Findings:

·

not only take great pride in their beauty, but benefit significantly from them.

Testimony presented by the Urban Forestry unit of DEEP showed the heating

and cooling costs of a home were lowered with the presence of appropriate

trees.

·

·

most dense tree canopies in the United States (# 1 in the U.S. for our

Wildland/Urban Interface tree density). Connecticut’s tree profile, also, revealed

trees with larger circumferences than average. UIL Holdings estimated that over

300,000 trees are planted in the utility pole rights of way (ROW) in its 17 town

territory.

·

Municipal (Used primarily for maintaining health of town trees, not for utility rights-of-way)

Approximately $10 million a year

Connecticut Dept. of Transportation (Used primarily for roadway clearance and safety)

$550,000 per year

Telecommunications companies Failed to provide a tree trimming budget to Two Storm Panel

CL&P (For 143 towns)       $24,625,000

UI (For 17 towns)               $3,418,883

·

submitted to the Two Storm Panel, the company recommended that they be

approved to spend $366 million over the next ten years, essentially a 50%

increase over what CL&P spent in the previous ten years, on tree trimming and

vegetation management.

·

aside from the safety standards in ANSI Z 133.1 and OSHA 1910.269 and the

operation standards in the ANSI A 300 series to direct the actions of tree wardens

or of those performing utility pruning.

·

particularly targeting hazardous trees.

matching grants to homeowners for the removal of trees on private property

that endanger utility wires.

should be used to fund the private property Hazardous Tree program for 5

years.

develop standards for road side tree care in Connecticut, vegetation

management practices and schedules for utility rights of way, right tree/right

place standards, licensing standards for tree wardens, municipal tree

inventories and pruning schedules. This Task Force should consist of State,

municipal, utility and nonprofit environmental organizations. The

Commissioner of the DEEP or his/her designee should be its Chairperson.

for the purpose of creating a 5 year collaborative effort for an enhanced tree

maintenance program and the development of an educational effort regarding

the use of appropriate and diverse tree species in both public and private

spaces.

State of Connecticut—engage in tree trimming/removal activities that may

protect the necessary infrastructure. On a semiannual basis, these activities

should be coordinated amongst them to maximize the effectiveness of each

entity and goals/targets should be established. This activity would be

monitored through the SVMTF.

for road/ tree safety program.

private property by utilities or municipalities, which should include reasonable

protections for property owners.

·

protect the existing “pole and wire” infrastructure from natural disaster,

specifically the impact of falling trees/limbs on this infrastructure.

·

in Connecticut, using data from other states to make estimates on cost and

feasibility/effectiveness.

·

due to cost factors and damage caused by traffic, weather, and condensation.

The majority of studies that were reviewed, however, indicated that the

appropriate installation of underground cables protected the cables from traffic

and frost, and a common system of condensation elimination, used in many

states in extensive underground systems, prevented damage caused in this way.

·

town centers, is not drastically different from that of above-ground utilities, due to

the absence of impediments below the surface (i.e, ledge).

DEEP in the areas discussed by the Panel and the utilities. Such study

should encompass feasibility of such undergrounding, the costs associated

with the undergrounding, as well as potential reliability issues associated with

undergrounded assets.

requirements of the National Electric Safety Code (e.g., use of composite

poles and spacer cable) should be recommended to PURA, with the cost

shared between ratepayers and shareholders. All work should be permitted

by municipalities, and the utilities should be required to pre-plan with other

utilities with above-ground or below ground assets to reduce all costs for

upgrades, bringing evidence of such cooperation as a requirement for local

permitting.

assets and wind load, to better assist in managing a work plan for asset

strengthening. This list should be provided to the newly-created pole

administrator position (discussed in Chapter 8, Recommendation 74 of this

document) on an annual basis.

with other utilities, and where possible, co-locate such expansion with other

utilities to minimize the cost of burying them underground. Such an effort

would need to be coordinated through a combination of PURA and the Siting

Council so that utilities could be co-located.