Energex considers that due to the density. Having some indication of tree density along a NSPs maintenance span is vital as tree density is a likely variance in estimation significant cost driver of tree trimming costs. methodologies, the AER should Cost is driven by the density of the vegetation being managed and the area of the land being managed – engage a contractor to undertake the we are capturing both. Businesses with a low cost per area maintained at a given vegetation density would estimation work themselves. This is to be more efficient than a business with a higher cost per area maintained at the same (or similar) ensure that we don’t assess vegetation density. expenditure based on perceived variances that don’t actually exist. (p. The immateriality of tree density to clearance costs assumes a particular approach to maintenance of the 9). vegetation management corridor. We need to be able to compare these different approaches – hence we need both density and area metrics. Transend suggested that the AER could collect this data on a per hectare We will collect data by length and width rather than by hectare as it will allow us to consider both basis. (bilateral meeting). dimensions of a vegetation corridor and examine any differences is corridor width that way. Transend suggests that vegetation 2.6.3 Vegetation management maintenance around communication We will make changes in accordance with Transend's submission, and make it clear that we are not after 2.6 metrics - general sites should not be included in the vegetation management work around communication sites. transmission line metrics. (p. 3). JEN suggests that the AER focus on We will incorporate JEN’s comment into template as well, recognising that the NSP themselves may not be collecting information on the party 6.3.1 Interruptions to supply – directly responsible for some outages. We will continue to collect outages by cause (grow-ins and responsible for the vegetation that vegetation blow-ins and as well as the number of fire starts. 2.6, 6.3 causes the outage, rather than capturing the outage by specific cause. NSPs will be provided the option to not provide this data initially if they do not collect it, but it will be (outages and fire starts) (p. 7). required in future years. SAPN state that they don’t collect
Energex considers that due to the likely variance in estimation methodologies, the AER should engage a contractor to undertake the estimation work themselves. This is to ensure that we don’t assess expenditure based on perceived variances that don’t actually exist. (p. 9). Transend suggested that the AER could collect this data on a per hectare basis. (bilateral meeting). density. Having some indication of tree density along a NSPs maintenance span is vital as tree density is a significant cost driver of tree trimming costs. Cost is driven by the density of the vegetation being managed and the area of the land being managed – we are capturing both. Businesses with a low cost per area maintained at a given vegetation density would be more efficient than a business with a higher cost per area maintained at the same (or similar) vegetation density. The immateriality of tree density to clearance costs assumes a particular approach to maintenance of the vegetation management corridor. We need to be able to compare these different approaches – hence we need both density and area metrics. We will collect data by length and width rather than by hectare as it will allow us to consider both dimensions of a vegetation corridor and examine any differences is corridor width that way. 2.6 2.6.3 Vegetation management metrics - general Transend suggests that vegetation maintenance around communication sites should not be included in the transmission line metrics. (p. 3). We will make changes in accordance with Transend's submission, and make it clear that we are not after vegetation management work around communication sites. 2.6, 6.3 6.3.1 Interruptions to supply – vegetation blow-ins and (outages and fire starts) JEN suggests that the AER focus on collecting information on the party responsible for the vegetation that causes the outage, rather than capturing the outage by specific cause. (p. 7). SAPN state that they don’t collect We will incorporate JEN’s comment into template as well, recognising that the NSP themselves may not be directly responsible for some outages. We will continue to collect outages by cause (grow-ins and as well as the number of fire starts. NSPs will be provided the option to not provide this data initially if they do not collect it, but it will be required in future years.
AER%20explanatory%20statement%20-%20final%20category%20analysis%20RINs.DOCX