Walker County Commissioners Court considered a variance request from Aspen Utility LLC / Comcast on Aug. 11 seeking relief from detailed engineering and profile-drawing requirements for a small conduit (described in the backup as a 32-inch conduit) to be installed in county right-of-way.
Aspen representatives described the conduit as modest in scale compared with large pipeline projects and asked to be exempted from providing the full set of profile views and shop drawings normally required for utilities. County planning staff and county counsel recommended conditions: Aspen must follow 811 locate practices, pothole or hydro-vac as needed to determine depths of existing utilities, and provide as-built drawings after installation. County staff recommended against waiving Aspen's responsibility to confirm it has legal authority to install within any claimed right-of-way; instead staff proposed a general note on the permit plans stating that the utility provider is responsible for ensuring the legal right to install and for locating existing improvements.
The court discussed recent incidents where contractors or utilities struck water lines, causing boil-water notices and service interruptions in county subdivisions. Commissioners and a county representative said Aspen and other installers must coordinate with water providers and county maintenance so locate information is accurate and right-of-way boundaries are confirmed. Aspen confirmed They would stop work in a contested area (Spring Lake) and coordinate with the City of Huntsville, TCEQ and county staff; Aspen said it has suspended work in the affected area while redesigning the route there.
The court voted to grant the variance to waive the full set of plan/profile submittals, subject to conditions documented in the county's recommended letter: 811 locates and potholing/hydro-vac as necessary, post-installation as-built plans, a plan note assigning legal responsibility for right-of-way confirmation to the installer, and adherence to minimum cover requirements for culvert crossings (commissioners reiterated a two-foot minimum below the flow line for conduit crossing culverts). The court also recorded that final permit approval would return to staff or a later court session; the variance was not a final permit.
Commissioners emphasized that the variance does not relieve the company of liability for utility strikes and that the county would expect timely coordination with water providers when work occurs in county rights-of-way.