20030917min.doc

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
SEPTEMBER 17, 2003 – 1:30 P.M.

In attendance were Commissioners Paul Kjellander, Dennis Hansen, and Marsha Smith.

Commissioner Kjellander called the meeting to order. The first order of business was APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS on July 23rd, August 4th, August 11th, August 25th, September 4th, and September 11th. Commissioner Kjellander made a motion to approve the minutes. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.

The second order of business was approval of the CONSENT AGENDA, items 2 and 3. There was no discussion. Commissioner Kjellander made a motion to approve items 2 and 3. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.

Commissioner Kjellander noted that item 5 would be held until the next meeting.

The next order of business was MATTERS IN PROGRESS:

Beverly Barker’s September 15, 2003 Decision Memorandum re: Formal Complaint of Clair Cheirrett.

Ms. Barker reviewed her Decision Memo. Three representatives of PacifiCorp were present via teleconference: Tim Reinke, Area Forester; Vaughn Rasmussen, Field Office Director; and Robin Cross, Analyst for Tariff Policy/Regulatory Liaison.

Commissioner Hansen asked why the tree trimming policy had all of a sudden become a problem in the area. He asked if there had been a change in policy, a different manager, or a different contractor trimming the trees. He said he realizes trees on residential property are very important to people, and in southeastern Idaho, it’s lucky if you get four or five inches of growth on a tree in a year. He said since moving to Boise, he has planted the same kind of trees he had in Soda Springs and they have grown as big in six years as his trees in Soda Springs grew in 20 years. He said the appearance of a tree is important to people and it takes a long time for a tree to grow. He stated that he had observed the tree trimming in the area and is puzzled as to why three to four feet are taken off if the trees are only growing at a rate of three to four inches a year. He said we owe it to the customers to trim trees around homes at the bare minimum to meet the requirements of safety and transmission flow. He said people have to realize that, but he is concerned that the trimming being done could be excessive. He said he would like to see the company and Mr. Cheirrett sit down and see if they can work things out. He noted that if the customer is willing to pay to have the trees trimmed every two years rather than every eight years, that should be considered. He stated he would like to put the matter on hold until the next Decision Meeting to see if the two parties can get together and work things out so both parties will feel good about the situation, and he thought there is some middle ground that can be reached.

Mr. Reinke responded that as far as the growth of trees is concerned, different species of trees grow at different rates. He said there are one or two species that grow at a rate of three to four inches, usually in times of drought, but not the birch species. He said cottonwood or elm grow ten or more feet in a year and in residential areas, customers water their trees, which causes more significant growth rates. He said even in times of drought, they have noted 10 feet of growth on trees. He said the clearances are dependent on the species of trees, with spruce and birch being slower growing species, so the company prunes for eight feet of clearance on the side and ten feet below the lines. He said they prune faster growing species, like cottonwood or Siberian elm, 12 feet to the side and 14 feet below the conductors, which might seem like drastic pruning, but in two or more growing seasons the trees could be touching conductors and posing a safety hazard. He said the company tries to prune every three to four years.

Commissioner Kjellander said one of the concerns raised in the complaint is that there is no independent party that establishes trimming standards. He asked about standards and methods of trimming in non-rural areas. Mr. Reinke explained that the company is required to follow the standards of the International Society of Arboriculture and the American National Standard (ANSI). He stated he has had numerous discussions with Mr. Cheirrett since February, and they had discussed different options. He said Mr. Cheirrett requested topping or shaping the tree, and he has tried to explain to him that topping and shaping are not proper pruning and for the health of the tree, those practices are not suggested for birch trees because they are sensitive to pruning.

Commissioner Smith asked if the customer could hire his own tree trimmer to shape the trees. Mr. Reinke stated that the Idaho Overhead Safety Line Act, a copy of which he gave to Mr. Cheirrett, provides for ten feet of clearance near a primary voltage line, so the company has an obligation to do the pruning. Robin Cross clarified that the company will prune to ensure the safety zone clearance and then the customer can hire someone to shape up the trees after that. Mr. Reinke said his concern was for the health of the tree, and he didn’t want the customer to come back against UP&L or him and say they had killed the tree if the tree had been topped by somebody else. He said he has been trying to explain to Mr. Cheirrett that topping or additional pruning will stress that tree, especially since that species is sensitive to pruning. Commissioner Smith said that if he hires his own tree trimmer, they will hopefully explain that to him. Mr. Reinke said there are not a lot of qualified or reputable tree workers in that area and he felt there were numerous companies who will trim even though the practices might not be acceptable. Mr. Rasmussen stated the tree trimmers in their area will come in and trim the way the customer wants it trimmed but will not trim based on the health of the tree.

Commissioner Smith stated that in her long tenure at the PUC, she did not remember any other tree trimming complaints. She asked if it is rare to receive tree trimming complaints, and if we have received other complaints, have we accepted them as formal complaints. She said it seems that the complaint is more like a trespass or a tort, or some kind of claim that is not a regulatory matter but more like a damage claim for negligence, which should be taken to court. Ms. Barker replied that it is not uncommon for the PUC to get complaints about either the right of a utility to trim trees or the manner in which they are trimmed. She said in her recollection, this is the first complaint to be taken before the Commission with a request to be a formal complaint. Commissioner Smith asked how they are usually resolved, and Ms. Barker said they are usually resolved by an inquiry to the utility to see if there has been discussion with the homeowner and to make sure all the avenues that could be explored have been explored. She stated that clearly if a tree is within the utility’s easement, then they have the right to trim the trees, and it’s a matter of how to trim. She said sometimes there’s a question as to whether there’s an easement, and we can resolve those kinds of questions, but we don’t get into the business of trying to figure out how the trees should be trimmed. She said that is left up to the discretion of the utility and hopefully the utility will work with the customer to come up with some agreement and find common ground, but in this case there is clearly a standoff between the customer and company.

Commissioner Kjellander asked if the company will be ready to start pruning immediately if the Commission denies the complaint. Mr. Reinke replied that he will need to make arrangements to get a crew there and it will take about a week. He also explained the history of the company’s tree trimming program and their practices of explaining things to the customers so they understand the reasons for what the company does.

Commissioner Hansen stated that he was in eastern Idaho last week and looked at the tree trimming the company had done, and it looked like it was excessive. He admitted that perhaps he needed to become more knowledgeable, but he said there are more people other than Mr. Cheirrett who are upset with the ways the trees are being trimmed in their yards. He said it will take four, five, or six years for the trees to ever grow back close to the power lines, and he wonders if the trees really need to be trimmed that much. He said this is an area that we should take the time to look at and make sure we are right because this is very close to peoples’ heart, especially when you start trimming or butchering or excessively disfiguring their trees. He said it is true that trimming has to be done but it has to be done in the very best way possible to try to please the customer. He said he would have a hard time going ahead without giving it some time, and he suggested that maybe a staff member could look into it further and make sure we are on the right track.

Commissioner Kjellander thanked the representatives from PacifiCorp. He commented that he agreed with a lot of the comments Commissioner Hansen had made. He said he wouldn’t want a tree on his property trimmed for any reason, even though he fully recognizes the safety issues. He stated we also have to recognize that in most instances, the power lines were there long before the trees were, and people had to know when those trees were planted that there was the possibility they could encroach on the right-of-way. He said we have seen where a tree was in part responsible for the huge blackout in the Western states in 1996, and in the recent incident in the East, a tree was also a piece of the puzzle there. He stated that although aesthetics are significant, our job in terms of public safety and reliability is an extraordinary responsibility. He said if an ice storm hits this winter and one of the branches takes out a power line resulting in an outage, no one would like it, including Mr. Cheirrett, so it is incumbent on the PUC to make some tough decisions. He said we all recognize that the tree needs to be trimmed, and he wasn’t going to second guess the national standards for tree trimming. He made a motion to not accept the complaint and to allow the trimming to proceed. He added that hopefully in the week or so it takes to get the trimming arranged, some more discussions will occur between the company and Mr. Cheirrett to see if there is a kinder, gentler approach to accomplish the same thing.

Mr. Rasmussen said he hasn’t had a chance to talk to Mr. Cheirrett but knows him personally, and he would get together with him as soon as possible and work it through one more time to see if there isn’t another option and to explain to him why the company is doing what it’s doing.

There was no further discussion. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried 2 to 1, with Commissioners Kjellander and Smith voting for the motion and Commissioner Hansen dissenting.

Commissioner Kjellander stated that the only other item on the agenda was under the category of FULLY SUBMITTED MATTERS and the Commission would deliberate on it privately. He then adjourned the meeting.

DATED this ______ day of September, 2003.

_______________________________________
COMMISSION SECRETARY

2