Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Van Zandt County secures two-week extension in battery facility litigation; Ondor agrees not to bring batteries until fire marshal clears NFPA compliance
Summary
County officials said the parties entered an agreed extension that prevents Ondor from bringing batteries into Van Zandt County until the county fire marshal confirms the batteries meet NFPA testing and requirements.
County Judge and county staff announced an agreed extension in litigation with Ondor that, by the parties' agreement, bars Ondor from bringing batteries into Van Zandt County until the fire marshal approves compliance with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards.
The agreement gives the county temporary relief and the same protections officials said they would seek in court, Judge said during the May 20 Commissioners Court meeting.
Miss Curry, a county staff member who provided the litigation update, told the court the parties “100% agree with our position and agree not to bring batteries into our county, until the fire marshal has given his approval that they meet all of the testing, all of the requirements of all of the provisions in the NFPA.” She said the parties had entered another extension by agreement and described it as giving the county “absolutely everything we want.”
Court members discussed the length and mechanics of the extension. Miss Curry said the current extension term is for two weeks while the parties negotiate a possible date for a final hearing and that the temporary restraining order (TRO) would remain in effect until that hearing or further agreement. She said Ondor was no longer asserting that its batteries qualified under the county’s restrictions and that the agreement avoids immediate litigation costs while preserving the county’s position.
No formal vote was recorded to create the extension; the court was briefed and the extension was described as entered by agreement of the parties and their lawyers. Court members said they will continue negotiations to set a final hearing date and maintain the TRO in the interim.
Officials did not provide a schedule for the final hearing or additional technical reports; Miss Curry said the county will press for the hearing date during the ongoing negotiations.
The court did not cite any new ordinance or statute in this discussion beyond references to NFPA testing and the existing TRO status. The county said it will continue to rely on the agreement until a hearing takes place or the parties amend the terms.
