On August 14th, 2003 the northeastern United States experienced the largest blackout in its history. The power outage extended from the northeastern states of New York, Massachusetts, and New Jersey through the midwestern states of Ohio and Michigan. The Canadian province of Ontario was also affected. All told, 50 million customers lost power. The cause of the blackout was a combination of trees touching the utility lines, human error, and software failures leading to a catastrophic shutdown of the electrical grid. The effects of the blackout were extensive reaching upwards of $12 billion in economic impacts.
To the surprise of many, the rules and regulations imposed on utilities were voluntary prior to the blackout. Many violations were sited but there was no enforcement and no penalties were issued. In the wake of the blackout the rules and regulations were made mandatory. More regulation was obviously needed. Stemming from the blackout the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) passed a new set of vegetation management requirements most notably FAC-003. The standard mandates:
- Utilities prevent vegetation from encroaching withing the minimum vegetation clearance distance (MVCD)
- MVCD’s are determined based on voltage of transmission facilities
- Utilities are required to inspect 100% of their transmission lines annually
Many utilities have implemented integrated vegetation management plans to be more proactive with their vegetation management activities and to produce better documentation for auditing purposes. Historically this vegetation management process has been a manual and paper driven process that was error prone. A shift towards a digital/software process has removed much of the error, has standardized many of the workflows, and has streamlined much of the data entry which has improved the results of reporting and analysis.
We’ll look at a basic utility vegetation management process below. A typical vegetation management process usually goes through the following phases:
- Initiation
- Pre-Planning
- Execution
- Audit
- Close-Out
Initiation
In the first phase of the vegetation management process a utility will begin developing a plan for the upcoming year. This is often termed the annual vegetation work plan which outlines the work activities proposed for that upcoming fiscal year. The bulk of the activities that a utility will anticipate for a given year will fall under the umbrella of planned maintenance. This proactive approach will prevent the majority of grow-in and fall-in threats that would potentially cause an outage and covers the utility from any liability.
The annual work plan for that year is often part of a multi-year trim cycle. The trim cycle is often defined by the utility commission for larger utilities and by local/regional best practices for smaller utilities and coops. Shifting towards a cycle-based approach allows utilities to more sustainability and more effectively manage their rights-of-way. This approach develops more dynamic wildlife habitats as well as encourages more desirable plant species along the right-of-way.
The other type of work that utilities often address is reactive work. Reactive work is by nature ‘Reactive’. This work is often generated through the call center when a hazard or threat is identified that requires immediate attention. They are often communicated from a customer or adjacent landowner who has identified the risk nearby. These are often prioritized based on the severity of the threat and how quickly it needs to be resolved.
Pre-Planning
The next phase in the vegetation management process is the pre-planning process. The pre-planning process can take on various forms depending on the utility. However, they quite often follow a work plan/work authorization type approach. A planner/inspector will inspect the utility line and will prescribe work according to FAC-003 standards and according to the voltage of the line. The planner/inspector will identify where removals are required, and where mowing, trimming, and herbicide type applications are needed.
A planner/inspector will also approach the landowner and obtain permission/authorization to perform the work on the property. These customer relationships are often complex and can be sensitive in nature. It is important for the utility to maintain a history of these relationships in the event the landowner disputes the work performed on the property. Legal reports are often collected for the permissioning and authorization of the work to be performed on the property further emphasizing the sensitivity and importance of these engagements. Utilities are often required to obtain landowner signatures to execute work on the property.
Simple dashboards are a great way to provide simple metrics of the planning process, the scope of work being planned, and the nature of the customer relationships established while on site. These dashboards provide invaluable insight into vegetation management activities dynamically as work is performed.
Execution
The work execution process has been historically a very manual, paper driven process, and often error prone. Work assignments are often distributed to work crews during morning meetings through paper maps and spreadsheets and marked up by hand throughout the day. Communication is often conducted face to face at the back office or over the phone while in the field. With the shift to a digital process these touchpoints have been eliminated and work orders can be assigned to crews seamlessly without ever stepping foot into the office. Communication has become more streamlined and as result work crews have become more efficient and more productive.
Several pricing models are used for billing/invoicing including fixed price, unit price, and time and materials. The model used depends on what is negotiated between the utility and the contractor. The pricing model also varies depending on the type of work being performed (i.e. removals, trims, mowing, herbicide, etc.).
Historically, with the manual method paper maps and spreadsheets would be taken into the field and would be marked up by hand with the details of the work performed. For example, quantities of the number of removals, total work hours at a job site, work completion notes, and any general field information would be captured on the map and on the corresponding spreadsheets.
Many utilities have migrated to a digital cross-platform approach for field work enabling users to use iOS and Android devices, as well as Windows devices to complete the work. GPS enabled devices can more accurately track your location and capture work information. Routing capabilities have also been implemented with turn by turn directions to more efficiently map the day’s work. With the digital format, work forms contain a short list of only the information necessary for conducting the work. The editable information is limited to only the information that needs to be updated while performing the work such as progressing status, capturing completion date and user, and entering any work information. The user experience is designed to be lightweight, streamlined, and intuitive with a focus on increasing efficiency and productivity.
Again, dashboards can be configured to provide high level metrics of the status of the work executed in the field. And with the shift towards a digital/software approach these execution/trimming/pruning related activities can be monitored in near real-time.
Audit
When the work has been completed by the pruning/trimming contractor, the utility will often send an auditor to check the quality of the work performed. This can either be a comprehensive audit where every property and each piece of work is revisited and reviewed for accuracy. Or it may be a sample set of the work. Or it may be a hybrid of the two. The utility may vary the sample size depending on the voltage of the circuit, environmental factors, and growth rates along the ROW.
A work contractor getting paid is often dependent on the work audit being completed. If the work performed is satisfactory the work is marked as ‘approved’. The utility will send an invoice for the corresponding work. Otherwise it is marked for ‘remediation’ or ‘rework’ and the site will need to be revisited by the work contractor. The work assigned to the work contractor may be audited several times until the work has been performed correctly. The audit will ensure all work is performed to spec and all prescribed work has been completed as planned.
Reports and dashboards can provide visibility and transparency into these auditing activities for management and executive level staff. The results of these auditing activities need to be well documented since they are often monitored and reviewed by federal, state, and local regulatory bodies under the FAC-003 regulation.
Close-Out
The close-out phase is the last and final step in the vegetation management process. In this phase all activities are reviewed and finalized. All work activities including the annual plan, the inspection, the associated work orders and work tasks, and all landowner communication is examined for completeness and accuracy. All budgetary activities including rates, invoices, and timesheets are also examined for completeness and accuracy and approved. Once closed, these work activities become read only in the system and provide a historical benchmark for future work activities. Many software solutions provide automated work functions where work activities will automatically appear in the system when work is closed and based on the desired trim cycle. These auto-generated work tasks will be progressed through the vegetation management process at that later date.
During the close-out phase all necessary reporting and documentation has been initiated per the FAC-003 regulation. The utility is required to maintain detailed documentation of its annual work activities and must be able to provide defendable evidence that all threats have been managed and resolved in a timely manner. With the shift towards digital software solutions utilities can now produce these reports and documentation with the click of a button.
Conclusion
Vegetation management is by far the most time consuming and costly activities that an electric utility manages. And it can be one of the most complex and unclear activities as well. Vegetation interacting with utility lines is the single greatest threat to the integrity of the electricity network. As a result of the 2003 Blackout, utilities are now required to follow more stringent vegetation management practices. Utilities are now shifting towards more intelligent and flexible vegetation management solutions. With this shift utilities have seen efficiencies gained within the organization by eliminating data and communication silos. Greater efficiency means greater reliability of the electrical grid.
What do you think?