.
Findings Of Fact The findings of fact set out in paragraph 1 of the Recommended Order are based upon Hearing Officer's exhibit 1 and FPC exhibits 6, 7, and 8. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 2 are based upon a stipulation of the parties which is recorded in the transcript of the formal hearing, Volume III, pp. 181-182. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 3 are based upon the testimony of the witnesses Schaefer and Guillet; and upon Hearing Officer's exhibit 1 and FPC exhibits 1 through 8, and 69. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 4 are based upon the testimony of the witnesses Greene, Schaefer, and Conner; and upon Hearing Officer's exhibit 1, and FPC exhibits 1, 5, 14, 47, and 48. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 5 are based upon the testimony of the witnesses Greene and Conner; and upon Hearing Officer's exhibit 1, and FPC exhibits 1, 5, 47, 48, and 49. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 6 are based upon the testimony of the witnesses Schaefer, Greene, Conner, and Voigts; and upon Hearing Officer's exhibit 1 and FPC exhibits 1, 5, 12, 35 through 45, 59, and 61. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 7 are based upon the testimony of the witness Conner; and upon Hearing Officer's exhibit 1, and FPC exhibits 14,35, and 39 through 43. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 8 are based upon the testimony of the witnesses Schaefer, Greene, Marin, Voigts, Guillet, Harp, Lokey, Gilmartin, and Watson; upon the testimony of public witnesses Wagoner, Velden, and Dykes; and upon Hearing Officer's exhibit 1 and FPC exhibits 1, 5, 14, 16, 22, 27, 28, 32 through 34, 39 through 43, 45, 46, 52, 61, and Public exhibit 1. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 9 are based upon the testimony of the witnesses Schaefer, Greene, Marin, Voigts, Guillet, Harp, Lokey, Gilmartin, and Watson; upon the testimony of public witnesses Wagoner, Velden, and Dykes; and upon Hearing Officer's exhibit 1 and FPC exhibits 1, 5, 14, 16, 22, 27, 28, 32 through 34, 39 through 43, 45, 46, 52, 61, and Public exhibit 1. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 10 are based upon the testimony of the witnesses Marin, Brown, Guillet, Lokey, Gilmartin and Watson; and upon Hearing Officer's exhibit 1 and FPC exhibit 16. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 11 are based upon the testimony of the witnesses Brown, Cartensen, and Miller; and upon FPC exhibits 49, 50, 51, and 65. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 12 are based upon the testimony of the witness Brown. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 13 are based upon the testimony of the witnesses Brown and Harp; and upon FPC exhibit 52. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 14 are based upon the testimony of the witness Conner. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 15 are based upon the testimony of the witness Miller; and upon FPC exhibits 51 and 65. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 16 are based upon the testimony of the witness Schaefer; and upon FPC exhibits 9, 10, 11, and 69. The findings of fact set out in paragraph 17 are based upon the testimony of the witness Koszulinski and Guillet; and upon Hearing Officer's exhibit 1, and FPC exhibits 70 through 73. ENTERED THIS 2nd day of June, 1982, in Tallahassee, Florida. G. STEVEN PFEIFFER Assistant Director Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 2nd day of June, 1982.
