That is all.

Really though, this is a good article. Even if the price tag came out to be 30 billion, it'd be worth it, imo. It can be done in phases.

Another thing I'd like to see is power lines being buried in all road construction. So if a road is being reconstructed, the power lines get buried. Why Edmond didn't do this with the Covell and Kelly is beyond me and annoying. This would make the cities look so much better.

Why doesn't Oklahoma bury power lines? | News, Weather, Sports, Breaking News | KOKH (http://okcfox.com/news/local/why-doesnt-oklahoma-bury-power-lines)

I think most people would rather run the risk of 12-24 hours of inconvenience every few years over a extra $2,700 a year out of their pocket.

They tend to bury them with new work. The trouble is, I'm not sure if you could ever get 100% buried. My entire area of town has the lines buried, and we still lost power. Now for us, they were short outages (2 hours was the longest.... right during the game) and off and on overnight. I do agree they need to continue to do it with new construction. OG&E does, and much of Edmond has buried lines.

I think most people would rather run the risk of 12-24 hours of inconvenience every few years over a extra $2,700 a year out of their pocket.Yeah I doubt that would be the price.

Also, if you read the article it says


Another study, done by the U.S. Energy Information Administration shows a the cost between $1 million and $2.2 million per mile.

And I am not suggesting OG&E goes and raises 30 billion to bury every power line right now. It can be done over time and in phases.

Tornado takes out a bunch of power lines? Work with the city to identify whether the road is going to be widened soon and bury the lines that were destroyed accordingly.

New road? Bury the utility lines.

Reconstructing or widening a road? Bury the utility lines.

Doing anything that requires the utility lines to be relocated? Bury the portion that was relocated.

Pros

Overtime, it'll save costs to OG&E that can be passed onto the consumer(which OG&E doesn't seem to like to do).

Won't have to worry about someone hitting the poles with their cars, a windstorm knocking them down, ice storm, tornado. . . etc.

Huge aesthetic boost for Oklahoma and Oklahoma City.

They tend to bury them with new work. The trouble is, I'm not sure if you could ever get 100% buried. My entire area of town has the lines buried, and we still lost power. Now for us, they were short outages (2 hours was the longest.... right during the game) and off and on overnight. I do agree they need to continue to do it with new construction. OG&E does, and much of Edmond has buried lines.
Can you tell me where they have buried them? Because they sure didn't do it with the reconstruction of Covell and Kelly and they aren't doing it with upcoming construction of Covell and I-35 because they are building new ones.

I do know of one or two small projects recently that I don't know exactly which ones they were, but they did bury them, but it was a small project.

I do agree with you that they will never be 100% buried and I'm fine with that. I'm thinking the majority of them being buried in OKC and the surrounding suburbs.

Also, for anyone that will say there is better ways to spend that kind of money. I just want to point out, there are always better ways to spend money.

Yeah I doubt that would be the price.

Also, if you read the article it says



And I am not suggesting OG&E goes and raises 30 billion to bury every power line right now. It can be done over time and in phases.

Tornado takes out a bunch of power lines? Work with the city to identify whether the road is going to be widened soon and bury the lines that were destroyed accordingly.

New road? Bury the utility lines.

Reconstructing or widening a road? Bury the utility lines.

Doing anything that requires the utility lines to be relocated? Bury the portion that was relocated.

Pros

Overtime, it'll save costs to OG&E that can be passed onto the consumer(which OG&E doesn't seem to like to do).

Won't have to worry about someone hitting the poles with their cars, a windstorm knocking them down, ice storm, tornado. . . etc.

Huge aesthetic boost for Oklahoma and Oklahoma City.

I agree with all this last part. Definitely needs to be something done going forward, and over time it will take care of itself and really help speed getting power restored when things like this do happen. I think the big problem is when stuff like this happens, people just want power, so they are more than willing to just patch and fix what's there. I can't say I blame them, but at least it's something more people are paying attention too.

Can you tell me where they have buried them? Because they sure didn't do it with the reconstruction of Covell and Kelly and they aren't doing it with upcoming construction of Covell and I-35 because they are building new ones.

I do know of one or two small projects recently that I don't know exactly which ones they were, but they did bury them, but it was a small project.

I do agree with you that they will never be 100% buried and I'm fine with that. I'm thinking the majority of them being buried in OKC and the surrounding suburbs.

I can't give specific examples. I know that much of west Edmond has buried lines, although there are stretches of feeder lines. From what I recall, Edmond has a long time goal of burying as much of the power lines as possible. I know new neighborhoods especially tend to have the lines buried. Not sure on the Kelly/Covell issues. There may have been a cost/benefit analysis or a time issue. I think in terms of miles of lines, there are a lot more buried in Edmond than their used to be. They seem to be focusing on the neighborhoods I assume because those are the hardest to fix when issues happen, while an outage along the road is quicker to fix. I remember reading an article back some point, I'll have to see if I can find it, that there goal is to get as much of Edmond's power lines underground as possible, over time as you've suggested.

In fact, my guess looks to be accurate.... assuming Edmond and OKC have been using the same logic as Tulsa, I found this talking about their program...


“Because feeders usually are on poles along street right-of-way and are easy to access, they are not buried,” Whiteford said. “The problems in areas we convert relate directly to heavy tree growth and difficulty accessing rear lots.”

Laterals are buried in front right-of-way, usually within 8 feet of the curb.

“We place a 2-by-2-by-3-foot, pad-mount transformer every three or four houses,” Whiteford said. “We directionally drill services to each house and replace existing meters with RF meters, which are read from the street. When a neighborhood is complete, we never have to go in the back yard again. All future repairs can be made in the front. Whether the access service point is a transformer or flush-mount pedestal, repairs are much quicker with less impact to the homeowner. No worry about downed lines. No locked gates. No dog bites.”

During planning stages of the reliability-enhancement program, PSO evaluated neighborhoods to identify the best candidates for replacing aerial lines underground.

“Most of those selected,” he said, “are older neighborhoods, usually with many old, large trees. In looking at the process we identified between 700 and 800 miles of overhead distribution cable that converting to underground would have a significant impact to improving reliability.”

Criteria considered when targeting areas were the following:

• Accessibility: Without alleys in the city, back yards can be difficult to access for repairs.

• Terrain: Is it conducive to directional drilling? Planners wanted to use this technique and avoid trenching.

• History of reliability

“For the first underground conversion,” Whiteford said, “we selected an area that was reasonably representative of the city—one where trees were causing problems, but not one of the worst areas in terms of reliability problems. It was a good starting point.”

Considering all factors, Whiteford said PSO is pleased with progress.

“We have converted roughly 65 miles of aerial cable to underground,” he said. “And we believe we are getting better at it as we proceed. Engineering is more nailed down. Contractor crews are more efficient.”

I can't give specific examples. I know that much of west Edmond has buried lines, although there are stretches of feeder lines. From what I recall, Edmond has a long time goal of burying as much of the power lines as possible. I know new neighborhoods especially tend to have the lines buried. Not sure on the Kelly/Covell issues. There may have been a cost/benefit analysis or a time issue. I think in terms of miles of lines, there are a lot more buried in Edmond than their used to be. They seem to be focusing on the neighborhoods I assume because those are the hardest to fix when issues happen, while an outage along the road is quicker to fix. I remember reading an article back some point, I'll have to see if I can find it, that there goal is to get as much of Edmond's power lines underground as possible, over time as you've suggested.

Okay that's great to hear. I was unaware of that.

I do know of a couple of projects that have buried lines in Edmond, so we might be thinking of the same ones. But I can't remember exactly what they were either.

I like this idea in theory, but I think in many areas around here it is simply cost prohibitive. I would support burying them in the high-density areas of the metro. Unfortunately, low-density suburbs and rural areas are simply going to have to deal with the inconvenience of power outages every few years when inclement weather strikes if they don't want to take on the additional costs it would require to have the lines buried.

If OKCtalk posters ran the world we'd be bankrupt in 2 mins. Between JTF's new airport in the middle of no where and panda's power lines we're already half way there.

Many other cities bury them, even in dense areas.

Frankly, I'm not sure I trust OG&E to get a fair assessment of what it would cost per mile, especially because their attempt to brush this off resulted in an estimate everyone seems to agree is greatly inflated.

They just don't want to do it, that part is clear.

Many other cities bury them, even in dense areas.


I think OKC should bury them in dense areas. With high population density I think it would be worth the cost to do it. An ordinance could also be passed to require them buried when new subdivisions are built.

However, going in and retroactively burying them in areas where they are currently above ground on the suburban fringe and in rural areas would be very cost prohibitive.

Out of curiosity, what other cities bury them citywide? I am familiar with Kansas City, Dallas, Little Rock, and Charlotte, and all of them have above ground power lines.

I checked into doing this once, as I was looking to buy a house that like most in OKC, had a long power and phone line strung across the backyard from a line of power poles.

As I recall, it was not a big expense to have it buried and homeowners can definitely contract such work out.

When I lived in Fl, I lived in an apt complex that had buried power lines, the box that served the part of the complex I lived in seemed to be in an area that got flooded fairly often, and when it was flooded the power in my area went out. I could see the apartments in the front part of the complex have power but the back ones not, I am not sure if the power company didn't care, but they sure knew about that box getting flooded and they didn't seem to be able to do anything about it, so my point is buried lines aren't always the golden ticket to preventing power outages.

Apparently you didn't see the news this morning where they said that that cost would be turned over to the customers resulting in $80-$260 monthly increases for 30 years afterward. NO THANK YOU!

Really though, this is a good article. Even if the price tag came out to be 30 billion, it'd be worth it, imo. It can be done in phases.


And I am not suggesting OG&E goes and raises 30 billion to bury every power line right now. It can be done over time and in phases.


We don't have $30 billion. That's about half the entire OKC metro economy.

It's not just the cost of burying the lines. What few buried lines we do have wreaked havoc on Project 180. It doesn't reduce headaches going forward, it just replaces them with different headaches.

And what about earthquakes?

Only issue I have with OG&E (as I still don't have power) is that they said on their twitter page that they " repair the hardest hit areas first". So instead of going to fix the most heavily populated areas they go after the outskirts if they are harder it.
Not taking into account how many people effected is a horrible policy. They will fix sq miles that have 10 people quicker than a downtown okc neighborhood with 100's of people in a square mile if the 10 people sq mile is "harder hit"


they claimed el reno was the hardest hit so they fixed el reno first.

Makes me think most of the oG&E workers live in El reno.........

As conservative, republican, anti-government as I am, I love Edmond Electric. Non-profit, monthly reports, and great service. Would hate to trade it for a for profit energy company.

Also in 25 years when a majority of homes are off the grid, we just wasted freaking 30 billion dollars on something we no longer need.

Also in 25 years when a majority of homes are off the grid, we just wasted freaking 30 billion dollars on something we no longer need.

The laws and tax incentives in Oklahoma are very biased against solar and alternative energy (and towards energy companies) and there is simply no way any significant percentage of homes are off the grid in any of our lifetimes.

Also, the comment about earthquakes... Never been a problem in California and in fact, you could argue underground is better as opposed to poles and powerlines coming down in a big event.

And it wouldn't cost anywhere near $30 billion, that is just OG&E's way of trying to brush aside the idea.

The laws and tax incentives in Oklahoma are very biased against solar and alternative energy (and towards energy companies) and there is simply no way any significant percentage of homes are off the grid in any of our lifetimes.

I'd be interested in knowing how this is true. I know we tax profits people make selling energy back into the grid, but to be fair they are using the grid at that point and should share the burden. But if you don't sell excess energy back I'm not away of any taxes or laws that would prohibit your use. I know a few people that have totally gone off the grid with solar, wind, and batteries.

The laws and tax incentives in Oklahoma are very biased against solar and alternative energy (and towards energy companies) and there is simply no way any significant percentage of homes are off the grid in any of our lifetimes.

Also, the comment about earthquakes... Never been a problem in California and in fact, you could argue underground is better as opposed to poles and powerlines coming down in a big event.

And it wouldn't cost anywhere near $30 billion, that is just OG&E's way of trying to brush aside the idea.

Current laws are that way. The free market will always win out. As other states adopt it the technology grows and grows gets cheaper and cheaper you will see a shift.

It's not unreasonable to think in 25 years for $1,000 (in today's $) you could get solar panels and a battery pack in your home. The people who make the rules need votes. When the technology gets cheap enough, it'll tip the other way. Also, because of term limits the legislature will have turned over twice.

So yes, in 25 years over 50% of homes will be off the grid. (By off the grid I mean, they occasionally have a power bill but for the most part it's $0)

It's not just the taxation and charges, it's the lack of tax incentives, low-interest loans, etc.

There are reasons you see so little solar in Oklahoma. Absolutely tons of it in California, which offers all types of incentives.

Just read that of 800,000 OG&E customers, only 200 to 400 use any solar or wind power.

Also, OG&E will only reimburse you for the amount of energy you actually use; they will not pay you for any extra that is fed back into the grid.

And BTW, things aren't changing anytime soon.

The governor just last year signed a new law that works as a strong disincentive for homeowners to generate their own electricity.

It's not just the taxation and charges, it's the lack of tax incentives, low-interest loans, etc.

There are reasons you see so little solar in Oklahoma. Absolutely tons of it in California, which offers all types of incentives.

Just read that of 800,000 OG&E customers, only 200 to 400 use any solar or wind power.

Also, OG&E will only reimburse you for the amount of energy you actually use; they will not pay you for any extra that is fed back into the grid.

And I'm saying because other states are offering tax incentives the technology will improve enough they become no longer necessary. That's the entire point of a tax incentive.

Oklahoma won't be on the forefront of solar, but as solar gets cheaper and cheaper eventually we won't need them, and then it'll be economical all on its own to put solar and a battery pack in your home.

It's ok we aren't on the leading edge, let other states spend tons on subsidies, we'll still reap the benefits.

Oklahoma was the leading edge on wind generation. which is better here then solar.

i'm not sure how common this is but the covenants in my neighborhood actually forbid me to install solar panels on my roof. -M

And BTW, things aren't change anytime soon.

The governor just last year signed a new law that works as a strong disincentive for homeowners to generate their own electricity.

I don't care if she outright banned them. Eventually bad policy always loses out.
Think of a cell phone in 1990, and think of one today. The same thing will happen with solar, particularity the home use application, it's an enormous potential market with very large upside. (Installation, upgrade cycles every 5 years, and maintenance)
We'll hit a point where the solar panel system pays for itself in 4 months, and if there's laws blocking that you can bet you butt people will get the laws changed or just break them.

^

The policy will change only when Oklahoma stops being pro energy, which is going to happen never.

It's ok we aren't on the leading edge, let other states spend tons on subsidies, we'll still reap the benefits.
.That's the mentality!!!!!!!!!!!!

And BTW, things aren't changing anytime soon.

The governor just last year signed a new law that works as a strong disincentive for homeowners to generate their own electricity.

I believe that's the law that just taxes proceeds on selling energy, unless there is another one. I support it. I'd hate to see google or another major company setup fully solar, pump energy into the grid (for a profit), and make homeowners in OKC support the infrastructure costs...

edited: not profits, but credit. If a large company is able to setup enough wind and solar power, they could pay zero money to OG&E yet there are still infrastructure costs related to them pumping the power in. If they chose, they could be completely off the grid, and have no connection, and power themselves, with no tax. But if they are going to have a line run to their house or business, they should pay something. There is maintenance and upkeep related to the lines.

i'm not sure how common this is but the covenants in my neighborhood actually forbid me to install solar panels on my roof. -M

That may be rare. I have a pretty strict homeowners group and they don't ban solar panels. At least I hope it's rare.

Keep in mind the charges that went into effect last year in Oklahoma are not commonly seen in other states and are certainly regarded as a deterrent, which is exactly what it was meant to be.

Pete the free market wins in the end. Always. When solar gets cheap, people will always act in their own self interest. If Oklahoma tries to block, people will throw them out or just break the law. (See: speed limits and marijuana) I'm talking 25 years down the road. Millienials will be in their 50s at that point. Life will be very different just as 1990 is very different then today.

Free market > any government policy.

My original point was don't worry about burying power lines we'll all be off the grip in a generation anyway.

Keep in mind the charges that went into effect last year in Oklahoma are not commonly seen in other states and are certainly regarded as a deterrent, which is exactly what it was meant to be.

Do we know what the surcharge is yet? Is anything in place? Arizona has what amounts to basically $5 surcharge per month for solar customers. I believe this will be controlled by the CC and not the energy companies.

Pete the free market wins in the end. Always. When solar gets cheap, people will always act in their own self interest. If Oklahoma tries to block, people will throw them out or just break the law. (See: speed limits and marijuana) I'm talking 25 years down the road. Millienials will be in their 50s at that point. Life will be very different just as 1990 is very different then today.

Free market > any government policy.

My original point was don't worry about burying power lines we'll all be off the grip in a generation anyway.

So you don't think we're going to have power lines in 25 years? Even if that is true, that's awhile away.

So you don't think we're going to have power lines in 25 years? Even if that is true, that's awhile away.

No, don't waste a ton of money burying them. In 25 years most homes will have panels and batteries. They'll power themselves independently except maybe when it's 110 degrees out and they'll need to pull from the line. So an ice storm comes and knocks your pole over you aren't going to worry to much because your home runs independently.

Basically these storms won't be as big of a deal in the future because a downed line doesn't automatically equal power loss.

The idea that all power lines can be eliminated and thus not needed any more is completely unrealistic.

You would need *all* homes on alternative power for this to happen and even then, the wires are important in terms of balancing supply and demand across the grid.

Absolutely no reason to think power lines won't be with us for a very, very long time.

As a perhaps weak analogy, 25 years ago one might have said we won't need telephone poles/lines in 25 years thanks to cellular phones. I'm sure there are plenty of new homes not having telephone line run to them, but those poles aren't going anywhere because of that...

I never said we don't need power lines. We'll probably always have power lines.

I said in 25 years a huge ice storm isn't going to paralyze everything because most homes will be self sustaining. So the benefit of burying power lines, like avoiding huge power losses due to downed poles will be vastly diminished.

So yes burying the power lines is a huge waste of money and problem that is likely fixed by technology in 25 years.

There was a hearing today at the CC on OGE distributed energy tarriffs.

Groups plan protest of OG&E's solar rate proposal - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports | (http://www.news9.com/story/30635694/groups-plan-protest-of-oges-solar-rate-proposal)

REC filed at some point. I don't know if theirs has gone into effect. I seem to remember something recently that OGE has not been able to put figures out to back up an amount they need to offset costs yet.

Here's some of the backstory on that issue.

A report last year by the industry’s research group, the Edison Electric Institute, warns of the risks posed by rooftop solar. It compared the development to the rapid technological changes from wireless communications that upended the traditional “Baby Bell” telephone companies.

“When customers have the opportunity to reduce their use of a product or find another provider of such service, utility earnings growth is threatened,” the report said. “As this threat to growth becomes more evident, investors will become less attracted to investments in the utility sector.”

The report urged regulated utilities to move quickly to change their rate tariffs to recover fixed costs from distributed generation. In Oklahoma, that happened this year with Senate Bill 1456. It drew some opposition from environmental groups, solar advocates and others, but passed the Legislature and is on Gov. Mary Fallin’s desk.

SB 1456 reversed a 1977 law that forbade utilities to charge extra to solar users. The new bill allows regulated utilities to apply to the Oklahoma Corporation Commission for a new class of customers who use distributed generation. The customers would be charged a higher base rate to make up for the infrastructure costs for sending excess electricity back to the grid.

The state’s major electric utilities backed the bill but couldn’t provide figures on how much customers already using distributed generation are getting subsidized by other customers. Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co. and Public Service Co. of Oklahoma have about 1.3 million electric customers in the state. They have about 500 customers using distributed generation.

Oklahoma electric utilities want higher rate for solar, wind energy producers | News OK (http://newsok.com/article/4083525)

I never said we don't need power lines. We'll probably always have power lines.

I said in 25 years a huge ice storm isn't going to paralyze everything because most homes will be self sustaining. So the benefit of burying power lines, like avoiding huge power losses due to downed poles will be vastly diminished.

So yes burying the power lines is a huge waste of money and problem that is likely fixed by technology in 25 years.It also has to do with looks as well.

^

Yes, appearance which is why they bury them in new developments.

The idea that all power lines can be eliminated and thus not needed any more is completely unrealistic.

But so is the idea that we should bury all of our power lines.

We don't need to bury all of them... Just prioritize areas and start the process.

This is how other cities do it, including the one I just moved from.

The goal should be to have everything buried in the Grand Loop by 2040 and require new developments to bury. That would likely lead to having only the middle ring of 1950s - 2000s era development that will need to be addressed for the following 25-35 years.

But so is the idea that we should bury all of our power lines.Correct. I don't think anyone is advocating for that to happen either. That is why I suggested doing it in phases and that doesn't mean that 100% of all power lines will be buried in the state of Oklahoma ever.

I know someone who lived in the Crown Heights area (IIRC) who had their existing overhead lines from the pole to their house placed underground at their own expense. OG and E required them to replace the meter base with one designed for underground service, to trench and install a 3" PVC conduit from there to the pole at the back of the property. OG and E cut it over from there at no expense. I'm not sure if they would still do that.

This ongoing important issue probably needs its own thread.

From the Oklahoma Sierra Club facebook page:
50 advocates stood up for solar today with yellow "Don't Block the Sun" umbrellas during a pro-solar choice rally and hearing at the OK Corporation Commission. Lots of media were there too! You can still share your thoughts on solar and wind energy with the attorney in charge of this case, Natosha Scott at n.scott@occemail.com. You don't have to be an expert -- just tell your story. The Attorney General and OCC's own Public Utilities Division both say no to OG&E's plan which fails to prove that full service customers are subsidizing solar customers. Thanks to The Alliance for Solar Choice (TASC) and Tell Utilities Solar Won't Be Killed (TUSK) for supporting this action.

https://www.facebook.com/oksierraclub/posts/1004040982952127

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhIvTLxUPBg

Bloom energy might be a thing for the future

That Bloom Energy is pretty incredible. Thanks for the video.

We don't need to bury all of them... Just prioritize areas and start the process.

This is how other cities do it, including the one I just moved from.

I believe that is happening in most of the communities in OK.

The federal credit was 39% (I think) though that is being phased out...

I know someone who lived in the Crown Heights area (IIRC) who had their existing overhead lines from the pole to their house placed underground at their own expense. OG and E required them to replace the meter base with one designed for underground service, to trench and install a 3" PVC conduit from there to the pole at the back of the property. OG and E cut it over from there at no expense. I'm not sure if they would still do that.They will and do. It's very common for commercial. Take somewhere like S. Meridian where the poles are very visible. You will see lots of the poles with PVC pipe running from just below the transformer to the ground. It continues on to the building's meter or CT cabinet.

They will and do. It's very common for commercial. Take somewhere like S. Meridian where the poles are very visible. You will see lots of the poles with PVC pipe running from just below the transformer to the ground. It continues on to the building's meter or CT cabinet.

I know the first neighborhood Edmond converted, they surveyed the residents about absorbing the cost, and I believe the HOA (through dues) helped pay for the conversion. Now, new neighborhoods in Edmond are almost always buried by default, but it's converting the older ones that are harder. My parents, off of Rankin and 9th had their lines buried a few years back, but they didn't pay anything for it, so not sure how the program is working.

Are you guys saying OGE absorbs the cost to bury the lines? That is great. I'm doing a project in downtown of another city similar to OKC and to have the lines buried in front and side of our site and to bury the transformer in a vault cost us tens of thousands of dollars (near 6 figures). If OKC does it for free, it should eliminate everyone's gripes in short order.

c
Are you guys saying OGE absorbs the cost to bury the lines? That is great. I'm doing a project in downtown of another city similar to OKC and to have the lines buried in front and side of our site and to bury the transformer in a vault cost us tens of thousands of dollars (near 6 figures). If OKC does it for free, it should eliminate everyone's gripes in short order.No. Read mkjeeves first post on the subject. OG&E is happy to bury the line from the pole to your home or business........ at your expense.

cNo. Read mkjeeves first post on the subject. OG&E is happy to bury the line from the pole to your home or business........ at your expense.

The home I was referring too was a bit different. It was an older existing occupied home that was being served with an overhead line. The homeowner wanted the line buried, contacted OGE to find out if and how that could be done. OGE gave them an underground meter base. The homeowner hired an electrician to install the meter base, dig a trench and lay conduit to the OGE pole. Then OGE pulled wire in that underground pipe. There was no charge by OGE to do that but the homeowner had to pay the electrical contractor. The houses on both side continued to have overhead lines and the main OGE lines were still on poles behind the house. I do not remember why the homeowner did that. I think it primarily beautification.

On new construction or new service rework, it's similar. If the owner wants to go underground OGE will frequently trench directly to the meter if there is no pavement or obstructions. Sometimes the contractor has to install conduit underground to an easement or pole. It varies also by what power is available, what has to be built, what the owner wants and what OGE can justify providing for the expected payback. They get load information on new construction, look at what they have to do to serve added load and the expected payback time. They aren't big on making changes at their expense they can't justify by adding revenue.