OREGON JOINT USE ASSOCIATION PRIORITIZATION OF REPAIRS

OREGON JOINT USE ASSOCIATION

PRIORITIZATION OF

REPAIRS

AGENDA

INTRODUCTIONS BACKGROUND DIVISION 24 HEARING COMMITTEE GOALS COMMITTEE MEETINGS WORK COMPLETED TO DATE GOING FORWARD

BACKGROUND

Why the Rulemaking?

Rulemaking ProcessRulemaking Timeline

Why the Rulemaking?

It had been over 5 years since House Bill 2271

PUC Staff Policies not authoritative when under legal challenge

Disputes before the Commission require efficient resolution

DOJ requested White Paper from PUC Safety Staff

Rulemaking Process

Drafted Proposed Rules with input from:• Electric Rates and Planning

Section• Telecomm Rates & Svc Quality• Administrative Hearings Division• Dept. of Justice• Utility Program Support Services• Safety & Reliability Section

Rulemaking Process

Informal Rulemaking – Industry InputFour Industry WorkshopsWritten comments from

Industry posted on PUC website

Revised Draft Rules ProposedSecond round of written

comments from Industry

Rulemaking Process

Formal Rulemaking• Hearings Division – ALJ• OJUA Advisory to the Commission• Public Meetings with

Commissioners in Attendance• OJUA Board of Directors Meetings

(Diverse Views)• Oral and written testimony• Commission adoption of Final

Rules

http://apps.puc.state.or.us/edockets/docket.asp?DocketID=13128

Rulemaking Timeline

PUC Safety Staff with the input from other Agencies drafted proposed changes to Divisions 24 and 28

Informal Workshops with Industry input began August 2005

Formal Notice of Rulemaking January 2006 – Docket AR-506

First Workshop March 2006; OJUA Requests Bifurcation of AR-506

Rulemaking Timeline

AR-506 Phase 1 – Division 24 (Commission Safety Rules)

AR-506 Phase 2 – Division 28 (Commission Pole Attachment, Dispute Resolution Rules)

OJUA proposed Docket AR-510 (Commission Sanction Rules) in September 2006 to run concurrently with AR-506 Phase 2

Rulemaking Timeline

AR-506 Phase 1 March 2006 Final comments due June

29, 2006 Final order 06-547 issued

September 26, 2006

Rulemaking Timeline

AR-506 Phase 2 began again June 2006 with first hearing October 2006

AR-510 ran concurrently beginning in September

Last day for written comments was November 17, 2006

Final Commission Order NO 07-137 on April 10, 2007

From the Commission

We commend the OJUA for coordinating comments from the various industries that have widely divergent views on sanctions and for proposing and revising their recommended rules throughout the process. Their advice, and willingness to broker a compromise, has been indispensable in this process, and we look forward to continued leadership by the OJUA in the future.

INTRODUCTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERS:o Bill Woods, PacifiCorpo Jeff Kent, Qwesto Terry Blanc, TPUDo Dave Ramsey, Comcasto Scott Wheeler, Comcasto Troy Rabe, Comcasto James Fife, Verizono Stuart Sloan, Consumers

Power Inc.o Julian Khouri, PGEo Bill Tierney, PGEo Linda Wolfe, EWEBo Dave Shaw, ORECA

o Karen Horejs, EWEBo Bruce Rogers, PGEo Dan Gilpin, PGEo Craig Andrus, EPUDo Heide Caswell, PacifiCorpo Gary Lee, Charter o Bill Kiggins, Clear Creeko John Wallace, OPUCo John Sullivan, PGEo Roger Kuhlman, Salem Electrico Wendy Knodel, OJUAo Joe Clifton, PacifiCorp

ORDER NO. 06-547ENTERED 09/26/06BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSIONOF OREGONAR 506In the Matter ofRulemaking to Amend and Adopt PermanentRules in OAR 860, Divisions 024 and 028,Regarding Pole Attachment Use and Safety.

Prioritization of RepairsCommission’s Order:

The rules adopted today require immediate treatment of any violation “that poses an imminent danger to life or property.” Other violations must be fixed within two years of discovery. If there is little or no foreseeable risk of danger, the operator has a plan to fix the violation, and all attachers on the relevant pole agree, some violations may be deferred to be fixed during the next major work activity, but no more than ten years after discovery of the violation.

860-024-0012Prioritization of Repairs by Operators of Electric Supply Facilities and

Operators ofCommunication Facilities(1) A violation of the Commission Safety Rules that poses an imminent

danger to life or property must be repaired, disconnected, or isolated by the operator immediately after discovery.

(2) Except as otherwise provided by this rule, the operator must correct violations of Commission Safety Rules no later than two years after discovery.

(3) An operator may elect to defer correction of violations of the Commission Safety Rules that pose little or no foreseeable risk of danger to life or property to correction during the next major work activity.

(a) In no event shall a deferral under this section extend for more than ten years after discovery.

(b) The operator must develop a plan detailing how it will remedy each such violation.

(c) If more than one operator is affected by the deferral, all affected operators must agree to the plan. If any affected operators do not agree to the plan, the correction of violation(s) may not be deferred.

(4) For good cause shown, or where equivalent safety can be achieved, unless otherwise prohibited by law, the Commission may for a specific installation waive

the requirements of OAR 860-024-0012.Stat. Auth.: ORS Ch. 183, 756, 757 & 759Stat. Implemented: ORS 757.035

860-024-0012Prioritization of Repairs by Operators of Electric Supply Facilities and

Operators ofCommunication Facilities(1) A violation of the Commission Safety Rules that poses an imminent

danger to life or property must be repaired, disconnected, or isolated by the operator immediately after discovery.

(2) Except as otherwise provided by this rule, the operator must correct violations of Commission Safety Rules no later than two years after discovery.

(3) An operator may elect to defer correction of violations of the Commission Safety Rules that pose little or no foreseeable risk of danger to life or property to correction during the next major work activity.

(a) In no event shall a deferral under this section extend for more than ten years after discovery.

(b) The operator must develop a plan detailing how it will remedy each such violation.

(c) If more than one operator is affected by the deferral, all affected operators must agree to the plan. If any affected operators do not agree to the plan, the correction of violation(s) may not be deferred.

(4) For good cause shown, or where equivalent safety can be achieved, unless otherwise prohibited by law, the Commission may for a specific installation waive

the requirements of OAR 860-024-0012.Stat. Auth.: ORS Ch. 183, 756, 757 & 759Stat. Implemented: ORS 757.035

860-024-0012Prioritization of Repairs by Operators of Electric Supply Facilities and

Operators ofCommunication Facilities(1) A violation of the Commission Safety Rules that poses an imminent

danger to life or property must be repaired, disconnected, or isolated by the operator immediately after discovery.

(2) Except as otherwise provided by this rule, the operator must correct violations of Commission Safety Rules no later than two years after discovery.

(3) An operator may elect to defer correction of violations of the Commission Safety Rules that pose little or no foreseeable risk of danger to life or property to correction during the next major work activity.

(a) In no event shall a deferral under this section extend for more than ten years after discovery.

(b) The operator must develop a plan detailing how it will remedy each such violation.

(c) If more than one operator is affected by the deferral, all affected operators must agree to the plan. If any affected operators do not agree to the plan, the correction of violation(s) may not be deferred.

(4) For good cause shown, or where equivalent safety can be achieved, unless otherwise prohibited by law, the Commission may for a specific installation waive

the requirements of OAR 860-024-0012.Stat. Auth.: ORS Ch. 183, 756, 757 & 759Stat. Implemented: ORS 757.035

860-024-0012Prioritization of Repairs by Operators of Electric Supply Facilities and

Operators ofCommunication Facilities(1) A violation of the Commission Safety Rules that poses an imminent

danger to life or property must be repaired, disconnected, or isolated by the operator immediately after discovery.

(2) Except as otherwise provided by this rule, the operator must correct violations of Commission Safety Rules no later than two years after discovery.

(3) An operator may elect to defer correction of violations of the Commission Safety Rules that pose little or no foreseeable risk of danger to life or property to correction during the next major work activity.

(a) In no event shall a deferral under this section extend for more than ten years after discovery.

(b) The operator must develop a plan detailing how it will remedy each such violation.

(c) If more than one operator is affected by the deferral, all affected operators must agree to the plan. If any affected operators do not agree to the plan, the correction of violation(s) may not be deferred.

(4) For good cause shown, or where equivalent safety can be achieved, unless otherwise prohibited by law, the Commission may for a specific installation waive

the requirements of OAR 860-024-0012.Stat. Auth.: ORS Ch. 183, 756, 757 & 759Stat. Implemented: ORS 757.035

860-024-0012Prioritization of Repairs by Operators of Electric Supply Facilities and

Operators ofCommunication Facilities(1) A violation of the Commission Safety Rules that poses an imminent

danger to life or property must be repaired, disconnected, or isolated by the operator immediately after discovery.

(2) Except as otherwise provided by this rule, the operator must correct violations of Commission Safety Rules no later than two years after discovery.

(3) An operator may elect to defer correction of violations of the Commission Safety Rules that pose little or no foreseeable risk of danger to life or property to correction during the next major work activity.

(a) In no event shall a deferral under this section extend for more than ten years after discovery.

(b) The operator must develop a plan detailing how it will remedy each such violation.

(c) If more than one operator is affected by the deferral, all affected operators must agree to the plan. If any affected operators do not agree to the plan, the correction of violation(s) may not be deferred.

(4) For good cause shown, or where equivalent safety can be achieved, unless otherwise prohibited by law, the Commission may for a specific installation waive the requirements of OAR 860-024-0012.

Stat. Auth.: ORS Ch. 183, 756, 757 & 759Stat. Implemented: ORS 757.035

PRIOTIZATION OF REPAIR COMMITTEE GOALS

1. Develop communication protocols between joint use operators and PUC on deferred corrections.

2. Develop specific guidelines for classification of corrections.

3. Product developed by committee endorsed by PUC safety staff.

4. Entire industry is involved in process by conducting two workshops throughout the state.

POR COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND WORKSHOPS

January 18, 2007 Organizing Meeting at PGE Salem February 1, 2007 Committee Work at PGE Salem February 14, 2007 Committee Work at EWEB March 1, 2007 Workshop at PGE in Salem 9 AM to

noon March 15, 2007 OJUA Board meeting 10 AM to 12

noon then POR Committee Work 1 PM to 3 PM Comcast Beaverton

March 22, 2007 Committee Work at PGE in Salem 9 AM to 3 PM

April 5, 2007 Workshop in Central Oregon Bend Broadband 10 AM to noon Committee Work noon to 3 PM

April 17 and 18, 2007 Release Final Work at OJUA NESC Spring Training.

WORK TO DATE

Decision TreeFive ReasonsMatrix“Affected” PartiesC Flow ChartPlan of Correction

DECISION TREE

John Wallace, Oregon Public Utility Commission

Is facilitystructurally sound?

A PRIORITY

Is structuralsoundness likely todeteriorate furtherquickly?

Could reasonablyantic ipated eventscom prom ise thestructural integrity of thefacility?

B PRIORITY

B PRIORITY

Doesm echanicalstress causeelectrical system designto becom prom ised?

C PRIORITY

A PRIORITY

Is m echanical stresslikely to cause

encroachm ent intopublic space?

B PRIORITY

B PRIORITY

Are m echanicalstresses showing

increased deteriorationwith tim e?

Are clearanceviolations belowthecom m unicationworker zone?

Are clearanceviolations w ith in thepublic space?

C PRIORITY

A PRIORITY

B PRIORITY

B PRIORITYDo clearanceviolations have less than norm ally requiredworker safety space?

Do facilities showevidence ofm echanicalstresses, such asrubbing orabrasion?

Do facilitieshave properclearances?

DETERMINING

SEVERITY

NO CONDITION

CONDITION CRITICALITY DECISION TREE

Five Reasons

BILL WOODS, PACIFICORPConditions that would postpone

repair work beyond two years. Road Widening Forced Relocate Scheduled Pole Replacement Scheduled Rebuild Scheduled Corrections

MATRIXOJUA/NESC/DEFECT/CONDITION

TROY RABE, COMCASTNESC RULESOREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULESOJUA INSPECTION CODES

MATRIXOJUA/NESC/DEFECT/CONDITION

    2007 NESC            

Item

OJUA Deviation Code Section Code   Page General Description A B C Exception Notes

3 PG 12 123 A 39

Protective Grounding or physical isolation of non-current-carrying

metal parts

Conditions that could

reasonably be expected to

endanger life orproperty

Almost Always

1. Road Widening2. Forced Relocate3. Scheduled Pole Replacement4. Scheduled Rebuild5. Scheduled Corrections

Yes (see code)

Also see 092C(page

18)

4 AB 21 214 B 71

Lines or Poles Permanently abandoned

Conditions that could

reasonably be expected to

endanger life orproperty

Almost Always Never None

Also see 012C

(page 1)

5 PG 21 215 C2 72

Anchor guys and span guys shall be

effectively grounded NeverAlmost Always

1. Road Widening2. Forced Relocate3. Scheduled Pole Replacement4. Scheduled Rebuild5. Scheduled Corrections

Yes (see code)  

OJUA DEVIATION CODE  

Code Deviation

AB Abandoned

BD Building

BHBuilding/Horizontal clearance

BV Building/Vertical clearance

“AFFECTED” PARTIESBILL TIERNEY, PGE

860-024-0012 (c) If more than one operator is affected by the deferral, all affected operators must agree to the plan. If any affected operators do not agree to the plan, the correction of violation(s) may not be deferred.

“AFFECTED” PARTIES Violating Operator has burden of receiving permission from affected partiesCommunication shall be in writing (e-mail or paper)Negative Option is OKRequires Plan

“AFFECTED” PARTIES Pole Owner Inspection

Pole Owner since the owner has an obligation to maintain its pole in compliance with code.

Other attached operators: Its workers may be impacted from a safety

and/or operations perspective. An event may occur because of the violation that

may impact its facilities.

“AFFECTED” PARTIES Operator Initiated Inspection

Pole owner if the violation is at the pole or between poles.

Other attached operators Its workers may be impacted from a safety

and/or operations perspective.

An event may occur because of the violation that may impact its facilities

Identify all companies

attached to the pole

Identify the pole owner

The pole owner has Identified next major work activity

Identify

No more than 10 years after discovery

Pole owner notify all licensees pole is scheduled to be

worked

Field Meet identify time lines and work to be completed by each

licensees

Time line

No time line

Agree

Field work completed and C violation resolved

Change C violation to complete in

database

Record C Prioritized polesTag pole in the data base for

tracking

C Violation Identified by the pole owner or

licensee

C Violation Prioritization Process

Record in database schedule

Agree the violation is a C

Violation

B Violation to be resolved in 2 years

Don’t Agree

Needs to be scheduled in

Not meeting 10 Year

PLAN OF CORRECTION

BILL TIERNEY, PGE NOTIFICATION 180 DAYS TO CORRECT 60 TO SUBMIT A PLAN OF

CORRECTION MUST BE ACCEPTABLE

GOING FORWARD

Please give feed back: Committee members OJUA.ORG Bill.woods@pacificorp.com Bill Woods 503-813-7157 OJUA 503-378-0595OJUA Annual Meeting October 4 and 5 2007,

Eagles Crest, Redmond OregonOJUA Quarterly meetings.

OJUA.ORG