Electricity Safety (Electric Line

Clearance) Regulations 2015

Regulatory Impact Statement

City Of Boroondara Submission

January 2015

Table of contents

Executive summary ................................................................................................ 3

Introduction ............................................................................................................ 4

About Boroondara .................................................................................................. 5

Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) ....................................................................... 6

4.1 Development of the Regulatory Impact Statement................................................. 6
4.2 The Regulatory Impact Statement ......................................................................... 6

The Distribution Businesses ................................................................................. 8

5.1 Timeliness and accuracy of response.................................................................... 8
5.2 Quotations and estimates for works....................................................................... 9
5.3 Protection of all relevant assets. .......................................................................... 11
5.4 Dispute Resolution .............................................................................................. 12

The Draft Electricity Safety (Electric Line Clearance) Regulations 2015 .......... 13
6.1 Amended method of specifying minimum clearance distances ............................ 13
6.2 Provision of alternative compliance mechanisms and exceptions to minimum
clearance spaces ....................................................................................................... 13
6.3 Expanded definition of `insulated cable .............................................................. 14
6.4 Adoption of the Australian Standard for the pruning of amenity trees .................. 14
6.5 Enhanced notification and consultation requirements .......................................... 15
6.6 Duty of Distribution Businesses to assist councils ............................................... 15
6.7 Reintroduction of flexibility provisions for insulated powerlines ............................ 16
6.8 Introduction of an exception to maintain minimum clearance distances around
uninsulated low voltage powerlines in low bushfire risk areas .................................... 16
6.9 Near the pole provisions ................................................................................... 17
6.10 Trees listed in a planning scheme to be of ecological, historical or aesthetic
significance ................................................................................................................ 17

1 Executive summary
The City of Boroondara (Council) has reviewed the Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) and the
proposed Electricity Safety (Electric Line Clearance) Regulations 2015 (draft regulations) which
incorporates the Code of Practice for Electrical Line Clearance.
This review identified changes within the draft regulations that enable a better balance between the
continuous supply of electricity, the safety of our community and the protection and preservation of
the amenity of tens of thousands of street trees. This is to be commended.
Deficiencies within the RIS have been highlighted that concern Council in its role as a Responsible
Person and custodian of the street trees for the Boroondara community. These include the lack of
acknowledgement of the value and benefits of street trees to Greater Melbourne and Victorian
liveability, the cost of compliance to councils and their communities and the significant loss of
established trees if councils had complied with the previous 2010 regulations.
The RIS claims significant improvements in relation to fire start and outage frequencies, in spite of
recognised non-compliance in urban trees. Council contends that it would be more efficient and
effective to draft regulations that reflect the current practice in urban areas to build on the identified
improvements in fire start and outage frequencies. If the draft regulations are passed in their
current form compliance will still require a significant loss of established trees across Melbourne.
This is not something that local communities will tolerate, nor a situation which is supported by
reliable and accurate data.
Council considers that the regulations do not demand sufficient support and cooperation from the
distribution businesses to enable Council to comply with its obligations. To achieve compliance
Council needs the distribution businesses to work with it in a timely, transparent and accountable
manner. Past experience offers that this level of cooperation is not present in their operational
procedures or business models and that their processes do not recognise or consider Councils
assets. Council therefore considers it reasonable that the regulations should place requirements
on distribution businesses that will assist Council in meeting its obligations regarding compliance,
in a manner that does not conflict with our obligations to the Boroondara community.
The draft regulations introduce a number of clauses that Council supports fully, such as the
introduction of the mandatory use of Australian Standard for Pruning of Amenity Trees and the
introduction of a linear graph to define the required minimum clearance space for different
powerline span lengths. However, there are a number of changes that will be difficult for Council to
utilise in their current form and will require cooperation from the distribution businesses which has
not previously been present. There are also changes that are not practical for urban areas at all,
such as the introduction of minimised clearances for structural branches greater than 400mm in
diameter.
Council acknowledges and appreciates the effort that has been put into developing these
regulations, and now requests that the issues and recommendations raised in our submission
inform amendments to the draft regulations as they stand now.

2 Introduction
The City of Boroondara (Council) welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on the Regulatory
Impact Statement and for the proposed Electricity Safety (Electric Line Clearance) Regulations
2015 which incorporate the Code of Practice for Electrical Line Clearance.
We consider that the 2015 draft regulations are heading in the right direction in terms of achieving
a better balance between the continuous supply of electricity, the safety of our community and the
protection and preservation of the amenity of tens of thousands of street trees.
There are a number of practical issues with regard to the management and implementation of the
regulations that need to be carefully managed into the future. A positive working relationship
between the Distribution Businesses (DBs) and all councils is essential for the regulations to be
successfully implemented and this needs to be developed and managed in partnership with Energy
Safe Victoria.
Since the introduction of the 2010 Electricity Safety (Electric Line Clearance) Regulations, Council
has been advocating for a line clearance regime that better balances safety, amenity and
environmental considerations. In doing so, Council has encountered a lack of acknowledgement
and acceptance in the line clearance regime of the very real value and benefits of street trees. Just
as the electricity network infrastructure is the DBs asset, so too are street trees council and
community assets.
This lack of acceptance of the value of trees as a community asset has resulted in Council facing
the significant challenge of reconciling a regulatory framework that requires the substantial pruning,
or removal of well established, high value street trees to meet minimum clearance distances and
communities that simply will not tolerate the scale of pruning needed to be compliant.
These challenges are amplified as past practice accepted by the relevant authorities has been to
allow structural branches of 130mm diameter or more to grow within close proximity of low voltage
cable in recognition of the low risk this presents. There is no data available regarding safety or
power supply being impacted by street trees which would substantiate the need for such drastic
and extreme pruning requirements and, in addition to this, affordable and approved engineering
and technical solutions have not been available to Council as an alternative method to achieve
compliance.
To achieve an outcome that will protect both street tree and electrical assets for the community the
process and ongoing dialogue around line clearance needs to be changed - moving away from the
immovable mentality of keeping trees away from powerlines, to working out how to protect and
enhance our tree-lined streets while also achieving a safe and secure supply of electricity.
Council Officers have been involved in the development of two other submissions, by the Municipal
Association of Victoria (MAV) and the Inner South Metro Mayors Forum (ISMMF). We support
these submissions and parts and extracts from these other documents have been drawn on and
included in this submission as relevant. We have also included additional information and
examples directly relevant to Boroondara.
This submission has been developed by Council Officers and will be presented to Council for
formal endorsement in early 2015.

3 About Boroondara
The City of Boroondara is an inner urban metropolitan council, representing more than 165,000
people in the inner-eastern suburbs of Melbourne. It has an area of 60km and more than 65,000
street trees, of which approximately 30,000 are in close proximity to power lines. Boroondara was
rated ninth of 590 Australian local government areas in the BankWest Quality of Life Index 2008
and first in the 2013 and 2014 Victoria-wide community satisfaction surveys.
A defining feature of the City of Boroondara is its significant number of avenues of mature street
trees, many of which are decades old, of historical significance and of immeasurable value to the
local community. Trees on public land provide essential amenity, health and biodiversity benefits,
particularly in the densely developed urban landscape of this region. Communities in this
municipality highly value street trees and are strongly committed to their ongoing protection and
preservation.
The City of Boroondara, 2010 Tree Policy highlights this by stating the following:
The City of Boroondara is renowned for the rich diversity and maturity of trees found within its
streetscapes, parkland and private gardens. Tree lined avenues, mature exotic gardens and
specimen trees are all present throughout the city.
The value of trees within an urban environment is widely accepted as high, due to their positive
contribution towards maintaining a citys sustainability and to community health and serenity.
Collectively, trees add beauty to our urban landscapes by softening the harsh lines of buildings,
complimenting architecture, screening unsightly views and providing privacy and a sense of
security and place.
Trees absorb air pollutants, release oxygen and sequester carbon dioxide. They reduce
stormwater runoff and erosion, ameliorate climate, can save energy, provide wildlife habitat and
strengthen a sense of community within a given area. Issues relating to tree management have a
high profile and can generate considerable public debate and passion and as a consequence,
planning is required in order to facilitate effective tree management.
The Council Plan 2013-17 further reinforces the values and expectations of the Boroondara
community through the following major themes and their strategic objectives
Theme
Sustainable Environment
Enhanced Amenity
Quality Facilities & Assets
Responsible Management

Strategic Objective
Our natural and urban environment is improved in a sustainable
way.
The character of our neighbourhoods is protected and improved.
The communitys current and future needs for assets and facilities
are proactively managed.
Decision-making in the delivery of high quality services by capable
and professional people reflect transparent, accountable and fair
practices.

These two documents (Tree Policy and Council Plan) clearly demonstrate the importance, benefits
and expectations that the Boroondara community places on its street tree population and Councils
role in managing them for current and future generations. It is in this context that we make our
submission.

4 Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS)

4.1

Development of the Regulatory Impact Statement

We understand that Energy Safe Victoria (ESV) is advised on the preparation and maintenance of
the Code of Practice for Electric line Clearance in relation to vegetation by the Electric Line
Clearance Consultative Committee (ELCCC). This committee is comprised of thirteen persons
appointed by the Minister under Section 87 of the Electricity Safety Act 1998 (the Act).
We believe that Local Government is under represented on this committee. Victoria has 79 Local
Governments who collectively comprise one of the two Responsible Persons under the Act that
have the largest population of vegetation to be responsible for, the other being the distribution and
transmission businesses. Yet the distribution and transmission businesses comprise 30% of the
committee with four representatives, while Local Government comprises 7% of the committee with
just one representative.
Given the substantial benefits this vegetation provides to Victorias communities and the
proportionate responsibility that Local Government has for line clearance Council seeks to have
this imbalance in representation rectified with the addition of three Local Government
representatives on the ELCCC.

4.2

The Regulatory Impact Statement

Council is concerned that the Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) provides very little explicit
acknowledgement of the substantial value and benefits of street trees and contains line clearance
requirements for urban environments that appear not to be based on any empirical evidence,
particularly in relation to low voltage cables in low bushfire risk areas.
Literal application of both the current and proposed Code of Practice for Electric Line Clearance
would result in the decimation of the structure, health and amenity of thousands of street trees
across the municipality and destroy the heritage and character of many localities.
The RIS that accompanies the draft of the 2015 regulations relies heavily on data provided by the
DBs. In the past Council has been presented with data from the DBs that attributes power outages
to street trees where there has been no street tree present, or cause of outage has clearly
originated in a privately owned tree. We are also aware of similar issues experienced by other
councils. This calls into question the accuracy and reliability of the data used to advise the RIS
and we are disappointed that there has been no discussion about the quality of the data. It is also
concerning that the RIS focuses very much on costs to DBs. Councils also meet extensive costs
as part of its role as responsible persons under the Act in ensuring the safe distribution of
electricity across the state. These costs include the proactive and reactive pruning and removal of
street trees and the use of engineering solutions to avoid pruning and removal. Similarly, the social
and environmental costs to the community of tree pruning and removal are ignored. The RIS
makes only limited reference to the environmental benefits of street trees and fails to acknowledge
the social benefits at all.
There is insufficient data available to properly assess the performance of a responsible person and
the impacts of vegetation within the clearance space. In order to improve safety, amenity and
environmental outcomes, there is a pressing need for systematic collection and review of available
data that is specific and verifiable.

The Victorian Competition and Efficiency Commissions advice on the adequacy of the RIS notes
that a more rigorous and evidence based evaluation of the data will be required in the next RIS in
order for that analysis to be assessed as adequate. Council would appreciate the opportunity to
work with ESV in developing appropriate measures to determine the effectiveness of the Code.
This would enable Council to assure its community that the data evaluation had been conducted
with due diligence and considered the impact of non-compliant trees in a transparent and
accountable manner.
The RIS for the 2015 regulations states that significant improvements in relation to fire start and
outage frequencies have been achieved under the 2010 regulations. This has occurred even
though ESV has advised that a substantial number of trees in declared areas are not compliant
with the regulations. In light of this it would appear that councils current practices have not led to
an increase in fire starts and outages and may even have contributed to a decrease. On this
basis, it would seem that it may be more efficient and effective to draft regulations that reflect the
current practice in urban areas.

5 The Distribution Businesses

Council considers that the regulations do not require sufficient contribution and cooperation from
the DBs to enable Council to comply with its obligations.
In order for councils to meet their compliance obligations with the 2015 regulations, cooperation
from the DBs will be critical. Where such cooperation is not forthcoming, it is essential that the
regulations provide a framework that will ensure transparency, accountability and a fair and robust
dispute resolution process..

5.1

Timeliness and accuracy of response

Council has had, and continues to have, unacceptable difficulties with receiving responses to
requests for shutdowns of powerlines, alternative engineering solutions or data on outages
allegedly caused by council trees. This lack of response by the DBs prevents Council from doing
what the regulations require it to do as a responsible person.
A recent example of this was when Council received an email from a distribution business that
stated the network had recently experienced a significant outage caused by Council trees. The
distribution business stated Council had been informed of the trees by the distribution business in
December 2013 and Council had advised that the trees would be actioned. Further investigation
by the distribution business of the cause of the outage had found that the trees were still noncompliant and the email asked what Council intended to do about these trees.
In this instance Councils contractors had submitted a request, on Councils behalf, for suppression
or shutdown following the initial contact in 2013, however the requested shutdown was not granted
until 31 October 2014. In the course of the vegetation removal an incident occurred that required
the works to be halted and resumed another day. Council requested a second shutdown to
complete these works, and as of 24 December 2014 this shutdown had not been actioned. Up
until this date Council had not received any notification of the outage referred to in the email, and a
request for further information on 18 December 2014 had not been responded to.
The primary issue in this case is the delay in response to a request for a shutdown. We have also
experienced delays in requests for assistance with other engineering solutions and associated
quotes.
A further issue is the lack of notification of an outage where it is alleged that a Council tree was
involved. Rather than being proactively notified, Council is generally only accused. As the DBs
have informed us themselves, their data collection on outages caused by vegetation does not
differentiate between private and Council owned trees. Furthermore, it is not determined whether
the tree was compliant with the regulated clearances or not and can even include outages caused
by wildlife, such as possums, as there is no specific category for wildlife. This further calls into
question the reliability of the data provided by the DBs to inform the RIS.
Council requests that:

a reasonable process and timeframe that recognises and responds to requests for
shutdowns or engineering solutions be defined in the regulations, or alternately, be
required in their Electric Line Clearance Management Plan (for example, this might be 10
business days).

5.2

a requirement be included in regulations that the DBs report any outages that it considers
are caused by a Council tree to the relevant Council within two business days of the
outage occurring. This report should include the date and time of the incident and the
location of the tree in the street.

Quotations and estimates for works

Where Council has sought quotes for engineering solutions as an alternative to pruning and
removing trees, there has been significant difficulty obtaining timely and accurate information from
the DBs and costs have varied markedly from one DB to another. There is a notable lack of
transparency about how the DBs identify and determine their costs.
Experience offers that it is also not possible to obtain a firm quote from these businesses . What
they will provide is a budget estimate, which often contains a disclaimer that it does not cover
all costs or might vary by up to 40%, and requires a non-refundable contribution if Council
wants a firm offer of works. The budget estimates and non-refundable fee to provide a firm
quote are often excessive and do not seem to reflect the scope of the works. Furthermore,
significant portions of the prices quoted are not contestable, thereby preventing councils from
seeking cost effective alternatives.
Examples of this quoting practice include two quotes for separate jobs, provided by two different
DBs.
DB 1
A request for a quote to convert two spans of Low Voltage (LV) to Aerial Bundled Cable (ABC) was
submitted to the distribution business. In August 2013 Council received a budget estimate for the
works. The budget estimate was for the conversion of two spans of LV to ABC and required a
$30,000 non-refundable payment to be made before a firm quote would be provided. However the
estimate did not clarify what the expected final cost might be and included the statement that the
estimate is approximate and is for budgetary purposes only; it should not be taken to commit DB 1
in any way.
DB 2
A budget offer was also received from DB 2 in December 2014. This offer was to convert a span of
LV to ABC and did include a budget estimate of $20,000, with a non-refundable payment of $8,646
to be made to cover the detailed scoping and design, soil analysis and road management
approvals. A firm quote would be provided after this scoping work had been done. This budget
estimate also included the statement that the cost and scope of our works in our firm offer are
subject to vary from the budget estimate as a result of the investigations undertaken.
Council is happy to provide ESV with copies of these documents upon request.
Without any transparency in determining the design or implementation of works it is difficult to see
how the cost of converting two spans starts at $30,000 and the cost of a single span starts at
$20,000.

Further, for Council to pay either amount to obtain a quote, which may end up being considerably
higher than expected, is not acting in the best interest of our community or in accordance with
Council procurement and legislative best value requirements.
Council currently contracts its power line clearance works to a company that employs appropriately
qualified live line staff. This company has held and currently holds contracts for live line works with
other DBs around Victoria. However, Council and its contractor has been informed that the DBs
will not approve suppression for any contractor that is working for Council, instead the DBs require
Council to use the DBs own approved live line workers. Apart from the questions this raises
around inappropriate market power, this has also led to councils being presented with what appear
to be exorbitant and inconsistent quotes and lengthy time delays to secure these workers services.
It is reasonable to expect that any quotes for engineering solution, live line and shut down works
are detailed, transparent and accurately reflect the scope of works. Our community, which funds
Council expenditure through rates, would also have this expectation.
Council recognises that a mechanism (deed) was presented to it in 2014 by one of the DBs to
provide the opportunity for its key tree pruning contractor to offer live line pruning services near
powerlines. However, the conditions associated within the document in its current form have
been assessed as too onerous on Council. Council continues to assess and consider its options
with regard to this deed and is committed to working with the DB to find consensus.
Section 12 of the RIS discusses compliance with the National Competition Policy and finds that the
proposed regulations do not limit competition and are therefore compliant.
This may be true of the regulations themselves; however as the examples above show, issues
arise in practice. The OECD Competition Assessment Toolkit asks the following questions:

Does the proposed regulation limit the number or range of suppliers?

Does the proposed regulation limit the ability of suppliers to compete?

Does the proposed regulation limit the incentives for suppliers to compete vigorously?

Does the proposal limit the choices and information available to customers?

The regulations themselves do not ensure these questions are considered or addressed.
Precedent and experience in particular offer that:

Council does not have a range of suppliers available to seek quotes for engineering
solutions or live line works.

The DBs will not provide a firm quote for works until Councils pay a non-refundable deposit
to them.

Where alternative options exist the distribution businesses refuse to allow these people
access to the network.

Where Council seeks alternative quotes to assist in evaluating the DBs quotes, alternative
suppliers are not willing to provide quotes as they are aware that they cannot be awarded
the works.

10

The lack of proper process, transparency, accountability and competition means that
Council does not have any certainty regarding the true cost of works.

Council requests that the regulations require that the DBs:

Be transparent and accountable in providing information and quotes on engineering

solutions, shutdowns, live line works and other associated works required to achieve
compliance and protect their asset.

Ensure their business practices including supply arrangements comply fully with NCP
requirements

5.3

Protection of all relevant assets

In light of the environmental, health, financial and amenity benefits that trees provide our
communities it is concerning that the regulations do not recognise the value and importance of
street trees.
This lack of acknowledgement is then reflected in the business methods adopted by the DBs.
There should be an obligation on the DBs to invest in powerline construction that minimises impact
on environment and amenity. Council has experienced incidences where the DB have refused to
discuss the possibility of using an alternative to the traditional utility supply in an urban area that
minimises the need for pruning.
An example of such a situation occurred when a DB approached Council officers in 2014 to
advise that they needed to upgrade the load capabilities to a section of ABC line in a local
residential street. Officers were informed at the time that the existing ABC cable would be
removed and replaced with open wire conductor, which was uninsulated and would require
greater clearances than already existed. An inspection confirmed that to achieve these
clearances one tree would need to be removed and three more trees would be significantly
impacted with more than 30% of the canopy removed to achieve the clearances required.
Council objected and was initially told this was the only solution. After persistence by Council, the
issue was escalated and other options were discussed, along with the outcomes for Councils
trees. An alternative solution was developed that involved installing an additional ABC line. This
still required additional pruning, however the clearance requirements were reduced due to the
lines being insulated.
There are now ABC spans where there was previously one this is a better outcome than
reinstalling uninsulated wires, but still a poorer outcome than the original single ABC that already
existed. It also took persistence and negotiating to have the DB even consider an alternative
solution.
Council requests that the regulations should:

require the DBs to install insulated lines when replacing or upgrading un-insulated lines.

state that no engineering solution should require greater tree clearance than the existing
one unless extensive consultation has been undertaken and agreement reached with the
owner of the tree.

11

5.4

include the objective to ensure that management procedures minimise the effect of power
lines on vegetation and establish strategies to progressively achieve a sustainable
environment unaffected by the presence of power lines. that was previously included in
the 1996 Code of Practice for Powerline Clearance.

Dispute Resolution

With regard to clause 18 (2) of the draft Code which requires a responsible person to establish a
procedure to be followed for the independent resolution of disputes relating to electric line
clearance, Council believes that this clause should be clarified to include the resolution of disputes
with councils in relation to the transparent, reasonable and timely:

Installation of technical solutions;

Provision of realistic and market tested cost estimates for technical solutions; and

Responses to requests for shutdowns to enable work near power lines.

Council also believes that the 2015 regulations need to clarify the circumstances and parameters
within which Energy Safe Victoria will intervene in ongoing disputes between DB and councils.

12

6 The Draft Electricity Safety (Electric Line Clearance)

Regulations 2015
Specific comments in relation to details of the proposed regulations are included below,
essentially following the structure of the RIS. We would also like to note that we agree with ESVs
decision not to introduce provisions into the regulations relating to unsuitable species and tree
climability.

6.1

Amended method of specifying minimum clearance distances

The proposed 2015 regulations introduce a linear relationship between powerline span length and
the required minimum clearance space.
Council supports this use of linear graphs because they eliminate the existing step changes
between different span lengths, whereby a marginal increase in span length arbitrarily leads to a
significant increase in the minimum required clearance space.
It is believed the overall impact for Council will be a reduction in the minimum clearance distances
required for a number of span lengths for which Council has line clearance responsibilities.

6.2

Provision of alternative compliance mechanisms and exceptions to minimum

clearance spaces

Council supports the proposed introduction of the alternative compliance mechanism (ACM)
provisions in that they have the potential to facilitate the use of innovative technical and
engineering solutions for managing trees.
However, we are concerned that this provision will be difficult to actually utilise in practice, due to:

the requirement to provide detailed, published technical information in order to have an

alternative compliance mechanism approved. Council does not currently employ anyone
with the technical expertise to obtain and interpret this information.

the requirement to obtain written agreement from the DBs. Past experience indicates this
is a solution that will not be readily forthcoming.

Furthermore, it is unclear what requirements and conditions ESV will place on authorities in
relation to the installation, monitoring and maintenance of the ACM and whether these will make
the use of the ACM prohibitively expensive.
It is our request that the provision is used by DBs when engineering solutions are identified that
enable mature trees and powerlines to remain in close proximity with minimal risk.
Council requests that the regulations include a more definitive process clearly defining the roles
and responsibilities should be provided for responsible persons and DBs to ensure the intent of
the clause is achieved. In particular, the ability should exist for either party to ask for an
independent authority or body to consider matters of dispute between the parties.

13

Expanded definition of insulated cable

6.3

Council supports the proposed definition of insulated cable, which captures cables fitted with
insulating cover. Insulating cover is relatively low-cost and easy to apply and has the effect of
insulating sections of bare powerlines thereby reducing the minimum clearance space required for
those sections of the wire. It is a far more cost-effective and simple engineering solution to install
than aerial bundled cabling and undergrounding.
If successfully implemented, this change presents a significant opportunity to reduce clearance
distances and limit the extent of pruning required.
In practice the successful application of insulating cover to uninsulated power lines will depend on
consideration, cooperation and agreement from the DBs. Based on past experience with DBs,
Council considers it unlikely that the potential benefit of this proposed change will be realised due
to the unwillingness of DBs to agree to install these extremely effective and low cost cable covers,
which meet the revised definition of insulated cable under this provision.
Previous applications for installation within Council have not been approved by the DBs; in fact the
only engineering solution offered has been to convert the lines to Aerial Bundled Cable (ABC) at a
significantly higher cost to Council.
An example of this occurred recently where the request for an insulating cover was submitted to
the DB with ESV acting as an intermediary for Council. The request was refused and a budget
estimate of $30,000 (non-refundable) was provided to Council by the distribution business with
regard to converting the lines to ABC. This was not the final quote for works and the cost could
increase substantially if accepted.

6.4

Adoption of the Australian Standard for the pruning of amenity trees

Council supports mandatory adoption of the Australian Standard for Pruning of Amenity Trees (AS
4373-2007). It is noted that the 1996 Code of Practice stated that it was essential that pruning be
done in accordance with recognised industry standards.
Council already requires all vegetation management staff and contractors to prune in accordance
with the Standard as a matter of course. This is to ensure the pruning does not result in structural
damage or inappropriate growth habits, enabling the retention of the tree and its amenity in a safe
and sustainable manner.
In the past Council has received numerous complaints from residents who have been deeply
distressed by the quality of pruning of their privately owned trees, in these situations Council has
referred the resident to the appropriate DB and advocated on their behalf, however feedback
indicates there has been little change in the performance of the works conducted. Application of a
penalty for non-compliance would assist in achieving a better outcome for the entire community.
Council requests that the regulations include:

A penalty for failing to prune in accordance with the Pruning of Amenity Trees Australian
Standard where it is practicable.

14

6.5

Enhanced notification and consultation requirements

Council supports the enhanced notification and consultation requirements included in the draft
2015 regulations. Council already adopts high levels of notification and consultation with our
residents and affected parties in relation to line clearance works undertaken.
Unfortunately, this level of communication is not adopted by the DB and Council is regularly
fielding complaints from residents about the standard of pruning, the failure of the distribution
business to properly inform affected persons of the intended scale and extent of their pruning and
the tardiness in removing tree debris, often left for up to a week, creating a safety hazard.
Council also notes that Clause 16 (3) only defines who the responsible person must consult with
and not how. Council requests that the regulations include:

A defined consultation process; or

A requirement to provide a defined consultation process in the DB Electric Line Clearance

Management Plan.

There also appears to be a blanket use of the word consult in Clause 16 of the regulations.
Council utilises the iap2 public participation spectrum with regard to all public communication and
engagement.
The iap2 spectrum defines the Public Participation Goal of consult as: To obtain public feedback
on analysis, alternatives and/or decisions.
Based on the specific clause offered in the draft regulations, and the roles and responsibilities of a
responsible person, it is considered that the term inform may be a better use of the correct
terminology with regard to public communication and engagement in these circumstances. The
iap2 spectrum defines the Public Participation Goal of inform as: To provide the public with
balanced and objective information to assist them in understanding the problems, alternatives,
opportunities and/or solutions.

6.6

Duty of Distribution Businesses to assist councils

Council supports the proposed introduction of clauses in the draft Code requiring DBs to assist
councils when requested.
The scope of the requirement in the draft Code relates only to assisting councils in response to
concerns about the safety of cutting or removal of a tree for which it has clearance responsibilities.
Council has experienced considerable frustration with DBs failing to work positively and
cooperatively with their local government counterparts in the electric line clearance system.
Improving the capacity and willingness of DBs to work fairly and cooperatively with councils in a
timely manner is critical to improving any outcomes in relation to electric line clearance in Victoria.
Council requests that clause 19 of the draft Code should be expanded to create a broader
obligation on DBs to work cooperatively with councils in regard to:

15

Identifying alternative treatment solutions for high amenity value trees with branches
located in the minimum clearance zone;

Providing realistic and market tested cost estimates for alternative treatment solutions;

Providing timely responses to requests for shutdowns to enable work near power lines;
and

Providing data and information relating to power outages resulting from vegetation
incursions by council owned trees into power lines.

6.7

Reintroduction of flexibility provisions for insulated powerlines

Council understands that clause 4 of the draft regulations is intended to effectively reinstate the
flexibility provisions contained in clause 9 of the 2005 version of the Code. Clause 9 of the 2005
Code enabled leaves as well as branches with a diameter of less than 10mm or greater than
130mm to be within the clearance space as long as certain conditions were met. ESV has publicly
committed to reinstating these provisions, including in its Review of Statutory Provisions relating to
the Mitigation of Bushfire Risks Arising from Electricity Assets White Paper.
Council supports clause 4 of the draft regulations, however the proposed regulations do not deliver
the promised flexibility for leaves and small tree branches with a diameter of less than 10mm. The
omission of leaves and smaller branches less than 10mm in diameter will create a regulatory
requirement for significant vegetation removal and significantly increase pruning costs.
Council requests that the regulations:

6.8

extend the flexibility provisions to include leaves and small tree branches with a diameter
of less than 10mm in clause 4.

Introduction of an exception to maintain minimum clearance distances

around uninsulated low voltage powerlines in low bushfire risk areas

While Council welcomes the move to formally offer some flexibility to vegetation management
around uninsulated powerlines, the threshold for structural branches, at 400mm diameter, is
unrealistic in urban areas. While many urban trees will have a trunk diameter greater than 400mm
it is rare to find one with branches that approach this size.
Its also unclear how a minimum diameter of 400mm has been chosen. We consider that the
amount of flex possible from a branch with a diameter of 130mm is not significantly greater than
that of a branch that is 400mm in diameter. Council believes the conditions attached to the 200mm
reduction in the clearance space including the fitting of cable spreaders and annual risk
assessments mean the provisions can safely be applied to branches with a diameter of at least
130mm.
As drafted, Council does not believe that clause 5 of the 2015 Code will provide the intended
improvements in flexibility for uninsulated low voltage electric lines in low bushfire risk areas.
Council requests that the regulations

Define structural branches under clause 5 of the 2015 Code as being branches with a
minimum 130mm diameter.

16

This would provide consistent definitions between insulated and uninsulated low voltage electric
lines in low bushfire risk areas.

Near the pole provisions

6.9

The near the pole provisions that were included in the 2005 and 2010 Code have been omitted
th
from the draft 2015 Code. These provisions apply to the 1/6 of the span closest to the pole. The
omission of these provisions from the draft 2015 Code means an increase in the minimum
clearance distance required around aerial bundled cable greater than 40 metres in length and
uninsulated powerlines greater than 45 metres in length. In the absence of any data to support
these increased clearances, Council requests that the near the pole provisions be reinstated so
as to prevent any unnecessary pruning or vegetation loss.

6.10 Trees listed in a planning scheme to be of ecological, historical or aesthetic

significance
The City of Boroondara is recognised for its green, leafy character and iconic tree lined avenues.
Mature trees dominate the neighbourhoods and are of significant importance to the community.
They are integral to the quality of life of our community. The value of the natural environment in
Boroondara is recognised in the Council Plan 2013-17. Council has developed a Tree Protection
Local Law which provides protection to private and public trees in Boroondara that are defined as
significant under the Local Law. A permit is required to prune or remove any tree required as
significant under the Local Law.
In recognition of the above Council requests that the proposed regulations:

recognise and incorporate the Local Laws of each Council in clause 9 (3) (b) and clause 14
(1) (d) of the draft Code.

17