oregon joint use association prioritization of repairs
TRANSCRIPT
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 [email protected] Bill Woods 503-813-7157 OJUA 503-378-0595OJUA Annual Meeting October 4 and 5 2007,
Eagles Crest, Redmond OregonOJUA Quarterly meetings.
OJUA.ORG