HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 09.09.2008Notice of Meeting of the
Governing Body of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, September 9, 2008 at 04:00:00 PM at City Council
Chambers, at the northeast corner of Seventh and Main Streets, Georgetown, Texas.
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
.An agenda packet, containing detailed information on the items listed below, is distributed to the Mayor,
Councilmembers, and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Saturday preceding the council
meeting. The library's copy is available for public review.
Executive Session
Regular Session to convene and continue Executive Session, if necessary
In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes,
Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the
regular session that follows.
A Sec.551.071: Consultation with Attorney
- Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise
the City Council, including agenda items
- Georgetown Village PID discussion of status and legal issues related to same.
- Development Agreement with San Gabriel Partners, Ltd. regarding the development of the River Place Project.
-City of Georgetown, Texas v. Georgetown Railroad Company, Inc., at at; Civil Action No. A08CA 453 SS; In the United
States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division
- MarkShetton v. City of Georgetown, et al; Cause No. A07CA063; in the United States District Court for the Western District
of Texas, Austin Division
- Pending, threatened, and contemplated litigation arising from incident in October 2007 Involving former police officer Fennell
- First Citizens Bank 8 Trust Company v. City of Georgetown , Cause No. D -1 -GN -08-02325, 53rd Judicial District, Travis
County, Texas
- Potential litigation regarding LCRA Wholesale Power Agreement
- Discussion of legal issues related to payment obligations for the Public Utility Improvements under the "Development
Agreement with Forestville Associates, a Maryland General Partnership, regarding development of Wolf Ranch" dated
September 11, 2003
- Discussion of legal issues related to the ABG Development Agreement
- Berry Creek Partners v. City of Georgetown , Cause No. 08-767-0277, in the District Court of Williamson County, 277th
Judicial District.
B Sec 551.072: Deliberations about Real Property
- Funding options regarding real estate transactions.
Acquisition of an easement from Southwestern University
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 04:00 PM
(Council may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of
the Mayor, a Councilmember, or the City Manager for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act,
Texas Government Code Chapter 551.)
C Call to Cyder
D Pledge of Allegiance
. E Comments from the Mayor
Welcome and Meeting Procedures
F Announcements and Comments from City Manager
G Action from Executive Session
City Council Agenda/September 9, 2008
Page. t of 6 Pages
S Discussion and possible action to approve a Resolution Amending the Annual Review and Amendment
Process for the Unified Development Code -- Paul E. Brandenburg, City Manager
T Discussion and possible action to appoint members to the Unified Development Code Review Task Force —
Paui E. Brandenburg, City Manager
U Consideration and possible action to approve amended language to the participation agreement with Williamson
County regarding the County's participation in the Rivery Park Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone related to
the proposed development of the Summit at Rivery Park — Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager
V Review and possible action to approve Informational materials for the road and park bond election in
November — Keith Huthcinson, Public Information Officer
W Status reports from Chair Dale Ross of the ad hoc City Council Subcommittee on Legal Services; Chair Ben
Oliver on the ad hoc City Council Subcommittee on Social Service Funding; and Chair Keith Brainard on the
ad hoc City Council Subcommittee on the Texas Municipal Retirement System (fMRS) -- Mayor George
Garver
X Discussion and possible direction to staff regarding the disposition of the old fire station on Main Street and the
city office building on the comer of 7th and Main Streets — Mark Thomas, Director of Economic Development
and Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager
Y Second Readings
1. Second Reading of an ordinance levying a tax rate for the City of Georgetown for the tax year 2008 —
Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration
2. Second Reading of an ordinance adopting the 2008109 City of Georgetown Annual Budget for the fiscal
year beginning October 1, 2008 and ending September 30, 2009 — Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and
Administration
3. Second Reading of an ordinance amending § 2.08.010 "Administrative Divisions and Departments" of
the Georgetown Code of Ordinances — Micki Rundell Director of Finance and Administration
4. Second Reading of an ordinance establishing the classifications and number of positions (Strength of
Force) for all the City of Georgetown Fire Fighters and Police Officers pursuant to Chapter 143 of the Texas
Local Government Code pertaining to Civil Service — Kevin Russell, Human Resources Director and Paul
Brandenburg, City Manager
5. Second Reading of an Ordinance for a Rezoning from AG, Agriculture District to C-3, General Commercial
District for 10.47 acres in the Wright Survey, to be known as Buc-ee's Commercial Tract, located at
Airport Boulevard and Lakeway Drive — Valerie Kreger, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of
Planning and Development
6. Second Reading of an Ordinance for a Rezoning from G3, General Commercial District to C-1, Local
Commercial District for 0.634 acres being Lot 5, Block 2, Highland Park Revised Subdivision, also known
as City of Georgetown Municipal Complex Parking Improvements, located along Industrial Avenue --
Valerie Kreger, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
Z First Reading of an Ordinance repealing and replacing Chapter 15.44 of the City of Georgetown Cade of
Ordinances relating to Flood Damage Prevention Regulations — Dave Hall, Director of Inspection Services
and Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager
AA Annexation Public Hearings -- To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
1. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 18.9 acres in the Wm. Addison Survey
and W. Stubblefield Survey for SH 29 ROW, extending from Reinhardt Boulevard for approximately 7,900
feet east to CR 104, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area NEI -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal
Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
2. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City all lots in the Texas Traditions Subdivision, and three
tracts of land out of the D. Wright Survey totaling approximately 52.6 acres, north of Bootys Crossing Road;
and approximately 13.1 acres of ROW, including a portion of Bootys Crossing Road extending from the
current city limits west approximately 3,000 feet, Sabine Dr, Brazos Dr, Texas Traditions, Lavaca Lane,
Concho Trail, Terlingua Trail, and Turtle Bend, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area NW1 — Edward G.
Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
City Council Agenda/September 9, 2008
Page 3 of 6 Pages
3. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 190.1 acres of land out of the I. Jones
Survey and J. Fish Survey, north and east of Lake Georgetown, located west of the Woodlake and Olde
Oak subdivisions and South of the Casa Loma Subdivision, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area NW2 —
Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
4. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of all lots in the Historic Acres 1 Subdivision, Tonkowan
Country Subdivision, Lot 4A and Lot 4B of the Creek Side 2 Subdivision and various tracts of land out of
the Wm. Roberts Survey, located west of Airport Road and east of Tonkowan Subdivision; and including
approximately 9.9 acres of ROW for Airport Road, Tonkowa Trail, and Indian Mound Road, referred to as
2008 Annexation Area NW3 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director
of Planning and Development
5. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of a single land parcel in Wm. Roberts Survey totaling
approximately 5.5 acres, located west of Airport Road, and south and east of Berry Creek Section 3; and
including approximately 1.9 acres of ROW for Airport Road, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area NW4 —
Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
6. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 8.2 acres of land out of the N. Porter
Survey, located north and east of Northwest Boulevard, south of Reata East Block C and Golden Oaks
Subdivision, and west of Northwood Drive, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area NW5 -- Edward G.
Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
7. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 166.4 acres of land out of the J.P.
Pulsifer Survey, located west of Wolf Ranch Parkway, north of Memorial Drive, east of River Chase
Subdivision, and south of the current city limits and Middle Fork of the San Gabriel River, referred to as
2008 Annexation Area NW6 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director
of Planning and Development
8. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 112.8 acres of land out of the J.P.
Pulsifer Survey and C. Stubblefield Survey, located east of Wolf Ranch Parkway, north of Memorial Drive,
and west of the River Hills Subdivision, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area NW7 — Edward G. Polasek,
AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
9. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 18.4 acres of land out of the N. Porter
Survey and D. Wright Survey, located south, east and west of the current city limits, and north of River
Bend Drive, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area NW8 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and
Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
10. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of a single land parcel, located west of Wolf Ranch
Parkway, south of Memorial Drive, and east and north of the current city limits, totaling approximately 0.07
acres in the J. P. Pulsifer Survey, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area NW9 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP,
Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
11. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 7.3 acres of land out of the J. P. Pulsifer
Survey, C. Stubblefield Survey and the remaining portion of the Good Luck Subdivision, located south of
Memorial Drive and east and west of Simon Road; and including approximately 0.4 acres or ROW for
Simon Road north of the current city limits and south of Memorial Drive, referred to as 2008 Annexation
Area NW10 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and
Development
12. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of the remaining portion of single parcel of land in the J. P.
Pulsifer Survey, located west of River Chase Boulevard, north of the current city limits, and south of River
Chase Subdivision; and including approximately 0.3 acres of ROW of River Chase Parkway, extending
from the current city limits north to Memorial Drive, referred to as 2008 Annexation NW11 — Edward G.
Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
13. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of Lot 4 of the Embree Subdivision and Lot 2 and Lot 3 of
the Embree Subdivision Lots 1-3 Amended, surrounded by the current city limits, and totaling
approximately 6.6 acres, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area NW 12 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP,
Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
14. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 2.4 acres in the J. Berry Survey for SH
195 ROW, extending from Berry Creek Drive north and west for approximately 650 feet, referred to as 2008
Annexation Area NW13 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of
City Council Agenda/September 9, 2008
Page 4 of 6 Pages
Planning and Development
15. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City for all lots within the Golden Oaks Subdivision; and
including approximately 11.5 acres of ROW for Shady Hollow Drive and Golden Oaks Road, referred to as
2008 Annexation Area NW14 -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director
of Planning and Development
16. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of the remaining portion of a single parcel of land identified
as Heritage Oaks Section 1, Block 2; and including approximately 9.8 acres of ROW for Shell Road and
Wildwood Drive, buffered by the current city limits, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area NW15 -- Edward
G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
17. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City for approximately 117.6 acres of land out of the L.J.
Dyches Survey, located west of FM 1460, south of SE Inner Loop, east of the current city limits and north of
CR 166, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area SE1 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and
Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
18. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 30.3 acres of land out of the L.J. Dyches
Survey, located north of the SE Inner Loop, west of FM 1460, and south of Inner Loop Commercial Park
and Rabbit Hollow Subdivision; and including approximately 0.2 acres of ROW for Snead Drive from the SE
Inner Loop north approximately 155 feet, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area SE2 -- Edward G. Polasek,
AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
19. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 294.7 acres of land out of the F.A.
Hudson Survey and L.J. Dyches Survey, located south of the SE Inner Loop, west of the current city limits,
east of CR 116; and including approximately 11.2 acres of ROW for Blue Springs Boulevard and Blue
Ridge, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area SE3 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and
Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
20. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 69.1 acres of land out of the F.A. Hudson
Survey and L.J. Dyches Survey, including the remaining portions of the B and T Subdivision and
Georgetown Technology Park Subdivision, located east of the current city limits, west of CR 116, and
north of the W.D. Kelly Foundation Subdivision; and including approximately 5.1 acres of ROW for the
remaining portions of Sierra Way and Courtney Drive, and 3,100 feet of CR 116 ROW south from the
current city limits, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area SE4 -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner
and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
21. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 47.25 acres of land out of the Wm.
Addison Survey, located west CR 110, north of SE Inner Loop, and south and east of the current city limits
along the Quail Valley Subdivision; and including approximately 4.1 acres of ROW for CR 110 from Quail
Valley Dr. to SE Inner Loop, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area SES — Edward G. Polasek, AICP,
Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
22. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of the remaining portion of a single parcel of land in the
Wm. Addison Survey, located east of SE Inner Loop and north of Carlson Cove., referred to as 2008
Annexation Area SE6 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of
Planning and Development
23. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 215.5 acres of land in the Wm. Addison
Survey, located east CR 110, north and west of SE Inner Loop, and south of the current city limits along the
Raintree Subdivision and University Park Subdivision boundaries, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area
SE7 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and
Development
24. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of the remaining portion of several parcels of land in the
Wm. Addison Survey surrounded by the current city limits, located east Smith Branch creek, north of
University Park Subdivision, west of Summercrest Subdivision, and south of SH 29 East, referred to as
2008 Annexation Area SE8 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of
Planning and Development
25. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 955.3 acres of land out of the I. Donegan
Survey, C Stubblefield Survey, J. Thompson Survey and remaining portion of the Church of Christ
Subdivision, located north of the current city limits along the South Fork San Gabriel River, east of the
Shadow Canyon Subdivision, south of SH 29 West, Legend Oaks Subdivision, First Baptist Church
Subdivision, and Legend Oaks Subdivision, and west of the Wolf Ranch Subdivision; and including
City Council Agenda/September 9, 2008
Page 5 of 6 Pages
approximately 24.8 acres of ROW for SH 29 West extending from the current city limits west to the western
limits of the Shadow Canyon Subdivision, and D.B. Wood Road from the current city limits south to the
termination of the roadway, referred to as 2008 Annexation Area SW1 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP,
Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
26. Public Hearing on the annexation into the City of approximately 4.6 acres of land out of the D. Wright
Survey and J. Pulsifer Survey including approximately 1,300 feet of the North Fork San Gabriel River,
located east of the Oakcrest Estates Riverside Unit Subdivision, north of the Georgetown Country Club,
west of Country Club Acres Unit 4 Subdivision; and including approximately 0.5 acres of ROW for Spring
Valley Road from the current city limits west for approximately 400 feet, referred to as 2008 Annexation
Area SW2 — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and
Development
27. Consideration and possible action to give staff direction on the 2008 Annexation program — Edward G.
Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Cook, Director of Planning and Development
Certificate of Posting
I, Sandra Lee, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the day of , 2008, at , and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
Sandra Lee, City Secretary
City Council Agenda/September 9, 2008
Page 6 of 6 Pages
Council Meeting Date: September 9, 2008
Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT
Consideration and possible action to award a contract for the painting of the bridge handrails on
Austin Avenue to DMS Painting, Inc. of Pasadena, Texas in the amount of $45,000.00.
ITEM SUMMARY
Bids were received for the painting of the four handrails on the two bridges located on Austin
Avenue. This will include the removal of existing paint, disposal of waste and painting of handrails. DMS
Painting has performed satisfactory work on larger projects for the City in the past.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
None
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Funds for this expenditure are budgeted from the 2005 & 2007 CO Bonds
Fund Cost Budget
120-9-0380-90-069 Austin Ave. Trans. $45,000.00 CO Bonds
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends awarding this contract to DMS Painting, Inc. of Pasadena, TX in the
amount of $45,000.00
COMMENTS
None
ATTACHMENTS
1. Bid Tabulation
2. DMS Painting Inc. Quote
Submitted By: Mark Miller, Jim Briggs,
Transportation Services Assistant City Manager
Manager for Utility Operations
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
PAINTING OF BRIDGE HANDRAILS
BID NO. 28065
BID TABULATION SHEET
DESCRIPTION
Preparation of surface and painting of four
handrails on two bridges located on Austin
Avenue
Low Bid
Posted on City's Website for five days - no response
GULF STATE
PROTECTIVE
DMS` GIBSON & ASSOC. COATINGS
$45,000.00 $ 403,850.00 $300,000.00
DMS PAINTING, INC.
5327 PINE AVE.
PASADENA, TEXAS 77503
PHONE 281-991-7709, FAX 281-991-5680
August 29, 2008
CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
ATTN: MARSHA
REF: QUOTE OF JULY 27, 2008
PROPOSAL FOR (2) BRIDGE HANDRAILS
PRODUCT/Materials: Sherwin Williams
Provide materials, labor, equipment, and insurance, to abrasive blast steel handrails
Existing paint has lead.
Reference TX -DOT 2004 Standards, Section 446.4
General Preparation
Test Paint chips for lead content prior to starting blast, to determine method
for waste disposal. 25 yd Covered Roll -off for storage. Must have a
designated contractors work area, to be provided by City/Owners near the site.
Install modified containment, to be moved or rolled on bridge for blasting and
for paint overspray. Containment will be designed to prevent blast medialdust
from escaping or falling into stream.
Provide traffic control minimum from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm with one lane
closure. Road work ahead signs, and barrels to be picked up or moved each
day.
Class A Blast Cleaning, with "coal slag abrasive", less than 1% silica
abrasive. SSPC-10 Near White Blast, surface preparation.
System II Paint Coatings,
Prime Coat, Sherwin Williams Macropoxy 646, FC Epoxy 3.0-4.0 mils DFT.
Intermediate Coat, Sherwin Williams Macropoxy 646 FC Epoxy 3.04.0 mils
DFT.
Finish Coat, Sherwin Williams Hi Solids Polyurethane 100, 2.0 mils DFT,
Color to be matched to owners request.
All products shall be applied as per manufacturers recommendations, with
recommended reducers.
Follow the requirements of 30 TAC 335, for site handling waste, and 49 CFR.
178.
Perform work involving removal of hazardous material in accordance with 29
CFR
For the sum of $ 45,000.00
Best regards,
Diane Kasvicis
DMS Painting, Inc.
Council Meeting Date: September 9, 2008
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT
Item No.
Discussion and possible action regarding the enforcement of maintenance of privately
owned water quality facilities, stormwater detention, wet ponds, and/or combination of these types
of drainage features.
ITEM SUMMARY:
Staff will present a short overview of the different methods of enforcing the maintenance of
water quality facilities, stormwater detention, wet ponds, and/or combination of these types of
drainage features on private property.
In the overview, we will briefly cover State and City requirements of drainage features,
results of poorly maintained drainage features, and tools the State and City has to enforce the
proper maintenance of drainage features on private property.
COMMENTS:
We are reporting on our findings, but not necessarily in need of an recommendation.
ATTACHMENTS:
Interoffice Memorandum regarding Water Quality Facilities, Detention Pond/Wet Pond
Maintenance on Private Property
big ov
Submitted By: Thomas R. Benz,
System Engineering Manager
Jim Briggs,
Assistant City Manager
for Utility Operations
7GkEO GETOWN
TEXAS
GEORGETOWN UTILITY SYSTEMS
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: Paul Brandenburg, City Manager
Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager of Utilities
From: Thomas Benz, Systems Engineering Manager
RE: Water Quality Facilities, Detention Pond/ Wet Pond Maintenance on Private Property
You have asked us to explore methods of enforcing the maintenance of privately owned water
quality facilities, stormwater detention, wet ponds and/or combination of these types of drainage
features. The following is a summary of our findings.
Background
Georgetown's Unified Development Code (UDC) requires that all site plans, plats, subdivisions
and stormwater permits comply with the City of Georgetown's Drainage Criteria Manual, as well
as any Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) regulations concerning drainage
and water quality. The majority of the City of Georgetown (approximately 95%) is located over
the Edwards Aquifer contributing zone, and therefore, must comply with the TCEQ regulations
regarding the Edwards Aquifer.
TCEQ's regulations and the Georgetown Unified Development Code requires site plans, plats,
subdivisions and stormwater permits to meet the stormwater management requirements of the
TCEQ and the UDC before approval. The results of such requirements are the existence of
drainage features on private land that are privately maintained — usually by the developer or a
Property Owners Association. Each development is different and pursues different drainage
strategies, resulting in different types of drainage features. The result is that there are
approximately 700 TCEQ water quality facilities (i.e. sand filters, wet ponds vegetative strips,
etc.) and other drainage features located on private property within Georgetown. According to
the TCEQ, the water quality facilities should be inspected quarterly and have an annual
Page 1 of 7
structural inspection, with repairs done based on the inspection. Based on observation, some
water quality facilities are poorly maintained.
Improperly maintained ponds may harbor stagnant water or unsightly vegetation, both of which
may constitute a nuisance condition. Improperly maintained ponds can also cause erosion and
flooding spillover. Such spillover may also cause water pollution from contaminants contained
in such ponds.
You have asked us to explore different methods to enforce the proper maintenance of drainage
features on private property. Please find below three options for the City to address the problem
of the improper maintenance of drainage features.
Option 1: Staff Monitors, TCEO Enforces
Under Option 1, the City would report conditions about particular water quality facilities that
appears to need maintenance or are not functioning correctly to the TCEQ The TCEQ will
investigate the water quality facilities within 30 days. If the facility is out of compliance with the
TCEQ rules, TCEQ will issue a notice of violation. The TCEQ will take up to 60 days after the
start of the investigation to issue a report and issue a "Notice of Violation". The notice of
violation will direct the pond owner to take remedial action within 30 days, if the remedial action
takes more time the owner may receive up to 6 months extension. If such remedial actions are
not taken, the TCEQ staff will refer the case to enforcement and would seek administrative
penalties for each day that the pond remains out of compliance with the TCEQ rules, plus do the
remedial action.
Option 1 would be cost effective to the City, in terms of staff time as well the cost of the City
enforcing the maintenance of privately owned drainage features. However, the TCEQ does have
limited staff devoted to these types of violations, but are required to follow the above time lines.
Option 2: Staff Monitors and Enforces Maintenance Under the City's Nuisance Abatement
Authority
Under Option 2, the City could step up its enforcement of improperly maintained drainage
features through its nuisance abatement authority. At present, the Georgetown Code of
Ordinances § 8.20.090 prohibits any person from allowing stagnant water to accumulate on their
property. (A copy of the current ordinance language declaring stagnant water and other
unwholesome material a nuisance is attached as Appendix A.)
Under the current ordinance, if a property owner improperly maintains a drainage feature (i.e.
water quality facilities, wet ponds, or detention pond) which results in stagnant water, the City's
Code Enforcement officers would then post notice to the property owner. The property owner
would have seven days during which to correct the problem. Should the owner refuse or fail to
remedy the situation within seven days, the City Code Enforcement officers could then enter
onto the property and take actions to abate the nuisance. The City could then charge the expense
to the homeowner, and if the charge is not paid, impose a lien on the property where the drainage
feature is located.
Page 2 of 7
If the abatement costs are not reimbursed to the City, the imposition of a lien may have little to
no practical effect. The reason for this is because liens are a cloud on title and usually must be
removed before property is sold, but it is probably the case that drainage ponds are conveyed by
the developer to a Property Owners Association, but are not regularly bought or sold. Option 2
may also be more costly for the City than monitoring enforcement by the TCEQ. Enforcement
and inspection under the City's nuisance authority may require an additional full time staff
person. Greater personnel costs, coupled with difficulty recovering enforcement costs, arise
under this Option.
Option 2 may require additional language to the City Code of Ordinances. The City defines
stagnant water and unwholesome substances as a nuisance. However, the City may wish to
expand the definition of nuisance to specifically include the improper maintenance of privately
owned drainage features. Please find attached as Appendix B sample ordinance language
declaring the improper maintenance of detention and other storm water ponds to be a nuisance
and attaching a penalty.
Option 3: City Files Code Enforcement Case in Municipal Court
Under Option 3, the City could bring actions in municipal court for violations of the City's
Drainage Criteria Manual. The Drainage Criteria Manual is adopted by reference in the UDC,
and is enforceable under the existing provisions of the UDC, which states as follows:
Section 15.01 Enforcement and Penalty
15.01.010 Compliance Required
A. No person may use, occupy, or develop land, buildings, or other structures,
or authorize or permit the use, occupancy, or development of land,
buildings, or other structures under the control of the person except in
accordance with all applicable provisions of this Code. For purposes of this
Section, the "use" or "occupancy" of a building or land relates to anything
and everything that is done to, on, or in that building or land.
B. The owner of any building or land, or part thereof, where anything in
violation of this Code is placed or used, and any architect, builder,
contractor, agent, or any other person employed in connection therewith,
who may have assisted or contributed to the commission of any such
violation, shall each be deemed guilty of a violation of this Code.
C. The City shall not issue a Building Permit or Certificate of Occupancy
required by this Code for any land located within the jurisdiction of the City
to which this Code applies, until and unless there is compliance with this
Code.
D. The City shall not connect City water, sewer or electricity to any property to
which the provisions of this Code apply, unless and until there is
compliance with the provisions of this Code.
15.01.020 Notice of Intent to Suspend or Revoke
A. Before suspension or revocation pursuant to this division, the Building
Official may give notice of intent to suspend or revoke, which notice may
specify a reasonable time for compliance with this Code.
Page 3 of 7
B. If notice of intent is given, suspension or revocation shall not occur before
the time for compliance has expired.
C. The Building Official shall not be required to provide notice of intent to
suspend or revoke for violations of this Code that cause imminent
destruction of property or injury to persons.
15.01.040 Enforcement and Penalties
A. Any person, firm or corporation who shall violate any of the provisions of
this Code or who shall fail to comply with any provisions hereof within the
corporate limits of the City of Georgetown shall be guilty of a misdemeanor
and upon conviction shall be fined with the maximum fine in the amount of
two thousand dollars ($2,000) for a violation of any provision governing
the public health, safety, and welfare and shall be fined with the maximum
fine in the amount of five hundred dollars ($500) for any other violation.
B. Each day any violation or noncompliance continues shall constitute a
separate and distinct offense.
C. Any person, firm or corporation who shall violate any of the provisions of
this Code or who shall fail to comply with any provisions hereof within the
extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City, outside the corporate limits, shall
not be guilty of a misdemeanor; however, the City may institute any
appropriate action or proceeding in the District Court to enjoin the violation
of this Code.
D. The penalty provided herein shall be cumulative of other remedies provided
by state law and the power of injunction may be exercised in enforcing this
Code whether or not there has been a criminal complaint filed.
E. In addition to the aforementioned penalty, the right is hereby conferred and
extended to any property owner owning property in any District where such
property may be affected by a violation of the terms of this Code, to bring
suit in such court or courts having jurisdiction thereof and obtain such
remedies as may be available at law or in equity for the protection of the
rights of such property owners.
Proposed language making maintenance responsibility more clear in the UDC for drainage
features is attached as Appendix C.
Recommendation:
At a minimum, a combination of Option 1 and 2 appears to be best approach to address the
problems with water quality facilities and drainage features. However, depending on the
response of the owner Option 3 should not be Wiled out. The city enforcement officers can act
quickly on complaints regarding ponding water and tall vegetation and report the problem to the
TCEQ. The City and TCEQ enforcement process can run concurrently which should result in
compliance with city and state requirements. Staff is still investigate modifying the ordinance
and/or UDC which requires owner of drainage features to submit an annual inspections and
maintenance report to the city to documentation their activities, which should result in better
compliance.
Page 4 of 7
APPENDIX A
EXISTING GEORGETOWN ORDINANCE:
Sec. 8.20.040. Holes where water may accumulate.
It is unlawfiil for any person who owns or occupies any lot in the City to permit or allow holes or
places on said lots where water may accumulate and become stagnant or to be in any other
condition that may produce disease, or to permit the same to remain.
(Ord. No. 2006-54, § 2(Exh. A); Prior code § 12-43)
Sec. 8.20.050. Accumulation of stagnant water.
It is unlawful for any person who owns or occupies any lot in the City to permit or allow the
accumulation of stagnant water thereon, or to permit the same to remain.
(Prior code § 12-44)
Sec. 8.20.090. Drainage --Removal of unwholesome substances --Abatement.
Should any owner of such lot that has places thereon where stagnant water may accumulate or
which are not properly drained, or the owner of any premises or building upon which carrion,
filth or other impure or unwholesome matter may be, fail and/or refuse to drain or fill the lot, or
remove such filth, carrion or other impure or unwholesome matter, as the case may be, within
seven days after notice to said owner to do so, in writing, or by letter addressed to such owner at
his post office address or within seven days after notice by publication as many as two times
within ten consecutive days in any newspaper of the City, if personal service may not be had as
aforesaid, or the owner's address is not known, then the City may do such filling or draining or
removal of filth, carrion, etc., or any other unsightly, objectionable, or unsanitary matter, or
cause the same to be done and may pay therefore and charge the expenses incurred in doing such
work or having such work done or improvements made, to the owner of such lot or real estate,
and if such work is done or improvements made at the expense of the City, such expense shall be
assessed on the real estate or lots upon which such expense was incurred.
(Ord. No. 2006-54, § 2(Exh. A); Prior code § 12-48)
Page 5 of 7
APPENDIX B
POSSIBLE NEW NUISANCE PROVISION THAT CAN BE ADDED TO THE
GEORGETOWN CODE:
Sec. 8.20.090. Drainage—Removal of Unwholesome Substances—Abatement
(A)The owner of real property on which a drainage feature is located shall maintain such
drainage feature in conformance with its intended use so as to prevent the
accumulation of standing or stagnant water.
(B) Should any real property owner allow a drainage feature located on that real property
to accumulate stagnant water or otherwise keep it in ill repair so that it poses a real
danger to the citizens of the City, such condition shall be considered a nuisance.
a. A real property owner in violation of this section shall be notified in writing at
address of record and given fourteen days to remedy the violation.
b. The City, after seven days notice and inaction on the part of the real property
owner, may enter onto the property and drain or otherwise maintain the
drainage feature sufficient to abate the nuisance. The City may then recoup
the costs of such abatement from the real property owner. Such work may be
levied against the property on which the work is being done.
(C) Failure to maintain such a drainage feature in accordance with this chapter shall
constitute a Class C misdemeanor and be punishable by a fine not exceeding $500.00.
Each day of a continuing violation of this chapter shall constitute a separate offense.
Page 6 of 7
APPENDIX C
POSSIBLE CIVIL PENALTY LANGUAGE TO BE ADDED TO THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OR UDC:
(A)Definitions
a. "Amenity pond" means a permanent pool of a pre -determined volume of storm
water kept or maintained purely for aesthetic purposes and that is not designed to
provide additional capacity for the temporary storage of storm water required for
detention.
b. "Detention pond" means a pool for the temporary storage of storm water to be
released at a pre -determined and controlled rate.
c. "Drainage feature" shall mean any amenity pond, detention pond, retention
facility, or water quality facility.
d. "Retention facility" means a facility that provides a permanent pool of a pre-
determined volume of storm water and that is designed to provide additional
capacity for the temporary storage of storm water that may be required for
detention purposes.
(B) All drainage features shall be adequately maintained on a recurrent and consistent basis
by mowing, removing trash and debris, removing silt and sedimentation, grading,
establishing and maintaining grass or other vegetation in order to provide stability for the
structure, structural repair, mechanical repair, and such other activities as may be
required to keep a facility covered by this section functioning in accordance with its
original purpose and design. The owner of real property on which a drainage feature is
located shall be responsible for compliance with the Georgetown Drainage Criteria
Manual, which is hereto incorporated by reference.
Failure to maintain such a drainage feature in accordance with the standards of the Georgetown
Drainage Criteria Manual shall constitute a Class C misdemeanor and be punishable by a fine not
exceeding $500.00. Each day of a continuing violation of this chapter shall constitute a separate
offense.
Page 7 of 7
Council meeting date: September 9, 2008 Item No. Q
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT
Consideration and possible action regarding a proposed resolution accepting a change in the tariffs of Atmos
Energy Corporation.
ITEM SUMMARY:
Atmos Energy Corporation is the successor in interest or assignee of the franchise agreement between the City
of Georgetown (the "City") and TXU Lone Star Gas. The City of Georgetown is a member of Atmos Texas
Municipalities ("ATM"), which actively intervened in the "Statement of Intent Filed by Atmos Energy Corporation to
Increase Utility Rates Within the Unincorporated Areas Served by the Atmos Energy Corp., Mid -Tex Division,"
Railroad Commission of Texas GUD Docket No. 9762.
In February and March, the Atmos Texas Municipalities ("ATM") agreed to increase utility rates by less than
20% of what was requested by Atmos. In connection with that settlement, ATM also agreed to a new regulatory
regime known as the "Rate Review Mechanism" or "RRM". The first RRM is to be implemented on October 1, 2008. In
April, Atmos filed its first RRM request. The request sought to increase rates by approximately $42 million. ATM's
consultants have undertaken extensive discovery as well as interviewing key management personnel with rate case
responsibilities. Recently ATM's experts along with the Chair of ATM's Steering Committee, Mr. Jim Finley, and
Steering Committee member, Mr. Jeff Betty of San Angelo, met with the Atmos' rate case team in Dallas. As a result of
that meeting, Atmos agreed to reduce its requested increase to $20 million.
Atmos' rates will be adjusted in the following respects:
• The residential customer charge will be reduced from $10.69 to $7.00/month.
• The small commercial customer charge will be reduced from $20.28 to $13.50/month.
• The typical residential bill will increase by 81 cents/month or by 1.38% overall.
• The typical small commercial bill will increase by $2.93/month or by 0.77% overall.
• The typical industrial/transportation customer will experience an increase of approximately half a percent
overall.
For the rates to go into effect, a resolution adopting the rates must be adopted by October 1, 2008. Attached for
your review and consideration is the proposed resolution approving the tariffs as amended?
A new energy conservation program aimed at customers of modest means will also take effect on October
1, 2008. Qualified customers will receive up to two hundred dollars ($200.00) worth of caulking, weather
stripping, sheathing, sealing, water heater blankets and like materials.
The ATM Steering Committee recommends the adoption of the attached tariffs, which have been
reviewed by its rate experts. A copy of the proof of revenues and average bill comparison has also been attached.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Resolution Approving a Change In The Tariffs of Atmos Energy Corporation
2. Attachment A- Amended Tariffs
3. Attachment B- Proof of Revenues and Average Bill Comparison
Submitted by: Jim Briggs,
Assistant City Manager
for Utility Operations
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
APPROVING A CHANGE IN THE TARIFFS OF ATMOS
ENERGY CORPORATION, MID-TEX DIVISION
("ATMOS") AS A RESULT OF A SETTLEMENT
BETWEEN ATMOS AND THE ATMOS TEXAS
MUNICIPALITIES ("ATM"); FINDING THAT THE RATES
SET BY THE ATTACHED TARIFFS TO BE JUST AND
REASONABLE; FINDING THAT THE MEETING
COMPLIED WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT;
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND REQUIRING
DELIVERY OF THE RESOLUTION TO THE COMPANY
AND LEGAL COUNSEL
WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown ("City") is a regulatory authority under the Gas
Utility Regulatory Act ("GURA") and under § 103.001 of GURA has exclusive original
jurisdiction over Atmos Energy Corporation — Mid -Tex Division ("Atmos") rates, operations,
and services of a gas utility within the City; and
WHEREAS, the City has participated in prior cases regarding Atmos as part of a
coalition of cities known as the Atmos Texas Municipalities ("ATM"), including Railroad
Commission Gas Utilities ("GUD') Docket No. 9400, numerous filings by Atmos pursuant to
Section 104.301 of GURA, GUD Docket No. 9670 and GUD Docket No. 9762; and
WHEREAS, on February 11, 2008, ATM and Atmos entered into a settlement
agreement which provided for a new mechanism to review changes in rates known as the "Rate
Review Mechanism" or "RRM"; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the new regulatory mechanism, Atmos filed for an increase in
rates of approximately forty-two million dollars ($42 million), to be effective on October 1,
2008; and
WHEREAS, the RRM is a three-year experiment which is aimed at reducing rate case
expenses and encouraging a more collaborative effort at arriving at just and reasonable gas rates;
and
WHEREAS, for over three months the experts representing ATM have been analyzing
data and interviewing Atmos' management; and
WHEREAS, ATM's experts have concluded that slightly less than half of the amount
requested by Atmos should be put into rates; and
WHEREAS, Atmos has agreed to reduce its requested increase in rates by more than
fifty percent (50%); and
WHEREAS, in connection with this first RRM, the customer charge for residential
customers will be reduced from $10.69 to $7.00, benefitting thousands of fixed income and low -
use customers; and
WHEREAS, in connection with the implementation of this rate request, an energy
conservation program will be instituted to benefit customers of modest means; and
WHEREAS, the Steering Committee of ATM and its lawyers recommend approval of
the attached tariffs, set forth as Attachment A.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF GEORGETOWN THAT:
Section 1. That the statements set out in the preamble to this resolution are hereby in
all things approved and adopted.
Section 2. The amended tariffs in Attachment A are hereby adopted to become
effective on October 1, 2008.
Section 3. The proof of revenues in Attachment B, the average bill calculations, and
the document entitled "Rate Review Mechanism — I" Year of Effective Period — Allocation of
Settlement Increase by Customer Class" has been relied upon in connection with the adoption of
the amended tariffs.
Section 4. The meeting at which this resolution was approved was in all things
conducted in strict compliance with the Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code,
Chapter 551.
Section 5. This resolution shall become effective from and after its passage with rates
authorized by the Attached Tariffs to be effective in accordance with the terms of the Settlement
Agreement.
Section 6. A copy of this Resolution shall be sent to Atmos Mid -Tex, care of Joe T.
Christian, Director of Rates, at Atmos Energy Corporation, 5420 LB J Freeway, Suite 1800,
Dallas, Texas 75204, and to Jim Boyle, Counsel to ATM, at Herrera & Boyle, PLLC, 816
Congress Avenue, Suite 1120, Austin, TX 78701.
RESOLVED this
ATTEST:
Sandra Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patricia E. Carls, City Attorney
day of
2008.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
By: George Garver
Mayor
ATTACHMENT A
AMENDED TARIFFS
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION
MID-TEX DIVISION
RRC TARIFF NO: 19843
REVISION NO: 0
RATE SCHEDULE:
R — RESIDENTIAL SALES
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division (except Environs areas and the City of Dallas)
EFFECTIVE DATE:
10101/2008
PAGE: 23
Application
Applicable to Residential Customers for all natural gas provided at one Point of Delivery and measured
through one meter.
Type of Service
Where service of the type desired by Customer is not already available at the Point of Delivery, additional
charges and special contract arrangements between Company and Customer may be required prior to
service being furnished.
Monthly Rate
Customers monthly bill will be calculated by adding the following Customer and Mcf charges to the
amounts due under the riders listed below:
Charge
Amount
Customer Charge per Bill
$ 7.00 per month
Commodity Charge —All Mcf
$2.2410 per Mcf
Gas Cost Recovery: Plus an amount for gas costs and upstream transportation costs calculated
in accordance with Part (a) and Part (b), respectively, of Rider GCR.
Weather Normalization Adjustment: Plus or Minus an amount for weather normalization
calculated in accordance with Rider WNA.
Rate Review Mechanism: Commodity Charge includes an amount calculated in accordance with
Rider RRM.
Franchise Fee Adjustment Plus an amount for franchise fees calculated in accordance with Rider
FF. Franchise Fees are to be assessed solely to customers within municipal limits. This does not
apply to Environs Customers.
Tax Adjustment: Plus an amount for tax calculated in accordance with Rider TAX.
Surcharges: Plus an amount for surcharges calculated in accordance with the applicable rider(s).
Agreement
An Agreement for Gas Service may be required.
Notice
Service hereunder and the rates for services provided are subject to the orders of regulatory bodies
having jurisdiction and to the Company's Tariff for Gas Service.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08/13/2008
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION
MID-TEX DIVISION
RRC TARIFF NO: 19844
REVISION NO: 0
RATE SCHEDULE:
C — COMMERCIAL SALES
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division (except Environs areas and the City of Dallas)
EFFECTIVE DATE:
10/01/2008
PAGE: 24
Application
Applicable to Commercial Customers for all natural gas provided at one Point of Delivery and measured
through one meter and to Industrial Customers with an average annual usage of less than 3,000 Mcf.
Type of Service
Where service of the type desired by Customer is not already available at the Point of Delivery, additional
charges and special contract arrangements between Company and Customer may be required prior to
service being furnished.
Monthly Rate
Customer's monthly bill will be calculated by adding the following Customer and Mcf charges to the
amounts due under the riders listed below:
Charge
Amount
Customer Charge per Bill
$13.50 per month
Commodity Charge - All Mcf
$ 0.9809 per Mcf
Gas Cost Recovery: Plus an amount for gas costs and upstream transportation costs calculated
in accordance with Part (a) and Part (b), respectively, of Rider GCR.
Weather Normalization Adjustment: Pius or Minus an amount for weather normalization
calculated in accordance with Rider WNA.
Rate Review Mechanism: Commodity Charge includes an amount calculated in accordance with
Rider RRM.
Franchise Fee Adjustment: Plus an amount for franchise fees calculated in accordance with Rider
FF. Franchise Fees are to be assessed solely to customers within municipal limits. This does not
apply to Environs Customers.
Tax Adjustment: Plus an amount for tax calculated in accordance with Rider TAX.
Surcharges: Pius an amount for surcharges calculated in accordance with the applicable rider(s).
Agreement
An Agreement for Gas Service may be required.
Notice
Service hereunder and the rates for services provided are subject to the orders of regulatory bodies
having jurisdiction and to the Company's Tariff for Gas Service.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08/13/2008
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION RRC TARIFF NO: 19842
MID-TEX DIVISION REVISION NO: 0
RATE SCHEDULE:
I — INDUSTRIAL SALES
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division (except Environs areas and the City of Dallas)
EFFECTIVE DATE:
10/01/2008
PAGE: 25
Application
Applicable to Industrial Customers with a maximum daily usage (MDU) of less than 3,500 MMStu per day
for all natural gas provided at one Point of Delivery and measured through one meter. Service for
Industrial Customers with an MDU equal to or greater than 3,500 MMBtu per day will be provided at
Company's sole option and will require special contract arrangements between Company and Customer.
Type of Service
Where service of the type desired by Customer is not already available at the Point of Delivery, additional
charges and special contract arrangements between Company and Customer may be required prior to
service being furnished.
Monthly Rate
Customer's monthly bill will be calculated by adding the following Customer and MMBtu charges to the
amounts due under the riders listed below:
Charge
Amount
Customer Charge per Meter
$ 425.00 per month
First 0 MMBtu to 1,500 MMBtu
$ 0.2733 per MMBtu
Next 3,500 MMBtu
$ 0.1993 per MMBtu
All MMBtu over 5,000 MMBtu
$ 0.0427 per MMBtu
Gas Cost Recovery: Plus an amount for gas costs and upstream transportation costs calculated
in accordance with Part (a) and Part (b), respectively, of Rider GCR.
Rate Review Mechanism: Commodity Charge includes an amount calculated in accordance with
Rider RRM.
Franchise Fee Adjustment: Pius an amount for franchise fees calculated in accordance with Rider
FF. Franchise Fees are to be assessed solely to customers within municipal limits. This does not
apply to Environs Customers.
Tax Adjustment: Plus an amount for tax calculated in accordance with Rider TAX.
Surcharges: Pius an amount for surcharges calculated in accordance with the applicable rider(s).
Curtailment Overpull Fee
Upon notifiaadon by Company of an event of curtailment or Interruption of Customer's deliveries,
Customer will, for each MMBtu delivered in excess of the stated level of curtailment or Interruption, pay
Company 200% of the midpoint price for the Katy point listed in Platts Gas Daily published for the
applicable Gas Day in the table entitled "Dairy Price Survey."
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08/13/2008
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION
MID-TEX DIVISION
RRC TARIFF NO: 19842
REVISION NO: 0
RATE SCHEDULE:
I —INDUSTRIAL SALES
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division (except Environs areas and the City of Dallas)
EFFECTIVE DATE:
10/01/2008
PAGE: 26
Replacement Index
In the event the "midpoint" or 'common" price for the Katy point listed in Platts Gas Daily in the table
entitled "Daily Price Survey" is no longer published, Company will calculate the applicable imbalance fees
utilizing a daily price index recognized as authoritative by the natural gas industry and most closely
approximating the applicable index.
Agreement
An Agreement for Gas Service may be required.
Notice
Service hereunder and the rates for services provided are subject to the orders of regulatory bodies
having jurisdiction and to the Company's Tariff for Gas Service.
Special Conditions
In order to receive service under Rate I, Customer must have the type of meter required by Company.
Customer must pay Company all costs associated with the acquisition and installation of the meter.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08/1312008
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION RRC TARIFF NO: 19845
MID-TEX DIVISION REVISION NO: 0
RATE SCHEDULE:
T—TRANSPORTATION
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division (except Environs areas and the City of Dallas)
EFFECTIVE DATE:
1010112008
PAGE: 27
Application
Applicable, in the event that Company has entered into a Transportation Agreement, to a customer
directly connected to the Atmos Energy Corp., Mid -Tex Division Distribution System (Customer) for the
transportation of all natural gas supplied by Customer or Customer's agent at one Point of Delivery for
use in Customer's facility.
Type of Service
Where service of the type desired by Customer is not already available at the Point of Delivery, additional
charges and special contract arrangements between Company and Customer may be required prior to
service being furnished.
Monthly Rate
Customer's bill will be calculated by adding the following Customer and MMBtu charges to the amounts
and quantities due under the riders listed below:
Charge
Amount
Customer Charge per Meter
$ 425.00 per month
First 0 MMBtu to 1,500 MMBtu
$ 0.2733 per MMBtu
Next 3,500 MMBtu
$ 0.1993 per MMBtu
All MMBtu over 5,000 MMBtu
$ 0.0427 per MMBtu
Upstream Transportation Cost Recovery: Plus an amount for upstream transportation costs in
accordance with Part (b) of Rider GCR.
Rate Review Mechanism: Commodity Charge includes an amount calculated in accordance with
Rider RRM.
Retention Adjustment: Plus a quantity of gas as calculated in accordance with Rider RA.
Franchise Fee Adjustment Plus an amount for franchise fees calculated in accordance with Rider
FF. Franchise Fees are to be assessed solely to customers within municipal limits. This does not
apply to Environs Customers.
Tax Adjustment: Plus an amount for tax calculated in accordance with Rider TAX.
Surcharges: Plus an amount for surcharges calculated in accordance with the applicable rider(s).
Imbalance Fees
All fees charged to Customer under this Rate Schedule will be charged based on the quantities
determined under the applicable Transportation Agreement and quantities will not be aggregated for any
Customer with multiple Transportation Agreements for the purposes of such fees.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08/13/2008
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION RRC TARIFF NO: 19845
MID-TEX DIVISION REVISION NO: 0
RATE SCHEDULE:
T—TRANSPORTATION
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division (except Environs areas and the City of Dallas)
EFFECTIVE DATE:
1010112008
PAGE: 28
Monthly Imbalance Fees
Customer shall pay Company the greater of (1) $0.10 per MMBtu, or (ii) 150% of the difference per MMBtu
between the highest and lowest "midpoint" price for the Katy point listed in Platts Gas Dally in the table
entitled "Daily Price Survey" during such month, for the MMBtu of Customer's monthly Cumulative
Imbalance, as defined in the applicable Transportation Agreement, at the end of each month that exceeds
10% of Customer's receipt quantities for the month.
Curtailment Overpull Fee
Upon notification by Company of an event of curtailment or interruption of Customers deliveries,
Customer will, for each MMBtu delivered in excess of the stated level of curtailment or interruption, pay
Company 200% of the midpoint price for the Katy point listed in Platts Gas Daily published for the
applicable Gas Day in the table entitled "Daily Price Survey."
Replacement Index
In the event the "midpoint" or "common" price for the Katy point listed in Plaits Gas Daily in the table
entitled 'Daily Price Survey" is no longer published, Company will calculate the applicable imbalance fees
utilizing a daily price index recognized as authoritative by the natural gas industry and most closely
approximating the applicable index.
Agreement
A transportation agreement is required.
Notice
Service hereunder and the rates for services provided are subject to the orders of regulatory bodies
having jurisdiction and to the Company's Tariff for Gas Service.
Special Conditions
In order to receive service under Rate T, customer must have the type of meter required by Company.
Customer must pay Company all costs associated with the acquisition and installation of the meter.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08113/2008
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION
MID-TEX DIVISION REVISION NO: 0
RIDER:
GCR — GAS COST RECOVERY
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division
EFFECTIVE DATE:
1010112008
PAGE: 40
Applicable to Rate R, Rate C, and Rate I for all gas sales made by Company, and applicable to Rate R,
Rate C, Rate I, and Rate T for recovery of Pipeline System costs. The total gas cost recovery amount
due is determined by adding the gas cost calculated in Section (a) below and the pipeline cost calculated
In Section (b) below.
The amount due for gas cost (Section (a)) Is determined by multiplying the Gas Cost Recovery Factor
(GCRF) by the Customer's monthly volume. For Customers receiving service under Rate R and Rate C.
monthly volume will be calculated on a Mcf basis. For Customers receiving service under Rate I,
monthly volume will be calculated on an MMBtU basis and the quantities will be adjusted as necessary to
recover actual gas costs.
The amount due for pipeline cost (Section (b)) is determined by multiplying the Pipeline Cost Factor
(PCF) by the Customer's monthly volume. For Customers receiving service under Rate R and Rate C,
monthly volume will be calculated on an Mcf basis. For Customers receiving service under Rate I and
Rate T, monthly volume will be calculated on an MMBtu basis and the quantities will be adjusted as
necessary to recover actual gas costs.
(a) Gas Cost
Method of Calculation
The monthly gas cost adjustment is calculated by the application of a Gas Cost Recovery Factor (GCRF),
as determined with the following formula:
GCRF = Estimated Gas Cost Factor (EGCF) + Reconciliation Factor (RF) + Taxes (fXS)
EGCF = Estimated cost of gas, including lost and unaccounted for gas attributed to residential,
commercial, and industrial sales, and any reconciliation balance of unrecovered gas costs, divided
by the estimated total residential, commercial, and industrial sales. Lost and unaccounted for gas is
limited to 5%.
RF = Calculated by dividing the difference between the Actual Gas Cost Incurred, inclusive of
Interest over the preceding twelve-month period ended June 30 and the Actual Gas Cost Billed
over that same twelve-month period by the estimated total residential, commercial, and industrial
sales for the succeeding October through June billing months. The interest rate to be used is the
annual interest rate published by the PUC every December. The interest rate of 2008 is 4.69%.
Actual Gas Cost Incurred = The sum of the costs booked in Atmos Energy Corp., Mid -Tex
Division account numbers 800 through 813 and 858 of the FERC Uniform System of Accounts,
including the net impact of injecting and withdrawing gas from storage. Also includes a credit or
debit for any out -of -period adjustments or unusual or nonrecurring costs typically considered gas
costs and a credit for amounts received as Imbalance Fees or Curtailment Overpull Fees.
Actual Gas Cost Billed = EGCF multiplied by the monthly volumes billed to Residential,
Commercial and Industrial Sales customers, less the total amount of gas cost determined to have
been uncollectible and written off which remain unpaid for each month of the reconciliation period.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date issued: 08/13/2008
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION
MID-TEX DIVISION
REVISION NO: 0
RIDER:
GCR — GAS COST RECOVERY
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division
EFFECTIVE DATE:
10101/2008
PAGE: 41
Any amount remaining in the reconciliation balance after the conclusion of the period of
amortization will be maintained in the reconciliation balance and included in the collection of the
next RF.
Atmos Energy shall file annual reports with the Commission, providing by month the following
amounts: Gas Cost Written Off. Margin Written Off, Tax and Other Written Off, Total Written Off,
Gas Cost Collected and Margin Collected.
TXS = Any statutorily Imposed assessments or taxes applicable to the purchase of gas divided by
the estimated total residential, commercial, and industrial sales.
ADJ = Any surcharge or refund ordered by a regulatory authority, inclusive of interest, divided by the
estimated total residential, commercial, and industrial sales is to be included as a separate line item
surcharge.
(b) Pipeline Cost
Method of Calculation
Each month, a Pipeline Cost Factor (PCF) is calculated separately for each Pipeline Cost Rate Class
listed below. The formula for the PCF is:
PCF = PP / S, where:
PP = (P - A) x D, where:
P = Estimated monthly cost of pipeline service calculated pursuant to Rate CGS
D = Pipeline service allocation factor for the rate class as approved in the Company's most recent
rate case, as follows:
Pipeline Cost Rate Class
I Allocation Factor D
Rate R - Residential Service
.634698
Rate C - Commercial Service
302824
Rate I -Industrial Service and Rate T - Transportation Service
062478
A = Adjustment applied in the current month to correct for the difference between the actual and
estimated pipeline cost revenue of the second preceding month, calculated by the formula:
A = R - (C - A2), where:
R = Actual revenue received from the application of the PP component in the second preceding
month.
C = Actual pipeline costs for the second preceding month.
A2 = The adjustment (A) applied to the PP component in the second preceding month.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08/13/2008
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION
MID-TEX DIVISION
REVISION NO: 0
RIDER:
GCR— GAS COST RECOVERY
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division
EFFECTIVE DATE:
10/0112008
PAGE: 42
S = Estimated Mcf or MMBtu for the rate class for the current billing month.
The PCF is calculated to the nearest 0.0001 cent.
The Pipeline Cost to be billed is determined by multiplying the Mcf or MMBtu used by the appropriate
PCF. The Pipeline Cost is determined to the nearest whole cent.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08/13/2008
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION
MID-TEX DIVISION
REVISION NO: 0
RIDER:
FF — FRANCHISE FEE ADJUSTMENT
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division
EFFECTIVE DATE:
101011`2008
PAGE: 43
Application
Applicable to Customers inside the corporate limits of an incorporated municipality that imposes a
municipal franchise fee upon Company for the Gas Service provided to Customer. Franchise Fees to be
assessed solely to customers within the municipal limits. This does not apply to Environs customers.
Monthly Adjustment
Company will adjust Customer's bill each month in an amount equal to the municipal franchise fees
payable for the Gas Service provided to Customer by Company. Municipal franchise fees are determined
by each municipality's franchise ordinance. Each municipality's franchise ordinance will specify the
percentage and applicability of Franchise fees.
From time to time, Company will make further adjustments to Customer's bill to account for any over- or
under -recovery of municipal franchise fees by Company.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08/13/2008
TARIFF FOR GAS SERVICE
ATMOS ENERGY CORP.,
MID-TEX DIVISION
RIDER:
Rider WNA —Weather Normalization Adjustment
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire System (except Environs areas
and the City of Dallas)
REVISION:
DATE:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
11/0112008
PAGE: 1 OF 2
RIDER WNA —Weather Normalization Adjustment
Provisions for Adjustment
The base rate per Mcf (1,000,000 Btu) for gas service set forth in any Rate Schedules utilized by the
cities of the Mid -Tex Division service area for determining normalized winter period revenues shall be
adjusted by an amount hereinafter described, which amount is referred to as the "Weather Normalization
Adjustment" The Weather Normalization Adjustment shall apply to all temperature sensitive residential,
and commercial bills based on meters read during the revenue months of November through April. The
five regional weather stations are Abilene, Austin, Dallas, Waco, and Wichita Falls.
Computation of Weather Normalization Adjustment
The Weather Normalization Adjustment Factor shall be computed to the nearest one-hundredth cent
per Mcf by the following formula:
WNAFI Ri
Where
(HSFI
(NDD-ADD) )
(BLi + (HSFI x ADD) )
any particular Rate Schedule or billing classification within any such
particular Rate Schedule that contains more than one billing classification
WNAFi = Weather Normalization Adjustment Factor for the ith rate schedule or
classification expressed in cents per Mcf
Ri = base rate of temperature sensitive sales for the ith schedule or
classification approved by the entity exercising original jurisdiction.
HSFI = heat sensitive factor for the ith schedule or classification calculated as the
slope of the linear regression of average sales per bill (Mcf) and actual
heating degree days by month for the test year by schedule or classification
and weather station as part of the RRM filing.
NDD = billing cycle normal heating degree days calculated as the simple ten-year
average of actual heating degree days.
ADD = billing cycle actual heating degree days.
Bli = base load sales for the ith schedule or classification calculated as the y -
intercept of the linear regression of average sales per bill (Mcf) and actual
heating degree days by month for the test year by schedule or classification
and weather station as part of the RRM filing.
The Weather Normalization Adjustment for the jth customer in ith rate schedule is computed as:
WNAr= WNAF1 x of
TARIFF FOR GAS SERVICE
ATMOS ENERGY CORP.,
vun.TFx r)IVIRION
RATE SCHEDULE:
Rate WNA— Weather Normalization Adjustment
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire System (except Environs areas
and the City of Dallas)
REVISION:
DATE:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
11/01/2008
PAGE: 2 OF 2
Where qq is the relevant sales quantity for the jth customer in ith rate schedule.
Filings with Entities Exercising Original Jurisdiction
As part of its annual RRM filing the Company will file (a) a copy of each computation of the Weather
Normalization Adjustment Factor, (b) a schedule showing the effective date of each such Weather
Normalization Adjustment, (c) a schedule showing the factors of values used in calculating such
Weather Normalization Adjustment and (d) a random sample and audit of thirty (30) actual customer
bills, with customer information deleted, for each rate schedule or classification to which the WNA was
applied in the preceding 12 month period. To the extent that source data is needed to audit the WNA
application, such data will be provided by the Company as part of the annual RRM filing.
If the RRM is discontinued, as provided in the Rider RRM tariff, the information required herein to be
filed with the entities exercising original jurisdiction shall be filed on March 1 of each year.
Base Use/Heat Sensitivity (HSF) Factors
Residential Commercial
Base use HSF Base use HSF
1A/nothcr Rtntinn Mrf Mrf/Hnr) Mrf Mcf/HDD
Abilene
1.27
.0130
10.93
.0638
Austin
1.29
.0133
18.47
.0641
Dallas
1.79
.0186
20.83
.0878
Waco
1.30
.0141
11.41
.0617
Wichita
Falls
1.35
.0143
11.62
.0540
Sample WNAFI Calculation:
1533 per Mcf = 1.2267 x
Where
(.0131 x
(1.14 +
(30-17) )
(.0131 x 17) )
I = Residential Single Block Rate Schedule
Ri = 1.2267 per MCF (Rate R - Final Order GUD No. 9670)
HSFI =
.0131 (Residential -Abilene Area)
NDD =
30 HDD (Simple ten-year average of Actual HDD for Abilene Area — 9/15106
—10/14/06)
ADD =
17 HDD (Actual HDD for Abilene Area — 9115/06 —10/14/06)
BLI =
1.14 Mcf (Residential - Abilene Area)
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION
MID-TEX DIVISION
REVISION NO: 0
RIDER:
CEE — CONSERVATION & ENERGY EFFICIENCY
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division
EFFECTIVE DATE:
1010112008
PAGE: 58
Puroose
Atmos Energy Mid -Tex is proposing to institute a complete Conservation & Energy Efficiency program
which will offer assistance to qualified customer segments in reducing energy consumption and lowering
energy utility bills. The proposal is one where Atmos Energy shareholders will fund a percentage of the
allowable expenses Incurred annually, with a customer rate component providing the remainder of the
funding. Following is a high-level, concept summary of the proposal. Almos Energy Mid -Tex Division
proposes to work with the communities it serves to develop the details of a new tariff and programs
addressing conservation and energy efficiency.
Synopsis:
Voucher system to provide free energy savings materials and supplies to qualifying customers of Atmos
Mid -Tex. Qualified Customers will receive up to two hundred dollars ($200.00) worth of caulking,
weather-stripping, sheathing, sealing, water heater blankets, and like materials, other energy saving
devices such as clock -thermostats, set -back devices ("covered items") from approved suppliers 1 retailers.
Company will undertake efforts to enlist support from community groups, including Its own Employee
Action Program, to assist customers with Installation. If it is determined that professional installation
capabilities are necessary, the parties will agree on labor assistance amounts.
Eli ibili
Low Income — Low-income rate -payers that qualify for heating bill assistance through LIHEAP
agencies and all agencies that distribute Atmos "Share the Warmth" funds. Agencies that allocate
assistance funds denote customer as Low Income, a status that lasts for one year.
Senior Citizen — Primary account holder can request eligibility through ATM call center or web -site.
Customer provides primary SSN which is verged through Social Security Administration. And account
holder that is or turns 65 years old in that year becomes eligible.
Funding
Initial program funding will be at two million dollars ($2,000,000). Atmos Energy shareholders will
contribute one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) to this initiative annually with ratepayers providing one
million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per year. it is proposed that the program operate on an October 1 through
September 30 year, with benefits being capped at the two million dollar level for the initial program period.
Administration:
A third -party administrator will coordinate qualification of customers, voucher distribution, subsequent
verification and reimbursement of eligible expenditures and general program administration. Program
administration expenses will be funded from the annual approved budget
Audits will be provided all interested parties within 120 days of the end of each program year to determine
effectiveness.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08/13/2008
ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION
MID-TEX DIVISION
REVISION NO: 0
RIDER:
CEE — CONSERVATION & ENERGY EFFICIENCY
APPLICABLE TO:
Entire Division
EFFECTIVE DATE:
10/01/2008
PAGE: 69
Report
Atmos shall file an annual report detailing cost to administer the program with details of the amounts paid
out of program for energy conversation assistance. The report shall also detail number of applicants,
number rejected and accepted and reason rejected. The report shall be filed with the Gas Service
Director.
Issued By: David J. Park Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Date Issued: 08/13/2008
ATTACHMENT B
PROOF OF REVENUES
I• -0 1
AVERAGE BILL COMPARISON
Line
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID•TEX DIVISION
SUMMARY PROOF OF REVENUE AT CURRENT RATES
TEST YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2007
Rate R
Rate Characteristics:
Customer Charge
2007 RRM True -up
Consumption Charge ($/Mcf
Rider GCR Part A
Rider GCR Part B
Billing Units (1):
Bills
Total MCF
Present Revenue:
Customer Charge
2007 RRM True -up
Consumption Charge
Base Revenue
Rider GCR Part A
Rider GCR Part B
Subtotal
Revenue Related Taxes
Total Present Revenue- Rate R
Total
RRM Settlement Tariff,
$10.69 Rate R
$0.00
RRM Settlement Tariff,
$1.2710 Rate R
$8.1244 Schedule H
$0.6243 Schedule I
17,069,679 Billing Determinants Study
78,708,921 Billing Determinants Study
$ 182,474,869
100,039,039
$ 282,513,907
639,460,135
49,140,231
$ 971,114,273
58,440,682
$ 1,029,554,955
Note 1: See Billing Determinants Study for details.
ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION
SUMMARY PROOF OF REVENUE AT CURRENT RATES
TEST YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2007
Line Description Total Reference
(a) (b) (c)
Rate C
1
Rate Characteristics:
RRM Settlement Tariff,
2
Customer Charge
$20.28
Rate C
3
2007 RRM True -up
$0.00
4
RRM Settlement Tariff,
5
Consumption Charge ($1Mcf)
$0.7104
Rate C
6
7
Rider GCR Part A
$8.1244
Schedule ti
8
Rider GCR Part B
$0.5228
Schedule I
9
10
Billing Units (1):
11
Bills
1,434,516
Billing Determinants Study
12
Total MCF
50,233,642
Billing Determinants Study
13
14
Present Revenue:
15
Customer Charge
$
29,091,984
16
2007 RRM True -up
-
17
Consumption Charge
35,685,979
18
Base Revenue
$
64,777,964
19
Rider GCR Part A
408,116,524
20
Rider GCR Part B
26,261,046
21
Subtotal
$
499,155,534
22
Revenue Related Taxes
30,038,679
23
24
Total Present Revenue- Rate C
$
529,194,213
25
26 Note 1: See Billing Determinants Study for details
Line
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION
SUMMARY PROOF OF REVENUE AT CURRENT RATES
TEST YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2007
Total
(b)
Rate I &T
Rate Characteristics:
RRM Settlement, Rate I &
Customer Charge $425.00 T
2007 RRM True -up $0.00
RRM Settlement, Rate I &
Block 1 ($/MMBTU)
$0.1933
T
Block 1
9,522,217
RRM Settlement, Rate I &
Block 2 ($/MMBTU)
$0.1410
T
Block 3
20,195,218
RRM Settlement, Rate I &
Block 3 ($/MMBTU)
$0.0302
T
Rider GCR Part A
$8.1244
Schedule H
Rider GCR Part B
$0.2938
Schedule I
Consumption Characteristics:
Block 1
0.23502
(1)
Block 2
0.26655
(1)
Block 3
0.49843
(t)
Billing Units (1):
Bills
10,052
Billing Determinants Study
Block 1
9,522,217
Billing Determinants Study
Block 2
10,799,921
Billing Determinants Study
Block 3
20,195,218
Billing Determinants Study
Total MMBTU
40,517,356
Sales Volumes 2,331,063
Present Revenue:
Customer Charge
2007 RRM True -up
Block 1
Block 2
Block 3
Base Revenue
Rider GCR Part A
Rider GCR Part B
Subtotal
Revenue Related Taxes
Total Present Revenue- Rate I&T
$ 4,272,100
1,840,645
1,522,789
609,896
$ 8,245,429
18,494,542
11,902,411
$ 38,642,382
2,325,460
$ 40,967,841
Note 1: See Billing Determinants Study for details.
Line
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION
SUMMARY PROOF OF REVENUE AT PROPOSED RATES
TEST YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2007
Rate R
Rate Characteristics:
Customer Charge
Consumption Charge ($/Mcf)
2007 RRM True -up ($/Mcf)
Rider GCR Part A
Rider GCR Part B
Billing Units (1):
Bills
Total MCF
Proposed Revenue:
Customer Charge
Consumption Charge
Base Revenue
Rider GCR Part A
Rider GCR Part B
Subtotal
Revenue Related Taxes
Total Proposed Revenue- Rate R
Total
(c)
RRM Settlement
Agreement,
$7.00 Pg 2, Item 5
$2.1600
$0.0810
$8.1244
$0.6243
17,069,679
78,708,921
$ 119,487,753
176,385,175
$ 295,872,928
639,460,135
49,140,231
$ 984,473,295
59,244,614
$ 1,043,717,909
Note 1: See Billing Determinants Study for details.
Settlement Allocation
Settlement Allocation
Schedule H
Schedule I
WP—J-1.1
WP—J-1.1
u
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION
SUMMARY PROOF OF REVENUE AT PROPOSED RATES
TEST YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2007
Rate C
Rate Characteristics:
Customer Charge
Consumption Charge ($/Mcf)
2007 RRM True -up ($/Mco
Rider GCR Part A
Rider GCR Part B
Billing Units (1):
Bills
Total MCF
Proposed Revenue:
Customer Charge
Consumption Charge
Base Revenue
Rider GCR Part A
Rider GCR Part B
Subtotal
Revenue Related Taxes
Total Proposed Revenue- Rate C
Total
Reference
RRM Settlement
Agreement,
$13.50 Pg 2, Item 5
$0.9442
$0.0367
$8.1244
$0.5228
1,434,516
50,233,642
$ 19,365,966
49,273,373
$ 68,639,339
408,116,524
26,261,046
$ 503,016,909
30,271,052
$ 533,287,962
Note 1: See Billing Determinants Study for details.
Settlement Allocation
Settlement Allocation
Schedule H
Schedule I
WP -J-1.2
WP -J-1.2
Line
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION
SUMMARY PROOF OF REVENUE AT PROPOSED RATES
TEST YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2007
Total Reference
(a) (b) (c)
Rate I &T
Rate Characteristics:
10,052
WP J-1
Customer Charge $
425.00
Settlement Allocation
Block 1 ($/MMBTU)
$0.2352
Settlement Allocation
Block 2 ($/MMBTU)
$0.1715
Settlement Allocation
Block 3 ($/MMBTU)
$0.0367
Settlement Allocation
2007 RRM True -up ($/MMBTU):
2,331,063
Settlement Allocation
Block 1 ($/MMBTU)
$0.0381
Block 2 ($/MMBTU)
$0.0278
Block 3 ($/MMBTU)
$0.0060
Rider GCR Part A
$8.1244
Schedule H
Rider GCR Part B
$0.2938
Schedule 1
Consumption Characteristics:
Block 1 (First 1,500 MMBTU)
0.23502
(1)
Block 2 (Next 3,500 MMBTU )
0.26655
(1)
Block 3 (Over 5,000 MMBTU )
0.49843
(1)
Billing Units (1):
Bills
10,052
WP J-1
Block 1
9,522,217
WP J-1
Block 2
10,799,921
WP J-1
Block 3
20,195,218
WP_J-1
Total MMBTU
40,517,356
Sales Volumes
2,331,063
WP_J-1
Proposed Revenue:
Customer Charge
Block 1
Block 2
Block 3
Base Revenue
Rider GCR Part A
Rider GCR Part B
Subtotal
Revenue Related Taxes
Total Proposed Revenue- Rate I&T
$ 4,272,100
2,602,422
2,152,424
862,336
$ 9,889,282
18,494,542
11,902,411
$ 40,286,235
2,424,385
$ 42,710,620
Note 1: See Billing Determinants Study for details.
• ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION
RATE REVIEW MECHANISM -1ST YEAR RATE EFFECTIVE PERIOD
ALLOCATION OF SETTLEMENT INCREASE BY CUSTOMER CLASS
Line Allocated Total True -Up Prospective
No. Customer Class Settlement Increase I'1 Amount I'I Amount I'I
(a) (b) (c) (d)
1 Residential $
14,164,235 $
6,373,906 $
7,790,329
2 Commercial
4,095,041
1,842,769
2,252,273
3 Industrial & Transportation
1,740,723
783,326
957,398
4 Total $
20,000,000 $
9,000,000 $
11,000,000
5
6 Note 1, Includes Pass-thru Taxes
0