After months of study, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission was advised it “should not take any action to alter the current practices of regulated electric utilities” on a proposal to require stronger wooden poles the companies use.
The recommendation came from the commission’s Public Utility Division (PUD), which reached its conclusions after a notice of inquiry launched last November to “identify and examine the structural resiliency and hardening of wood utility pole systems” that are used in Oklahoma.
One “expert” contended that the resiliency of poles employed in Oklahoma is “inadequate, and current poles are not compliant with standards.”
According to the PUD study, Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. determined that if it had replaced all poles that failed a groundline assessment, the utility’s costs would have increased by more than $200 million from replacement of 25,000 poles.
The specialist, Dr. Clayton Posey, formerly of Oklahoma State University, claimed utility poles in the state are weak because they were manufactured from trees only about 30 years of age rather than older trees. The Corporation Commission gathered Posey, lumber representatives and utilities to hear input.
At a Corporation Commission meeting in January, Posey contended it was absolutely guaranteed that the strength of poles has decreased dramatically and the state should not continue on this path, calling it a “path to destruction.” He also contended the state Legislature has a responsibility to ensure the state’s utility poles meet requirements of the National Electrical Safety Code.
One representative of OG&E informed commissioners the utility is confident it meets compliance with contemporary standards.
Comments also were filed by Stella-Jones Corp., a manufacturer of pressure-treated wood products; Koppers Utility and Industrial Products, which also is a manufacturer of specialty pressure-treated wood products; Timber Products Inspection, which has three state-ofthe- art laboratories that specialize in the analysis of physical properties of lumber, solid biomass fuels, and wood preservatives; Oklahoma Association of Electric Cooperatives; Oklahoma City-based OG&E, which serves approximately 900,000 customers in Oklahoma and western Arkansas; Tulsa-based Public Service Co. of Oklahoma, which serves more than 575,800 residential, commercial, and industrial customers in 232 communities in eastern and southwestern Oklahoma; Empire District Electric Co., an investor-owned utility based in Joplin, Mo., that provides electricity, natural gas, and water service to approximately 215,000 customers in Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas; Atlas Telephone Co. based in Craig County; and Bell Lumber & Pole Co., which was founded in 1909, is based in Minnesota, and makes utility poles.
The PUD decided at the conclusion of the notice of inquiry that its investigation was “adequate to clearly demonstrate that there is no dispute as to which standards apply to the poles being procured and utilized.” All Oklahoma utilities “have the same minimum standard requirements as every other state in America,” the PUD found. The PUD decided the dispute was centered on interpretation of the standards.
The PUD also found that in reviewing the regulated utilities rate cases, it “has not observed exceptional costs associated with pole failures or a high rate of pole replacements.”
Most utility line damage “comes as a result of secondary damage effects, such as falling trees and flying debris. Lines do not typically fail under the design loads. Failures occur when an unquantifiable high load, beyond that considered in design is encountered,” PUD wrote. “In Oklahoma, this would most often be secondary damage associated with an ice storm or tornado. An overhead system cannot be designed and built to survive these conditions, which cause secondary damage, without the failure of some system components.”
The “most effective activity” in protecting the resiliency of poles is “more aggressive vegetation management” – such as trimming tree limbs – which reduces secondary damage effects. However, the PUD noted, “the public is often opposed to these practices for aesthetic reasons.”
Resiliency “could also describe the time it takes to restore power after a natural disaster such as an ice storm or tornado,” the PUD pointed out. In this scenario the wood pole industry has “the capacity to provide a large number of poles in a short period of time.” In the hurricane season of 2005, the wood pole industry was able to provide all of the poles for timely restoration of power “and provided about 100,000 poles in a period of 30 days.”
As for contentions that older trees were needed for stronger poles, the PUD determined, “There is no clear basis to conclude that poles from younger trees are de facto of such lesser quality and characteristics as to be inadequate, noncompliant, or otherwise inappropriate for use.”