State's new tree-cutting rules for utilities involve approvals, notice-lohud.com

State's new tree-cutting rules for utilities involve approvals, notice

Laura Incalcaterra

May 20, 2011

One day in November 2009, Amy Kupferberg looked just beyond her Hartsdale backyard and saw hundreds of cut trees lying, she said, "like bodies on a killing field."

She would later count the tree stumps -- 450 in all -- that served as a buffer between her home and a nearby highway.

But her loss was just a fraction of the community's loss, she said, as a vegetation management plan was put into effect by Consolidated Edison along a swath that stretched from Yonkers to Yorktown Heights.

"Tens of thousands of trees were taken down," Kupferberg said.

The situation led Kupferberg, who now lives in Warwick, Orange County, to become active in an effort to change how utility companies approach tree trimming.

So she was pleased to be in Albany on Thursday to listen as the state Public Service Commission approved new rules regarding tree cutting and vegetation removal.

The rules address when and how utility companies tell homeowners about removal done along high-voltage transmission line rights of way. They do not apply to streetside power lines.

Several of the rules, which also require work plans that need approval by the PSC, specifically apply to Con Edison and its subsidiary, Orange and Rockland Utilities Inc.

The companies were harshly criticized for removing trees and brush throughout Westchester and Rockland counties, with homeowners and others questioning the companies' strategy of wide-swath cutting instead of just trimming vegetation in utility rights of way.

Allan Drury, a Con Edison spokesman, said the company already had begun providing more information to the public and elected officials regarding vegetation management.

"We'll continue to work with the PSC, the public and elected officials to see where communication can be improved," Drury said.

He also said the company remained committed to its vegetation management efforts.

"We've maintained -- and still maintain -- that vegetation management is very important for providing reliable electric service," Drury said. "No one likes to lose a tree, but it's even worse to lose electric service."

The PSC had adopted stricter tree maintenance rules after the Northeast blackout of 2003.

Since then, an increasing number of people have complained that the tree cutting goes too far, that its impact is not considered in advance and that no replanting occurs.

The new rules require the utilities to detail when and where vegetation will be allowed to remain and to incorporate a management approach that recognizes that the removal of desirable species "is neither required nor preferred."

Mark Gilliland said the approach was a good one, but that the new rules still left much open to the interpretation of the utility company.

Gilliland, chairman of the nonprofit Lorax Working Group, which has worked to change how utilities manage vegetation, said he would prefer to see the public comment on the companies' vegetation management plans before the PSC approved any such plans.

"I don't think it went far enough in terms of public oversight," Gilliland said.

Kupferberg said she was satisfied with the PSC's new rules and appreciated the agency's efforts in addressing the issues.

"It was a long, hard fight to get this much," Kupferberg said. "We got more than Con Ed and O&R wanted to give us. I think the PSC realized the companies could not go unwatched. Their interpretation of the vegetation management plan was totally overkill."

COMMISSION IMPROVES VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RULES

PSC Issues Ruling on CASE 10-E-0155

STATE OF NEW YORK

Public Service Commission

Garry A. Brown, Chairman

Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223 Further Details: James Denn james_denn@dps.state.ny.us | 518.474.7080 http://www.dps.state.ny.us http://twitter.com/NYSDPS

11041/10-E-0155

COMMISSION IMPROVES VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RULES

— Utilities Required to Improve Public Notification When Maintaining Power Lines —

Albany, NY—5/19/11— The New York State Public Service Commission (Commission) today adopted eight recommendations to improve and clarify utility practices regarding high voltage transmission right-of-way vegetation management practices.

“Maintaining the highest degree of electric system reliability for the benefit of New York’s customers is among the most important of our responsibilities,” said Commission Chairman Garry Brown. “However, there is a real need to ensure that the public is kept fully informed regarding changes to be made to vegetation surrounding high-voltage power lines in the community. These comprehensive new rules will help significantly improve the notification process and will help avoid problems that have occurred in the past.”

The Commission’s earlier policy regarding right-of-way (ROW) management established requirements for utilities’ ROW maintenance programs and ensured adequate record keeping and reporting by the utilities. In addition, the federal Energy Policy Act called for the development and implementation of additional mandatory and enforceable reliability standards for utility ROW maintenance.

The Commission noted that reliability problems are commonly manifested when contact occurs between a tree and a transmission line during, for example, a storm which causes a fault in the transmission circuit which may cause widespread electric system outages. Because of this,effective management of transmission rights-of-way is an essential component of system reliability.

However, in recent months, members of the public and elected officials have expressed concern with respect to the ROW vegetation management practices used by utilities to implement the above described regulatory scheme along their transmission rights-of-way.

These concerns have largely focused on the trimming and removal of trees and other vegetation by utilities in their transmission rights-of-way. Those objecting to the utilities’ practices cite the unwanted aesthetic impacts associated with the utilities’ ROW work, as well as noise, erosion and decreased property value as potential results. Expressions of concern have taken many forms including individual complaints to this department, letters from public officials, municipal resolutions and proposed state legislation.

As part of the public review process, more than 200 written comments were received from interested parties and six public statement hearings were conducted throughout the state at which people who would rather comment orally were able to do so. Staff reviewed the written comments and those made at the public statement hearings, and developed for the Commission’s consideration eight recommendations to improve ROW management practices in the State. Staff also sought public comment on the first seven of its recommendations.

Upon review of the comments, the Commission accepted eight recommendations:

1. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. shall provide individual written notification to all easement encumbered and abutting landowners, local municipal elected officials, and affected state agencies, of cyclic ROW vegetation management work, not more than 180 days nor less than 30 days prior to the commencement of such work.

2. Con Edison and Orange and Rockland shall provide in their notification details of the type of vegetation management work to be performed, the physical boundaries of the work, the methods and extent of the proposed work, provisions for cleanup and ROW restoration and the expected dates of commencement and completion.

3. Con Edison and Orange and Rockland shall develop, for staff review and acceptance, a section in their Long Range Right of Way Management Plans (Plan) specifically addressing how they will conduct their ROW management work on high density ROW areas.

4. All companies shall submit, for staff review and acceptance, updates to their websites and any printed materials, detailing the rationales and practices governing their ROW management programs.

5. All companies shall establish a direct line of communication between the public and the companies’ vegetation management personnel for questions regarding ROW vegetation management work. Information advising of the opportunity for such communication and how such communication can be accessed shall be made available on the companies’ websites, on all required notifications, and provided by field personnel and contractors upon request.

6. All companies shall develop sections in their Commission approved ROW Management Plans, for staff review and acceptance, to address the circumstances and criteria pursuant to which replanting is warranted.

7. All companies shall develop, if one does not exist or enhance if one does, a section in their plans detailing when and where various types of vegetation will be allowed to remain on a ROW. The section shall incorporate, to the extent possible, a vegetation management approach that recognizes that removal of desirable species is neither required nor preferred. Commensurate training and oversight of field personnel shall also be addressed.

8. The Commission Order containing ROW management requirements issued in Case 04-E-0822 will be appended to this Order.

Staff believes its recommendations appropriately reflect the concerns that have been expressed, are cost-effective and sensitive to environmental, aesthetic and community values, and protect the continued provision of safe and reliable electric service and recommends their adoption.

The Commission’s decision today, when issued, may be obtained by going to the Commission Documents section of the Commission’s Web site at www.dps.state.ny.us and entering Case Number 10-E-0155 in the input box labeled "Search for Case/Matter Number". Many libraries offer free Internet access. Commission orders may also be obtained from the Commission’s Files Office, 14th floor, Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223 (518-474-2500).

LORAX Comments on Today's PSC CASE 10-E-0155 Ruling

LORAX Comments on Today's PSC CASE 10-E-0155 Ruling
LORAX is supportive of the goals outlined in the new transmission vegetation management regulations. However, as a public interest environmental lobbying group, we have some specific concerns with the guidelines as announced in today's Press Release. (Note: as the actual text of the Order has not yet been released, we have not seen the commentary by DPS Staff nor the discussion by the Commission itself. This commentary may provide additional insight into the intentions and context of each guideline.)

In general, the guidelines enhance notification requirements, provide for a TVMP complaint escalation process, create a distinction between rural ROWs and urban/suburban ROWs, call for more limited vegetation removals (modifying the original Case 04-E-0822 orders requiring clear-cutting of the entire ROW "to the floor"), and require utilities to describe when and what sort of replant mitigation they will provide along impacted ROWs.

All of this is good news when seen from a high level perspective. However, in most instances, the rules do not provide specific criterial or detailed requirements and are thus open to a possibly wide-ranging interpretation by each utility. Yes, the DPS staff must review and approve these updated TVMP documents, but nowhere is there a requirement for any public review of proposed changes to said TVMPs. Given the public outcry and concern about the appearance of DPS staff / utility cronyism, why shouldn't a public review phase be mandated?

The first new regulation concerning notification, in particular, is more expansive that originally proposed:


Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. shall provide individual written notification to all easement encumbered and abutting landowners, local municipal elected officials, and affected state agencies, of cyclic ROW vegetation management work, not more than 180 days nor less than 30 days prior to the commencement of such work.


This requires notification not only of properties with ROW easements within them, but of all properties adjacent to ROWs. Good news. There are two weaknesses, herein, however. First, the notification window can be as short as 30 days - ok for individual landowners, but tougher for municipalities to hold public meetings. Secondly, this notification requirement applies specifically only to Con Ed and O&R, rather than to all state transmission utilities.

In regulation #3, special TVMPs for highly population areas are required:


Con Edison and Orange and Rockland shall develop, for staff review and acceptance, a section in their Long Range Right of Way Management Plans (Plan) specifically addressing how they will conduct their ROW management work on high density ROW areas.


Again, the issue here is that no prescriptive detail is provided as to what sort of changes should be made in dealing with high density population areas. Nor is there a specific criteria defining "high density" - which has previously been an issue in O&R territory.

In terms of mitigation, the new rules call out for public documentation about replanting:


All companies shall develop sections in their Commission approved ROW Management Plans, for staff review and acceptance, to address the circumstances and criteria pursuant to which replanting is warranted.


Once again, however, there are no detailed "base" requirements about when and how mitigation is to be performed. Could a utility simply take Con Ed's position that "We don't replant, period." Would this not fulfill the letter of requirement #6 (quoted above)?

So, over all the ruling is a mix blessing. It offers a lot of possibility for relief, but just how much there will be is based upon an ongoing (an not public) process. LORAX believes that there should be more robust (detailed) requirements as well as public oversight based upon the last 7 years of utility rampage along the ROWs in conjunction with the DPS/PCS's avoidance & justification of said actions.
Posted by -mg- at 4:53 PM

JUST IN FROM MARK GILLILAND OF THE LORAX WORKING GROUP

Comments on Draft PSC Recommendations for Changes in TVMP Are Due Feb.
2nd

The NYS Department of Public Service staff has made a series of seven
recommendations for changes in utility transmission vegetation
management programs after reviewing the written input and public
hearing testimony collected around the state during the last year.
Many of the recommended changes are specific to O&R and Con Edison
(due to the excess of problems and issue reported in the NY Metro
region compared to state-wide), while others apply to all NYS PSC-
regulated transmission utilities: Read the detailed in the PSC notice
attached (below) as PDF.

The PSC is inviting comments from the public on these recommendations,
before they hold formal Commission hearings to discuss these
recommendations and make their decisions/findings on Case 10-E-0155.
Comments are due by Feb 2.

The GEF LORAX Working Group strongly urges local property owners,
municipal officials and other elected officials to review these
recommendations and provide feedback directly to the PSC (contact
details within the attached announcement). We believe that the draft
guidelines do not go far enough, ignoring the need for mitigation for
existing problems, and ultimately will prove insufficient to prevent a
recurrence of the same widespread issues experienced previously along
the ROWs in Westchester, Rockland and Orange Counties (and elsewhere
in the state).

Please speak up and ensure your voice continues to be heard in this
important process.

THE PSC PREMININARY RECOMMENDATIONS-

STATE OF NEW YORK
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
CASE 10-E-0155 - Proceeding on Motion of the Commission as to New York State’s Electric Utility Transmission Right-of-Way Management Practices.
NOTICE INVITING COMMENTS
(Issued December 31, 2010)
The Commission instituted this proceeding to consider New York State electric utility transmission right-of-way (ROW) management practices. In this proceeding, the Commission sought comment on the implementation of utility ROW management practices and the contribution of ROW management to the safety and reliability of the State’s electric transmission system. In addition, comment was sought on the balancing achieved by these utility practices of the concerns of ratepayers, neighboring property owners, the public, and other interested parties. Further, several Public Statement Hearings were held across the state. More than 200 comments were received.
Staff reviewed the comments and developed seven proposed recommendations for consideration by the Commission. These recommendations reflect the concerns expressed by commenters and take into account the Department’s responsibilities in regulating utilities’ ROW management activities such as maintaining the highest degree of electric system safety and reliability for the benefit of New York’s customers while taking cost and environmental impact into account. These recommendations are also intended to ameliorate, to the extent practical, some of the impacts that may be associated with ROW vegetation management. Because the majority of comments came from Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. service territories, Staff proposes some recommendations solely for those utilities, while other recommendations apply to all state regulated utilities.
CASE 10-E-0155

Comments are invited on the following proposed Staff Recommendations:
1. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. shall provide individual written notification to all abutting and otherwise affected landowners and local municipal elected officials of cyclic ROW vegetation management work, not more than six months nor less than three weeks prior to the commencement of such work.
Discussion: This recommendation is intended to specify who is to be contacted and ensure timely communication with the public. Specifically, this recommendation is intended to provide direct notification to landowners who have a utility easement on their property or to landowners who directly abut a fee owned utility ROW. Flexibility in the time frame is provided to address individual circumstances. For example, where significant land use changes have occurred along the ROW, a utility and landowner may need a longer time period to address issues of concern. In other instances, a shorter notification period may be sufficient to inform landowners of upcoming work. This recommendation is also intended to recognize the importance that local municipal officials play in the chain of communication with their constituents regarding ROW management activities.
2. The notification required in Recommendation 1 shall in detail describe at a minimum the type of work to be performed, including the geographic limits of the work, the type and extent of vegetation management work planned, provisions for cleanup, and expected dates of commencement and completion.
Discussion: This recommendation specifies the minimum information deemed necessary to enable a member of the public or public official to understand the nature and extent of the ROW management work to be performed.
CASE 10-E-0155

3. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. shall develop, for Staff review and approval, a section in their Long Range Right of Way Management Plans (Plan) specifically addressing how they will conduct their ROW management work in high density ROW areas.
Discussion: Each utility has various demographic areas, including those with high and low density populations, through which its transmission ROW passes. Also, each utility possesses ROW that may differ in numerous other respects, including for example, stage of re-growth, width, topography, and right of use resulting from ownership or easement. For the purposes of this requirement, high density ROW includes any individual span that has multiple abutting residential homes along one or both sides of the ROW. This recommendation would require Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. to create sections in their Plans detailing how they will tailor their ROW management work in high density areas. While not overly prescriptive, this requirement provides the utilities with the flexibility necessary to develop and implement effective ROW management while accounting for and ameliorating, to the extent practical, the issues that have arisen due to ROW management work in the past.
4. All companies1
shall submit, for Staff review and approval, updates to their websites and any printed materials detailing the rationale and practices governing their ROW management programs.
Discussion: This recommendation is intended to ensure that the public is adequately informed of the details and reasons for the companies’ transmission ROW management programs.
1 Companies, for the purposes of these recommendations, shall include all State regulated electric utilities
CASE 10-E-0155

5. All companies shall establish a direct line of communication between the public and the companies’ vegetation management personnel for questions regarding ROW vegetation management work. Information advising of the opportunity for such communication and how such communication can be accessed shall be made available on the companies’ website, on all required notifications, and provided by field personnel and contractors upon request.
Discussion: This recommendation addresses commenters’ frequently expressed concern that they were unable to reach and speak with a responsible party while the ROW management activities were going on.
6. All companies shall develop sections in their Plans to address the circumstances and criteria pursuant to which replanting would be warranted.
Discussion: This recommendation requires companies to specify the circumstances where replanting of compatible vegetation is appropriate as part of their routine ROW management activities. It is intended to inform the public of applicable criteria, outlining in a general manner, instances in which a company may or may not replant. This also affords municipalities, who may wish to partner with the utility, the chance to assist with the planning and funding of planting compatible vegetation on a ROW. This recommendation will require each company to formalize its replanting program and how it will determine required funding levels. This requirement is not intended to be a one to one replacement program for vegetation appropriately removed from the ROW, but instead, an acknowledgement that appropriate replanting is a reasonable and necessary part of a utility vegetation management program for electric transmission ROW.
7. Each company shall develop, if one does not exist, a section in its Plan detailing when and where otherwise undesirable vegetation would be allowed to remain on a ROW.
CASE 10-E-0155

Discussion: A number of commenters from downstate questioned why undesirable vegetation (usually trees) would need to be removed from a ROW if the wire elevation above the ground is such that a mature tree could never grow tall enough to reach it. As a practical matter, undesirable vegetation is defined by utility companies as vegetation growing on a ROW that at mature height can reach, either by growing into or if it were to fall, the wire security zone which is also referred to as the priority zone. The rationale for removing only undesirable vegetation is set forth by the utility companies in their respective Plans. However, Staff believes it is important to reemphasize the basic vegetation management principle that vegetation, which will never endanger an overhead electric transmission line even at its mature height, should be retained throughout a ROW. Typically only deep valleys and severe side slopes below the conductors would be places where this vegetation could exist. Each utility will utilize its own expertise to determine when, where, and under what conditions this management practice will be employed.
Interested parties are invited to file their comments by February 2, 2011. Any party wishing to respond or reply to a comment made by another party may do so through reply comments by February 22, 2011. Comments should be submitted electronically to the Secretary at secretary@dps.state.ny.us. Those who cannot file electronically may mail or deliver them to Hon. Jaclyn A. Brilling, Secretary, Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, New York 12223-1350.
Anyone on the service list or wishing to be added to the service list, may also consent to receive electronic service of all Commission-issued documents. To do so, please e-mail a letter to the Secretary at secretary@dps.state.ny.us with your request. Please understand that if you agree to electronic service, you will be sent the issued document(s) immediately and you will not receive paper copies. If you do not consent to CASE 10-E-0155
electronic service, you will receive paper copies by US Postal Service.
All comments submitted to the Secretary will be posted on the Commission’s web site and become part of the official case record.
JACLYN A. BRILLING
Secretary

SOME INTERESTING READING!

"http://documents.dps.state.ny.us/public/MatterManagement/CaseMaster.aspx?MatterCaseNo=10-E-0155">

PUBLIC HEARING FOR CON ED STEAM AND GAS RATE INCREASE

PSC Seeks Public Input on Con Edison Gas and Steam Rates

by New York State Public Service Commission
ALBANY, NY (06/01/2010)(readMedia)-- The New York State Public Service Commission will hold public statement hearings and otherwise seek public comments on cases concerning Joint Proposals for Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (Con Edison) to increase its annual revenues for steam and gas services. On May 18, 2010, comprehensive Joint Proposals were filed by interested parties in each case for consideration by the Commission. The Joint Proposals recommend three-year rate plans for steam and gas services commencing October 1, 2010 and continuing through September 30, 2013.

The public statement hearings will be held on:

Yonkers: TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2010, 1:30 p.m.

Grinton I. Will Library

1500 Central Park Avenue

Yonkers, New York

Manhattan: WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 2010, 7:00 p.m.

City University of New York

The Graduate Center, Proshansky Auditorium C

Level (elevator one level down from lobby)

365 5th Avenue (between 34th & 35th Streets)

New York, New York

Steam Joint Proposal

The Joint Proposal in the steam rate case calls for a three-year rate plan with levelized annual increases of $49.5 million per year (7.01%, 6.52%, and 6.09%) on total revenues in Rate Years 1 through 3, respectively.

The Joint Proposal in the steam rate case also proposes to resolve an issue concerning the allocation of costs of the East River Repowering Project (ERRP) between the Company's electric and steam systems. The issue was most recently under consideration in Case 09-S-0029, the steam planning case, but was later consolidated for decision in the steam rate case.

The Joint Proposal recommends reallocating $7.5 million per year in ERRP fuel costs from the electric system to the steam system beginning in Rate Year 2 and continuing in Rate Year 3 and beyond, until changed by the Commission.

Gas Joint Proposal

The Joint Proposal in the gas rate case supports a three-year rate plan with annual increases of $47.1 million (2.4% on total bills, or 6.1% on delivery only), $47.9 million (2.3% on total bills, or 5.8% on delivery only), and $46.7 million (2.2% on total bills, or 5.3% on delivery only) in Rate Years 1 through 3, respectively.

The Commission may adopt the terms of the Joint Proposals in whole or in part, adopt alternative terms, or adopt terms concerning matters not addressed in the Joint Proposals.

Public Statement Hearings

It is not necessary to make an appointment in advance or to present written material in order to speak at a public statement hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. Speakers will be called after completing a request card. All comments at the hearing will become part of the Commission's formal record for the case to which they pertain. Each hearing session will remain open for at least one hour and, if necessary to accommodate persons wishing to speak, will continue for no more than one additional hour.

Disabled persons desiring special accommodations may place a collect call to the Department of Public Service's Human Resource Management Office at 1 (518) 474-2520 and should do so as soon as possible.

Other Ways to Comment

Writing: Those who cannot attend or who prefer not to speak at a public statement hearing may comment by writing to Jaclyn A. Brilling, Secretary, Public Service Commission, Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223-1350. If concerned with the steam rate case, your comments should refer to "Case 09-S-0794 Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. – Steam Rates." If concerned with the gas rates case, your comments should refer to "Case 09-G-0795 Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. – Gas Rates."

Toll-free opinion line: You may also submit comments through the Commission's Opinion Line at 1 (800) 335-2120. This number is designed to take comments about pending cases from in-state callers 24 hours a day. Callers should select English or Spanish and press 1 to leave comments. In your comments, refer to the steam rate case or the gas rate case as explained above.

Internet: You may also submit comments through the "PSC Comment Form" in the "Consumer Assistance" file available on the Commission's website at www.dps.state.ny.us or through the "Contact Us" link at www.AskPSC.com. Many libraries offer free Internet access. In your comments, refer to the steam rate case or the gas rate case as indicated above.

All comments submitted by one of these alternative means are due as soon as possible, but must be received no later than August 2, 2010. All timely comments the Commission receives become part of the official case record, are posted on the Commission's website for public inspection, and will be summarized for the Commission for consideration in its deliberations.

Persons interested in the Company's filings may view them, the Joint Proposals, and summaries of the Joint Proposals at the Commission's offices, Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY, or on the Commission's website-www.dps.state.ny.us, click on "What's New;" then click on "Case 09-S-0794 Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. for Steam Service" or "Case 09-G-0795 Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. for Gas Service."

Hard copies of the Joint Proposals and summaries also can viewed at:

Manhattan

Con Edison Headquarters

4 Irving Place

New York, NY

* * * * *

Con Edison Office

116 East 124th Street

Harlem, NY

Queens

Con Edison Office

89-67 162nd Street

Jamaica, NY

Bronx

Con Edison Office

448 East Fordham Road

Bronx, NY

Westchester

Con Edison Office

One Pathmark Plaza

Mount Vernon, NY

* * * * *

Grinton I. Will Library

1500 Central Park Avenue

Yonkers, NY

-30-