to: transportation, infrastructure, energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health...

33
T&E COMMITTEE #1 July 18,2011 Discussion MEMORANDUM July 14, 2011 TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment (T&E) Committee Keith Levchenko, Senior Legislative Analyst SUBJECT: Discussion: Pepco's Tree Trimming Program The issue of Pepco's reliability was brought to the forefront last year during the major regional snow event in February 2010 and by a July 2010 severe rain event, both of which resulted in widespread and multiple day power outages in Montgomery County. A major winter storm event on January 26 of this year also led to widespread power outages. In August 2010, PEPCO announced a six point reliability enhancement plan intended to reduce. the frequency and duration of outages (occurring both during major storm events and during non-major storm events). A summary of this plan is attached on © 17-18 along with a progress update from May 2011 (see © 14-15). Vegetation management (i.e., tree trimming) is a key component of the plan. PEP CO believes that the vegetation issue is the primary cause of outages during major storm events. The Montgomery County PEPCO Work Group's Final Report concurred with this conclusion. l As noted on ©1, PEPeO has trimmed over 1,800 miles of tree line. Discussion Topics With the increased level of PEPCO's tree trimming has come concerns from neighborhoods about loss of tree canopy and resulting changes in the character of neighborhoods (or, in some cases, in the character of officially designated rustic roads). As a result, PEPCO has encountered resistance from property owners regarding its tree trimming efforts on private property. In response, PEPCO has asked the Council to consider legislation that would provide a process by which PEPCO could seek 1 Page 10 of the Work Group Report notes, "In the case of the former (major events), the Work Group concludes that vegetation is indeed the primary cause of disruptions." However, in Non-Major Event conditions, outages are primarily attributable to system internal malfunctions (switch failures, transformer outages, etc., that not uncommonly are a consequence of inadequacies in preventative maintenance) or by animal interference (potentially avoidable with barriers) ... Because the overall period without major storm activity is greater than that with such storms, the cumulative reason for overall outages can be largely attributed to internal system failures."

Upload: phungkhanh

Post on 09-Mar-2018

213 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

TampE COMMITTEE 1 July 182011

Discussion

MEMORANDUM

July 14 2011

TO Transportation Infrastructure Energy and Environment (T ampE) Committee

FROM~Keith Levchenko Senior Legislative Analyst

SUBJECT Discussion Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

The issue of Pepcos reliability was brought to the forefront last year during the major regional snow event in February 2010 and by a July 2010 severe rain event both of which resulted in widespread and multiple day power outages in Montgomery County A major winter storm event on January 26 of this year also led to widespread power outages

In August 2010 PEPCO announced a six point reliability enhancement plan intended to reduce the frequency and duration of outages (occurring both during major storm events and during non-major storm events) A summary of this plan is attached on copy 17-18 along with a progress update from May 2011 (see copy 14-15) Vegetation management (ie tree trimming) is a key component of the plan PEP CO believes that the vegetation issue is the primary cause of outages during major storm events The Montgomery County PEPCO Work Groups Final Report concurred with this conclusion l

As noted on copy1 PEPeO has trimmed over 1800 miles of tree line

Discussion Topics

With the increased level of PEPCOs tree trimming has come concerns from neighborhoods about loss of tree canopy and resulting changes in the character of neighborhoods (or in some cases in the character of officially designated rustic roads) As a result PEPCO has encountered resistance from property owners regarding its tree trimming efforts on private property In response PEPCO has asked the Council to consider legislation that would provide a process by which PEPCO could seek

1 Page 10 of the Work Group Report notes In the case of the former (major events) the Work Group concludes that vegetation is indeed the primary cause ofdisruptions However in Non-Major Event conditions outages are primarily attributable to system internal malfunctions (switch failures transformer outages etc that not uncommonly are a consequence of inadequacies in preventative maintenance) or by animal interference (potentially avoidable with barriers) Because the overall period without major storm activity is greater than that with such storms the cumulative reason for overall outages can be largely attributed to internal system failures

from the County the designation of trees and plant growth as a public nuisance under certain circumstances

Specific concerns (both for and against Pepco s tree trimming) have also arisen over tree trimming along the right ofway of rustic roads (see copy27-31) On June 9 2011 Pepco implemented a suspension of trimming trees along rustic roads and arranged a meeting on June 30 2011 which included representatives from Pepco Montgomery Countryside Alliance (MCA) M-NCPPC the Agricultural Advisory Committee and the Rustic Roads Advisory Committee Comments from the Montgomery County Farm Bureaus President and Vice President are attached on copy27-29

To ensure a comprehensive discussion of the tree trimming issue the TampE Committee has assembled a panel for each ofthree major discussion topics as noted below In addition Council staff expects other Executive officials staff and interested parties to be present at the meeting and available to discuss these topics as well

Topic 1 Current laws standards and practices bull Brett Linkletter Tree Maintenance Manager Montgomery County Department of

Transportation bull Tod Erickson Urban and Community Forester Maryland Department ofNatural Resources

Topic 2 Pepcos tree trimming efforts to date and suggestions for legislative changes bull Pepco officials

Topic 3 Community Concerns and Best Practices bull Jim Woodworth Director of Tree Planting Casey Trees bull Caren Madsen Chair Conservation Montgomery Board ofDirectors bull Caroline Taylor Executive Director Montgomery Countryside Alliance bull Dr Lonnie Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Attachments KMLflevchenkodepenergy issuespepco issuestampe pepco tree trimming 7 18 J ldoc

-2shy

Page 1 of2 j

---shy-----=---~J 111c(middot

~ Guthrie Lynn 063804 t l ___~bull_____bull__ 1___1 -shy

From cwashingtonjrpepcocom

Sent Friday July 01 2011 529 PM

To Andrewss Office Councilmember Berliners Office CouncilmemberElrichs Office Council member Ervins Office Council member Flqr~Ap- Pfflp~ Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Riemers Office Councilmem9sectriJ~~~Ih~r~~pounCilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Montgomery County CouilcilmiddotV_ I

Subject Follow-up Information from the June 20 Meeting

Montgomery County Councilmembers

In advance of the tree trimming discussion scheduled before the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment Committee (T ampE) for July 18 I am writing to follow up on the questions you raised about the nuisance tree concept Pepco proposed to address the challenge posed by offright-of-way trees In addition you will find attached additional information you requested during our June 20 discussion including

bull Information on the companys Reliability Enhancement Plan investments bull Information on an additional major infrastructure investment the Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway and bull A chart that compares outage duration and frequency at different quartiles of service

Not included is the heat map that graphically represents Pepcos system capacity across its service territory Pepcos System Planning team is finalizing the 2011 version ofthat document and I will forward it to you once it is c01J1pleted

What challenges are you facing when trying to trim trees in Montgomery County Since September oflast year Pepco has trimmed over 1800 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

Does Pepco have greater authority to trim trees on private property in other jurisdictions Pepco is particularly concerned about the number of private property refusals we have encountered in Montgomery County because off right-of-way trees have been a major cause of outages during recent major storms Currently Pepco does not have a recourse when residents refuse to allow the company to trim trees on private property in Montgomery County While the company does not have any greater authority in Prince Georges County or the District of Columbia Montgomery County residents have proven more reluctant to allow the company to implement its enhanced tree trimming program

How does Pepco propose to address the challenge of off right-of-way trees in Montgomery County State and local governments and utilities around the country have addressed the challenge of private tree maintenance in a number of ways For example in some states like California residents grant utilities the authority to trim private trees as a condition of electric service In a local example Salisbury MD shy

7512011

Page 2 of2

served by PHI utility Delmarva Power - requires property owners to trim any nuisance tree or plant growth or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets sidewalks street lighting or City utilitieslgt

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to discussing this concept with you and your colleagues on July 18

Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions and have a safe and happy Independence Day weekend

Charles

Charles L Washington Jr Senior Public Affairs Manager Maryland State Relations PEPCO amp Delmarva Power

202-872-2132 (Office) 202-872-2032 (Fax) 301-261-1576 (Annapolis)

This Email message and any attachment may contain information that is proprietary legally privileged confid~ntial andor subject to copyright belonging to Pepco Holdings Inc or its affiliates (PHI) This Email is intended solely for the use ofthe person(s) to which it is addressed If you are not an intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this Email to the intended recipient(s) you are hereby notified that any dissemination distribution or copying of this Email is strictly prohibited If you have received this message in error please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete this Email and any copies PHI policies expressly prohibit employees from making defamatory or offensive statements and infringing any copyright or any other legal right by Email communication PHI will not accept any liability in respect of such communications

752011

middotMAPP-~ 1amp III MID-ATUNTIC POWER PATHWAY

wwwpowerpathwaycQn1

Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway Overview

Much of the East Coast relies on a congested power system that cant meet rising demand without significant upgrades As per a report on the US energy infrastructure electricity demand has increased by about 25 percent since 1990 while construction of transmission facilities decreased by about 30 percent Meanwhile the demand for power in this region is projected to increase by nearly 20 percent over the next i 0 years

As a result of this increasing demand for power the existing transmission system in the region will not be able to keep up in the years ahead Experts like the Us Department of Energy have said that building new transmission will help address this problem

The MAPP project is a transmission line that would significantly increase the regions ability to transport power Local utilities and electric cooperatives rely on this transmission system to keep the lights on for their customers The MAPP line will bring reliable and more economical power to the region

When you combine this improved ability to transport energy with a stronger focus on energy conservation and development of new clean-air power sources like wind and solar the region will be well positioned to meet the energy challenges in its future

The Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway will connect numerous points on the grid According to a study completed by the US Department of Energys (DOE) National Renewable Energy

Dever

lVarltingon DC Burches Georgetown

Possum Point ~- 1 Indian~ iII Chalk bullbullbullbull bull

Point ~_ _ Cambridge ~ bullbull ~ bullbull~ RIver

ltgt North Anna

ca~ Vienna

Cliffs Salisbury

_ MAPP AC Power

u MAPP DC Power

Existing AC Line

(Jgt Nuclear Generation

Fossil Generation

Substation

TheMt-E~Ii~~~willbeil approxlrnately69 miles Ilnesand83 miles of DC

bull r bull -~ -~ ~~

The DC POrtion cif the line o j miles in CCllvertCountyIA~I~ I

39 miles underWater (across

Laboratory (NREL) in early 2010 Whether were talking about using land-based wind in the Midwest offshore wind in the East or any combination of wind power resources any plausible scenario requires transmission infrastructure upgrades and we need to start planning for that immediately

ASCE Report httpJwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgfact-sheetienergy

PJM Load Forecast Report January 201 0

13 miles in Dorchester County Ma~yland 7 miles in Wicomico County Maryland o 21 miles in Sussex County Delaware

bull The AC portion of the line will consist of o 30 miles in Charles County Maryland a 24 miles in Prince Georges County Maryland o 9 miles in Calvert County Maryland 6 miles in Sussex County Delaware

bull ACiDC converters will be located inCalvert Wicomico and Sussex Counties

bull A majority ofthe line will be built on oradjacentto existing transmission lines

MAPP has a target completion date of 2015

agency approved and permitted route

Inc1V

~dcmotvo J4I power

Project Overview 110810

----- ------ -------

Pepco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 bull camp~

~ ~ 1 I ~ ~

~ ~ 1 q ~q lt ~ 11 -a 16 vb gt ~ ~ ~ bull C gt f E b ~ $i 0 li I

LocallOn Feeder LocatlOnISulldlvlSlon 41Jj ~ - ltif o~ -1Jj~ 6 ~ Statusmiddot middotTmelmemiddot ~ ~ J ~ 1Jj~ b 0 gt ~ ~l ~E Ji 0 lt~

~ J1~ -a sect j ~i q J - ~ J1

lt I bull )1( ~ ~ ~l 1lt bull Be~t4i1 __ 69119 ___ Beverly Farms HuntingliillPlllacRockville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~eIl5Mill_ _____ 34978 Twinbrook -- Montgomery county X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~ 69180 Bevrly Farms Potomac Rockville Montgomery County X 10 Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 _______ Blls Mill ~ Beverly Farms Hunting Hill Rockville Montgomery county X ____ ---- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

B tI d 14834 Genralarea between Old Georgetown Rd and Chellon Rd and M C X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 e les a East-West Highway and Cheltenham Dr Bethesda MD ontgomery ounty n on5 ruc on n ua er

f-- --shyVicinity east of Wisconsin Ave south of EastmiddotWest Highway

Bethesda 14867 Also vicinity between Wisconsin Ave and Old Georgetown Rd Montgomery County X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 north of Easl-West Highwav Bethesda MD

Bradley Hills Chevy Chase Terr Kenwood - The area bounded - --- --- - ----- - ~ --- _

Bethesda 14869 by Hampden La bull Bradley Blvd Wisconsin Ave and Arlington Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

1_____ IR~~e_sd_aMD ______ _~______ __~__ 1____ -- ---------- ---- c-- -----~--~-B Ih d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhouodlng Rdto Vendome M I C ty X Cit 41h Qu rt 2010

e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery oun amp e B ______a_er_______

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendom M t ---- C ty X Cit 4th Q rt 2010 e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery Qun omp e e ua er

r------ The Palisades Cong slonal Country Club ESTS Cabin John ----- 1--- --- ----- f- --- ----- shyBethsda 14943 Glen Echo Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Wathoundlng Rd te Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ Vendolll Dr Bethesda MD ___ _

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C ty X I E I rI 3rd Q rt 2011 e eo a Dr Belhesda MD _ Major MC SAtFI contriilutlon on gomery oun n ng nee ng ua er

Woodburn Memmack Park KenWOOd Park - General -r~-of --- ----- ---- shy

Bethbullbullda 14944 MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Brickyard Rd Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

_t____-IB_ethesdaMD ------ ------ r-- -----shyB th d 14945 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Duvall Dr and adjacenl M t co ty X Cit 1 t Q rt 2011

e es a streets in Bethesda) MD on gomery un omp e e s ua er

Gle~ Echo Hgls Sumner Westhaven Wetgate Glen Cove ---- -- r--- ------Belhesda 14945 Brookdale Westwood Shopping Centermiddot Massachusetts Ave Montgomery County X Complete 1t Quarter 2011

from Avalon Dr 10 Duvall Dr and adjacenttreet In Bethesda MD ----- --- f-- -------- ----- ----Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and Wilson La and along

Bethesda 14948 Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley BlvAlso along Bradley Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brlle Rd Bethesa MD

_ ----------------- _ ------ -- --- ---- ---------- ------ --- shy

Wilson Knolls Oakwood Knolls Locust Ridge Landon Wood English Vii Bradley Hillsmiddot Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and

Belhesda 14948 Wilson La and along Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley Blvd Monlgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 Also along Bradley Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brite Rd

_ __Belllsda~_~__ __ Springlleld bull Vlclnltv of Ridgefield Rd between River Rd and

Belhesda 14949 Kirkwood Dr and River Rd between Brookside Dr and Western Montgomery county X Complete 1st Quarter 2011 _____ __ ___ Ave Bethesda MD ___

General vlclnily of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradley

Bethesda 14950 Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr to Hiliandale Rd and Chevy Monl ornery Count X Com lete 1st Quarter 2011 Chase Blvd from Hllandale Rd to WisconSin Ave Bethesda gyp

MD _________ ____ _ ______ ______

Generailliclnltv of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradlev Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr 10 Hiliandale Rd and Chevy

Bethesda 14950 Chase Blvd from Hillandale Rd to Wisconsin Ave Belhesda Montgomery County X In Englneerlng 3rd Quarter 2011 I

MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution

A of May 2 2011

Pellco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --shy r----shy - bullbull

bull gt- -

~ 1 I bullbullbullbull~o ~ ftt

) ilt~ shyJ ~~ If J~ fshy lt ~ f

Feeder Location I Subdivision I I t b~ tjt s

Location

~~g ~ I l If 0 tsect cf 91 Status Tlmelinll

c -shy - 111 )0

i I~ ~I l~f amp (1f rsect ~ tsect middot~ft

~ cg- f ~ tj Q

gtlt igtf It ti bull

-General vicinity of River Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield

Bethesda 14951 Rd Brookede Dr Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Bethesda MD

---shy -Westwood Kenwood - Generat vicinity of River Rd from ~--

Bethesda 14951 Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeside Dr Chamberlain Monlgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__-shy _-shy Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD -----shy r-shy -shy -

Glen Echo Hgts Potomac Palisade Park Washington Waldorf _ Belhesda 14952 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Sangamore Dr and Rive Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Rd between Buller Rd and Ridgefield Rd Belilesda MD -~- ~ -shy ~-- --shy

General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree Bethesda 15106 Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

----shy -shy -I----Longwood Bradley lIIanor Tuscullun Bradley Hills Grove

Bethesda 15106 Orumaldry Green Tree Manor Siratton Wood Fernwood shyMontgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree

Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD --shy -shy -shy ---shy r-shy -----shy ------shy 1---shy --

McCauley Park Kentdale Ests Bradley Park Wet Bethesda Bethesda 15108 Park Burning Tree VaUey Cohasset- Vicinity of Kent_dale Dr Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

between Bradley Blvd and Sorrel Ave 8ethesda MD ~--- ----shy -~-- -shy ----shy -+---- --shy --shy --shy -----------~ -------shy

General vlclnily of Arrowood Rd from Arrowood CI to Burdette Rd Hillmead Rd from Burdette Rd to Bradley Blvd Bradley

Bethesda 15110 Blvd from HIUmead Rd to Glenwood Rd Woodhaven Blvd fran Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Bradley Blvd to Hawthome Rd Bethesd MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution1----_------ -shy --~------ ----shy --shy shy --shy -~-- --shy -~- -~-- -~-- -------Ro~ Hill Est Burning Tree Ets Stonellurst Center Seven locks Hills Carderrock Springs Evergreen Cabin John Park -

Bethesda 15111 General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd between Bradley Blvd and Montgomery County X InConstruction 2nd Quarter 2011 MacArthur Blvd and River Rd between Fans Rd and Fenway

I---shy -_shy --shy -~-Dr Betneda MD

----shy - - 1---shyWildwood Hills Knollwood Windsor Hills Bells Mill Vii BeUs

--shy 1--shy --shy ~i--

Bethesda 15115 Mill Springs - General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd Democracy Montgomery County ilt Complete lsi Quarter 2011

r--- Blvd Bells Mill Rd Bethesda MD -shy --shy ---shy ~ ---~ ---

Edgemoor Bradley Hills - Vicinities of Arlington Rd between Betned 15144 Moorland La and Elm St Wilson La between Corden Ave and Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Aberdeen Rd and Apple Ridge Rd at Custer Rd Bethesda MD

I---shy --shy --shy ---shy I--shy ---shy -shy ----_-shyVicinity of Auburn Norfolk and Rugby Avenues between

Bethesda 15145 Georgetown Road and Wisconsin Avenue and icinity of Wisconsin Avenue between Rugby Avenue and Pooks Hill Road

Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---Bethesda MD

--~ --Icomplete~hes~ i5793shy Pooks Hill Apartment - Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County X 1st Quarter 2011-shy

Vicinity of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Bethesua 1579l Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hltl Road Monlgomery County X In Engineering lrd Qu arter 2011

---~----~-

Bethesda MDbullbull Major MC SAIFI contribution ---IcornpletoBethesda 15797 S-cred Heart Schoolmiddot Pooks HIli Road Montgomery County X 4th Quarter 2010

-=--~-~~-

Bethesda 34013 Westmoreland Oliver 51 Montgomery Counly X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Wesllake Dr 10 Old

~_=1M G~_ M O Goo_ m C C _ bullbull 0 X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Executive Boulevard Bethesda MO -shy shy -----~--r--------~ shy ---

VIcinity of Seven Locks Rd between Tuckerman La and Belnsua 14082 Gainborough Rd Also Tuckerman La between Galnsborough Montgomery Counly X In Engineering 3rd

Rd and Old Georgetown Rd Bethesda MO ~----- ----shy ---~-- ------~-

to

~f A of May 2 2011

Pep~Q Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011

Location Feeder

1---Belhesda

Bethesda

~he~~ Belhesda

IKenwod Pk__ IBelhesdo MDf-----shyI ------~

15793

I selhesda MD 14950

I

I-s~~ -~-F------115153 eveuy arms I

B I F-~ ---)15153 ~-r-y-a-r~-s---

Beverly Farms 15162

~ ___ ~ _~ ~+ ~_ __

Beverly Farms 15162

Che Chas 14271 vy t--- shyChevy Chase 14271

Che Chase 14896 vy

I

IChevy Chase MO 14271

F ~

Location t Suhdlvision Jurisdiction

_ Monlgomery County

Monlgomery County

Vlclnily of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County Sethesda MD General viclnily-of-=G-oc-ldc-s7b-o-ro--=RdCf=-ro-m---Nc-e-wb-c-u-m--=0-r-I-o-=S=-r-dley

Blvd Bradley Blvd~ from Brlle Or to HiIIndale Rd and Chevy Montgomery CountyChase Blvd from Hlilandale Rd 10 Wisconsin Ave Bethesda

I~nity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road -- ~M~--I- ~ C I Rockville MD on gomery oun y

Vicinity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road M I Roclltv_III__M_D_ On gomery oun Vicinity of Falls Rd between West Ritchie Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Fails ~Rdlo Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

IP-ot--o-rn-a_c-M=-D-c--c----__-c----=---=-__---__~__---~ Vicinity of Falls Rd between Wesl Rilchle Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Falls Rd 10 Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

potorna~M~D~_-----~-=------~--~--__-----+--Vicinity of Montgomery Hills Park Areamiddot Montgomery Street from Fraser A venue to Srookvllle Road Montgomery County Vicinity of lyttonsvlUe Rd between Brookeville Rd and Grubb Rd and Grubb Rd between EaslmiddotWesl Highway and Welern Montgomery County Ave Chevy Chase MO

ChevY Chase Section 3middot along Conneclicul Avenue from Chevy Mont orne County Chase Circle to Bradley lane g ry Vicinity of lyttonsville Rd between BrookeVille Rd and Grubb -j--~~~----------I--~~ Rd and Grubb Rd between EastmiddotWest Highway and Western Montjom ry County

tMMontgomery County

Montgomery County

Monlgomery County

I Montgomery County

Briggs Road and Camella Drive General Vicinity of Randolph Rd from New Hampshire Ave 10 Mlddlevale lane and Briggs RdlMonlgomery County Frorn Mlddlevale lane 10 Hathaway Dr Whoaton MD

b Ave Chce=VY7-Cih=a-seMdeg7middot=---=---c---c--~___~~~svi- 14~ Fairview Estates I Randolph Rd EO New Hampshire AJe~ Colesville 14439 Paint Branch Eslales I Randolph Rd SlO Falnand Rd

Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Fairland Colesville 14493 Rd and Fairland Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd

__ iFalriand MO

Gene~al vicinity wesl of Old Georgetown Rd between Wilson laIMonlgOmery County Colesvill 14866 and Singleton Dr Bethesda MObull Major MC SAIFI conlributlon

General vicinity of New Hampshire Ave from Shaw Ave to 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New~

Hampshire Ave Colesville MD

General vicinity of New Hampshire Avo from Shaw Ave to Colesville 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New

Hampshire Ave Colesville MObull Major MC SAIFI contribution

X

~ fPl

t~ ltshy

~ Ii

fit ~~ t ~ ilo

Igtj 1

~ ~ e

rlgt ~

II ~if ~p

e~ 11i~~

Q~ ~Q

~amp g~ ~-

~ ~I iir ~

It ~fIt ~ Igtj

f ~o

ltJ ~

J

-------+--~ -+shy --+-- +-- ---t-X

-R~ J(1ltshyl ltr~ ~ q ~~

In Engineering

In Engineering

I Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

lTd Quarter 2011

-=-I~-~=tnsectontructlon ~__~12~~er_2~ __~ X

x

x

~---+-P---+ -C--ty-----+-shy 1--x- +shy------11-------l-- shy

x

r-shyX

~~ - ~---~~

1__ ~~~ ~_~ ~4~-~ ---~P~--1 --~ ~~ --r shyX

X ~------~--~-------l--

-+shy -j- shy --+shyX

=-o--nt--g-om-e-ry-Co-u-n7ty------t-shy X X

X

--t shy ~-~

X

- ~-----i ~---+---~

X

2nd Quaner 2011

In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

in Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

+--shy I~- ~~----

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 t--shy --- shy

Quarter 2011

In Conslructlon 3rd Quarter 2011

In Progress 3rd Quarter 2011

+--------1 ----I In Conslruction

--+-shyIn Construction

Complete

Complete

In Engineering

Complete

2nd Quaner 2011

t--- shy2nd Quaner 2011

2nd Quaner 2011

4th Quarter 2010

3rd Quaner 2011

4th Quaner 2010

------+--- ~--------1r-------

X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--+---t--~ +~----

X In Engineering 41h Quarter 2011

~--1~ ~ ___ ~

tmiddot

~~~ As or May 2 2011

_--_~ ~c ~_-c-~------_~~~_~-----~p~e=lpc~O=R=e=lia=biI=ity==E=n=h=an==ce=mentpla-20=11------r---r--------r---rcc----c------------c-c-----~

Location

r-

Darnestown

I---Darnestown

Darnestown

Ia~

Feeder Looationl Subdivision Timeline-1ls~tJJs ~~~~~~0

fftS ~~ II

Tree Trimming installation of ACR and SWitCh ana fleJa Inspection In the vicinity of Springfield Popular Hill Esworthy15230 3rd Quarter 2011Monlgomery County x In Engineering and White Rock Roads

r----~ ~~~~~

Ancienl Oak North I Colton lane URD cable replacemenllcuring Mont Orne Count )( Com lete 41h Quarter 2010 15238 _--i~n Ihe vicinity of coll lane g ry y ~ ~~

15286 Vicinity of HI Wood Rd Montgomery County X In Englneerlng3rd Quarter 2011

Darnestown MO 15237 VTiciknilyFof DtaRmesdtoDwn RdmiddottbetweMeOn Ancienl Oak Drive and Montgomery Counly)( In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 1_ ur ey 00 oa I ames own bull __

Viclnily of Darnestown Rd between Ancienl Oak Drive and M I C t 3rd Quaner 2011OamesIown MD 15231 T FIR dOl MD on gomery oun y CompleleLr----- urfey o~~ ~~~es~~l bull I 15254 Vicinily of Muncasler Mill Rd from Laytonsville Rdlo Redland Monl ome CountDerwoord X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 I_~__ Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Winters Run ~ _ ~ ~-g _ ry y

____ ~ ~492 Countryside I Briggs Chaney Rd WIO Old Columbia Pik~e___ Montgomery Counly Complele Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Falnand

Fainand MD 14493 Rd and Falnand Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd Montgomery Counly X lin Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

I--~~ ~~ Fairtnd~_~ -[-----I-----+---__t_Woodside Parkway and Dale Drivemiddot Vicinity of Universily Blvd

IFour Corners 14452 at Indian Spring Dr and ColeSville Rd between Brewsler Ave Montgomery County X lin Engineering 41h Quarter 2011 nd Spring St Sliver Spring MD -+--t I---t-------

Gaithersburg I14063 Vicinity of Quince OrChard Blvd al Sebastian Blvd and W Montgomery County x Complele ~ Diamond Ave al Muddy Branch Rd Galthersburg MD ~- -~ ------t- shy--+shyM~ddy-Brnch Rd nortll of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy

Gaithersburg 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of IMonlgomery Counly X IComplete i---- fieldS R~~lthersburg MDmiddot ____L

~------t~-----I---l-

General vlclnlly of Quince Orchard Rd Pin Oak Or ChestnutGaithersburg 14070 Montgomery Counly X CompleteSt Waler St and Cedar Ave Gaithersburg MD

1 land Place I Monlgomery Village Montgomery County _X__~ lsi Quarter 2011 -~+----l= ~Iete General vicinity of Research Blvd from Darnestown Rd to Mont ome CountGaithersburg 15067 x In Construction bull 2nd Quarter 2011 ~___ middotrhltlrGrOVeRdGalthe~bUrgMD ___ 9 ry y 1__ -+-- ~~-~middotI----+--

Gallllersbur 115235 General Vicinity or Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suyanand Mont ome Count 4th Quarter 2010 x CompleleI--- ~~__g_ ~--+--- Rd and Partnershp Rd Suganand MD ~ __~~ g ry y +------+---------~ l---~--+--~__+-

Vicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and Gailhersburg 41h Quarter 2010

Cenlerway ~Rd-Gait~h_ers_b_u~rg~_M_D___________-j

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County Complete

----+ ~ ------1------1~-~~ ~ 1shyVicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and

Gallhersburg 3rd Quarter 2011 Centerway Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Major MC SAIFI contribution

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County )( In Engineering

r- --- shyG it b 15256 Vicinity of Laytonsville Rd Warfield Rd and Goshen Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

a lers urg ~~~___~ ~ __ ~ 13-theigturg MD ~~ ~ _

GI b 15256 WarfieldRdfromWoodfieldRdtoAddnbroo~wayandGoshenM nt C ty I C I Ii 2 dQ rt 2011 a ers urg Rd from Warfield Rd 10 Brink Rd 0 gomery oun nons rue on n ua er

~~~ 1~5284 Westleigh I Duri Mill Rd EO Quince Orchard Rd --Montgomery County -----~__=_r--x-- -~ Completelt Quart2011 Muddy Branch Roadmiddot Vicinity 01 Shady Grove Rd between

Ufg 15834 iR h C rt d G Ith Rd R ~III MD Montgomery County In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 es~a-~_ ou an a er I OCnll e 1___ _~_ _______1

15834 Vicinity of Shady Grove Rd between Research Court and Galthe M t C I C let mg Rd Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e1

~-~ ---- --- ~~~-r__~----~-~~ r~

mg 15235 General vicinity of Blackrock Rd Dameslown Rd Sugarland County x lin engineering 4th QUarter 2011 _ ~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suyanand MD t--------~~ t------~ -+ ~+-_~

GmiddotII b ~ ~~~523S Ge eral vicinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Sugarland M t C I X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 ers Ufg ~~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suganand MD on gomery oun y 1 t--- shy

G I b 15235 General vcinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suganand M I C t 3rd Quarter 2011X In Planningt lers urg Rd and Partnership Rd Suoanand MD on gomery oun y

(J As of May 2 2011

---- --- -- - ---- ------ -- - --- --- ------- ---- ---- ---- ------- ---

------- ------ -----

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 ------- ---- bullbull J _ bull c bull

_ _ ~ ~ c If 0 f I

I if~ sect~ ~ c-V Imiddot - I II b - ofltgt t l

Location Feeder Location (Subdivision ~Iti -f I oc- rsectc- csect sgt $ Statu Timeline c- c- gt b i 0 ~ ~t Cf)t I~ J1 ~~

~l~ rsectio ff~ lt bullbullbullbullbullbull Q ~ -= f t-i Q

I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ _c___ I plusmn bull tv ~___ _ -

Vicinity of Quince Orchard Blvd at Sebastian Blvd and W ---~-------f Gaithersburg 14063 Diamond Ave at Muddy Branch Rd Gaithersburg MDmiddot West Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ___ _ ____ Riding and[)iamond Sq _ ____ __ _____ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ ____ __ _

Gaithersburg 14069 General vicinltv of Quince Orchard Rd between Longdraft Rd M t C I X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 and Muddy Branch Park Galthe burg MD West Riding II on gomery Dun y nons rue on n ua er

---- ------------ ------ -- --- -- ---- --- -+----------1 Gaithersburg 14886 ~e~r1 ~Icinit~~f Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

1----_________ a___ eurllL -- ------___ ~--- ----__ ------f------------l ------------1 Germanlown 14886 ~~~~~~~~t~~ Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---- --~ ------- --- ----- --------- --- ------1 Germanlown 15238 VGICllnhitY degbf RlfflMefoOrdMRdj degMame essAtolFWn Rdmiddot bundtiJones lane Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

tr----------- _-5 urg_ - aor connon 1-----_ ---- ---~- _ -- ---------1--1----------1-------------1 Germantown 15240 ~~n~y of Citopper~ betwen Mateney Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

~~nown bull _____ ______ _________ ______ _________ _______-

Germantown 115240 ~~in~ty of CI~pper~ between Matenev Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Planning 4th Quarter 2011 ~~~r~~~ ~~wn ~~ _ _ _________-1

Oakland Road and Brookland Drive - General vicinity of River Glen Echo 14951 Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeslde Dr Montgomery County X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD ---- 1---------- --- --1---- ----1------- -----1-------- shy

Glen Echo 1476814769 SurnnerViliage I Sentinel Dr Eta Sangmore Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

Glen Echo 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C t X J PI I 3rd Q rt 2011 Bethesda MD Dr Bethesda MD on gomery Dun y nann ng ua er

r=ccc=c - - ----- -- 1----------Kensinglon 14440 nr~1 Vi~lniy of~~ward Ave Strthmore Ave and Montrose Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

__e~ng_on ~---- ______ ______ 1_-----shyGeneral vicinity of Bel-Pre Rd from Connecticut Ave to layhltl

Layhill MD Rd layhill from Bel-Pre Rd to Cherter Mill Rd and Argyle Club Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd from layhdl Rd to longmead Crossing and Nonnandy

---- CrossingOrlayhlllMD _____ r---- ----- ------ --c---- --- ------- --------Vlcinlly of Olney-laytonsville Rd between Stanbrook la and

Laytonsville 15901 Griffith Rd Griffith Rd between OIneYmiddotLaytonsvilie Rd and Montgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 ~- Dam-scus Rd Laytonsville MD ~_ _+__ __1----_ ______________+ l ytlI 15902 Vlcinily of Brookville RdMunc bullbullter Rd and Muncaster Mill M tel X I PI 3rd Q rt 2011

bull oosv e Rdbetween Pepco 230kV RIW and Air Park Rd on gomery oun I n anmng u er -- -- ------- - ----- - ---- --- ---- ---1----- ---- ------ -- ----- --- 1------ --------+--------shy

layt lie 15903 Vicinity of Fleldcrest Rd and Woodfield Rd between Olney M t C t X I PI 3rd Q rter 2011 onVI laytonsville Rd and Brenloll Dr Gaithersburg MO on gomery oun y n nmng u

-- -------- --- c--- --- --- --- -------- lytonsville 15904 ~~~~~v~e~r~~vllle Rd between Zion Rd and Georgia Ave Monlgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

-~

Vicinity of Olney laytonSville Road Dorsey Road WalfJeld

laytonsville 15905 Road Woodfield Road and Brink Road between Riggs Road ami Monlgom Count X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 Gaithersburg Road and RIggs Road between Oinev laylonsvlUe ry y Road and Ripplemead Drive laytonsville MD

--+-----+-- -- -~ --- ----- --- --------- shyII 1506 Vicinity of Zion Rd from Gregg Rd Soulh to Olney laytonsville M t C t X I PI I 3 d Q rt 011Laytonsv e bull Rd (RIl0B) to Olney Mill Rd on gomery oun y nann ng r ua er lt

---- -1----- --- - GeneraiVijnityof Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to EaslWes 1--------1------ - - --- ------------1 linden 14264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East Montgomery Counll( X In Ptanning 3rd Quarter 2011

Wesl Highway Sliver Spring MD MiieURd---- 6914------- Willi Oak Falrtand Montgomery County ------i-~)(-I_- --- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Metzerolt Rd --- 6913~- Fairland and Cores ville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011=----_ - -- -- ---shyMontgomery 14379 Vicinity of Arrowhead Rd Goshen Rd Snoufte School Rd Mont orne Count X In En Ineertn 4th Quarter 2011 VlIage Wightman Rd and Warfield Rd GaIthersburg MD 9 ry Y ____ ____ 9 g __

reg 5 As of May 2 2011

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 2: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

from the County the designation of trees and plant growth as a public nuisance under certain circumstances

Specific concerns (both for and against Pepco s tree trimming) have also arisen over tree trimming along the right ofway of rustic roads (see copy27-31) On June 9 2011 Pepco implemented a suspension of trimming trees along rustic roads and arranged a meeting on June 30 2011 which included representatives from Pepco Montgomery Countryside Alliance (MCA) M-NCPPC the Agricultural Advisory Committee and the Rustic Roads Advisory Committee Comments from the Montgomery County Farm Bureaus President and Vice President are attached on copy27-29

To ensure a comprehensive discussion of the tree trimming issue the TampE Committee has assembled a panel for each ofthree major discussion topics as noted below In addition Council staff expects other Executive officials staff and interested parties to be present at the meeting and available to discuss these topics as well

Topic 1 Current laws standards and practices bull Brett Linkletter Tree Maintenance Manager Montgomery County Department of

Transportation bull Tod Erickson Urban and Community Forester Maryland Department ofNatural Resources

Topic 2 Pepcos tree trimming efforts to date and suggestions for legislative changes bull Pepco officials

Topic 3 Community Concerns and Best Practices bull Jim Woodworth Director of Tree Planting Casey Trees bull Caren Madsen Chair Conservation Montgomery Board ofDirectors bull Caroline Taylor Executive Director Montgomery Countryside Alliance bull Dr Lonnie Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Attachments KMLflevchenkodepenergy issuespepco issuestampe pepco tree trimming 7 18 J ldoc

-2shy

Page 1 of2 j

---shy-----=---~J 111c(middot

~ Guthrie Lynn 063804 t l ___~bull_____bull__ 1___1 -shy

From cwashingtonjrpepcocom

Sent Friday July 01 2011 529 PM

To Andrewss Office Councilmember Berliners Office CouncilmemberElrichs Office Council member Ervins Office Council member Flqr~Ap- Pfflp~ Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Riemers Office Councilmem9sectriJ~~~Ih~r~~pounCilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Montgomery County CouilcilmiddotV_ I

Subject Follow-up Information from the June 20 Meeting

Montgomery County Councilmembers

In advance of the tree trimming discussion scheduled before the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment Committee (T ampE) for July 18 I am writing to follow up on the questions you raised about the nuisance tree concept Pepco proposed to address the challenge posed by offright-of-way trees In addition you will find attached additional information you requested during our June 20 discussion including

bull Information on the companys Reliability Enhancement Plan investments bull Information on an additional major infrastructure investment the Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway and bull A chart that compares outage duration and frequency at different quartiles of service

Not included is the heat map that graphically represents Pepcos system capacity across its service territory Pepcos System Planning team is finalizing the 2011 version ofthat document and I will forward it to you once it is c01J1pleted

What challenges are you facing when trying to trim trees in Montgomery County Since September oflast year Pepco has trimmed over 1800 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

Does Pepco have greater authority to trim trees on private property in other jurisdictions Pepco is particularly concerned about the number of private property refusals we have encountered in Montgomery County because off right-of-way trees have been a major cause of outages during recent major storms Currently Pepco does not have a recourse when residents refuse to allow the company to trim trees on private property in Montgomery County While the company does not have any greater authority in Prince Georges County or the District of Columbia Montgomery County residents have proven more reluctant to allow the company to implement its enhanced tree trimming program

How does Pepco propose to address the challenge of off right-of-way trees in Montgomery County State and local governments and utilities around the country have addressed the challenge of private tree maintenance in a number of ways For example in some states like California residents grant utilities the authority to trim private trees as a condition of electric service In a local example Salisbury MD shy

7512011

Page 2 of2

served by PHI utility Delmarva Power - requires property owners to trim any nuisance tree or plant growth or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets sidewalks street lighting or City utilitieslgt

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to discussing this concept with you and your colleagues on July 18

Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions and have a safe and happy Independence Day weekend

Charles

Charles L Washington Jr Senior Public Affairs Manager Maryland State Relations PEPCO amp Delmarva Power

202-872-2132 (Office) 202-872-2032 (Fax) 301-261-1576 (Annapolis)

This Email message and any attachment may contain information that is proprietary legally privileged confid~ntial andor subject to copyright belonging to Pepco Holdings Inc or its affiliates (PHI) This Email is intended solely for the use ofthe person(s) to which it is addressed If you are not an intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this Email to the intended recipient(s) you are hereby notified that any dissemination distribution or copying of this Email is strictly prohibited If you have received this message in error please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete this Email and any copies PHI policies expressly prohibit employees from making defamatory or offensive statements and infringing any copyright or any other legal right by Email communication PHI will not accept any liability in respect of such communications

752011

middotMAPP-~ 1amp III MID-ATUNTIC POWER PATHWAY

wwwpowerpathwaycQn1

Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway Overview

Much of the East Coast relies on a congested power system that cant meet rising demand without significant upgrades As per a report on the US energy infrastructure electricity demand has increased by about 25 percent since 1990 while construction of transmission facilities decreased by about 30 percent Meanwhile the demand for power in this region is projected to increase by nearly 20 percent over the next i 0 years

As a result of this increasing demand for power the existing transmission system in the region will not be able to keep up in the years ahead Experts like the Us Department of Energy have said that building new transmission will help address this problem

The MAPP project is a transmission line that would significantly increase the regions ability to transport power Local utilities and electric cooperatives rely on this transmission system to keep the lights on for their customers The MAPP line will bring reliable and more economical power to the region

When you combine this improved ability to transport energy with a stronger focus on energy conservation and development of new clean-air power sources like wind and solar the region will be well positioned to meet the energy challenges in its future

The Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway will connect numerous points on the grid According to a study completed by the US Department of Energys (DOE) National Renewable Energy

Dever

lVarltingon DC Burches Georgetown

Possum Point ~- 1 Indian~ iII Chalk bullbullbullbull bull

Point ~_ _ Cambridge ~ bullbull ~ bullbull~ RIver

ltgt North Anna

ca~ Vienna

Cliffs Salisbury

_ MAPP AC Power

u MAPP DC Power

Existing AC Line

(Jgt Nuclear Generation

Fossil Generation

Substation

TheMt-E~Ii~~~willbeil approxlrnately69 miles Ilnesand83 miles of DC

bull r bull -~ -~ ~~

The DC POrtion cif the line o j miles in CCllvertCountyIA~I~ I

39 miles underWater (across

Laboratory (NREL) in early 2010 Whether were talking about using land-based wind in the Midwest offshore wind in the East or any combination of wind power resources any plausible scenario requires transmission infrastructure upgrades and we need to start planning for that immediately

ASCE Report httpJwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgfact-sheetienergy

PJM Load Forecast Report January 201 0

13 miles in Dorchester County Ma~yland 7 miles in Wicomico County Maryland o 21 miles in Sussex County Delaware

bull The AC portion of the line will consist of o 30 miles in Charles County Maryland a 24 miles in Prince Georges County Maryland o 9 miles in Calvert County Maryland 6 miles in Sussex County Delaware

bull ACiDC converters will be located inCalvert Wicomico and Sussex Counties

bull A majority ofthe line will be built on oradjacentto existing transmission lines

MAPP has a target completion date of 2015

agency approved and permitted route

Inc1V

~dcmotvo J4I power

Project Overview 110810

----- ------ -------

Pepco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 bull camp~

~ ~ 1 I ~ ~

~ ~ 1 q ~q lt ~ 11 -a 16 vb gt ~ ~ ~ bull C gt f E b ~ $i 0 li I

LocallOn Feeder LocatlOnISulldlvlSlon 41Jj ~ - ltif o~ -1Jj~ 6 ~ Statusmiddot middotTmelmemiddot ~ ~ J ~ 1Jj~ b 0 gt ~ ~l ~E Ji 0 lt~

~ J1~ -a sect j ~i q J - ~ J1

lt I bull )1( ~ ~ ~l 1lt bull Be~t4i1 __ 69119 ___ Beverly Farms HuntingliillPlllacRockville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~eIl5Mill_ _____ 34978 Twinbrook -- Montgomery county X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~ 69180 Bevrly Farms Potomac Rockville Montgomery County X 10 Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 _______ Blls Mill ~ Beverly Farms Hunting Hill Rockville Montgomery county X ____ ---- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

B tI d 14834 Genralarea between Old Georgetown Rd and Chellon Rd and M C X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 e les a East-West Highway and Cheltenham Dr Bethesda MD ontgomery ounty n on5 ruc on n ua er

f-- --shyVicinity east of Wisconsin Ave south of EastmiddotWest Highway

Bethesda 14867 Also vicinity between Wisconsin Ave and Old Georgetown Rd Montgomery County X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 north of Easl-West Highwav Bethesda MD

Bradley Hills Chevy Chase Terr Kenwood - The area bounded - --- --- - ----- - ~ --- _

Bethesda 14869 by Hampden La bull Bradley Blvd Wisconsin Ave and Arlington Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

1_____ IR~~e_sd_aMD ______ _~______ __~__ 1____ -- ---------- ---- c-- -----~--~-B Ih d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhouodlng Rdto Vendome M I C ty X Cit 41h Qu rt 2010

e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery oun amp e B ______a_er_______

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendom M t ---- C ty X Cit 4th Q rt 2010 e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery Qun omp e e ua er

r------ The Palisades Cong slonal Country Club ESTS Cabin John ----- 1--- --- ----- f- --- ----- shyBethsda 14943 Glen Echo Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Wathoundlng Rd te Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ Vendolll Dr Bethesda MD ___ _

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C ty X I E I rI 3rd Q rt 2011 e eo a Dr Belhesda MD _ Major MC SAtFI contriilutlon on gomery oun n ng nee ng ua er

Woodburn Memmack Park KenWOOd Park - General -r~-of --- ----- ---- shy

Bethbullbullda 14944 MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Brickyard Rd Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

_t____-IB_ethesdaMD ------ ------ r-- -----shyB th d 14945 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Duvall Dr and adjacenl M t co ty X Cit 1 t Q rt 2011

e es a streets in Bethesda) MD on gomery un omp e e s ua er

Gle~ Echo Hgls Sumner Westhaven Wetgate Glen Cove ---- -- r--- ------Belhesda 14945 Brookdale Westwood Shopping Centermiddot Massachusetts Ave Montgomery County X Complete 1t Quarter 2011

from Avalon Dr 10 Duvall Dr and adjacenttreet In Bethesda MD ----- --- f-- -------- ----- ----Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and Wilson La and along

Bethesda 14948 Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley BlvAlso along Bradley Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brlle Rd Bethesa MD

_ ----------------- _ ------ -- --- ---- ---------- ------ --- shy

Wilson Knolls Oakwood Knolls Locust Ridge Landon Wood English Vii Bradley Hillsmiddot Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and

Belhesda 14948 Wilson La and along Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley Blvd Monlgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 Also along Bradley Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brite Rd

_ __Belllsda~_~__ __ Springlleld bull Vlclnltv of Ridgefield Rd between River Rd and

Belhesda 14949 Kirkwood Dr and River Rd between Brookside Dr and Western Montgomery county X Complete 1st Quarter 2011 _____ __ ___ Ave Bethesda MD ___

General vlclnily of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradley

Bethesda 14950 Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr to Hiliandale Rd and Chevy Monl ornery Count X Com lete 1st Quarter 2011 Chase Blvd from Hllandale Rd to WisconSin Ave Bethesda gyp

MD _________ ____ _ ______ ______

Generailliclnltv of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradlev Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr 10 Hiliandale Rd and Chevy

Bethesda 14950 Chase Blvd from Hillandale Rd to Wisconsin Ave Belhesda Montgomery County X In Englneerlng 3rd Quarter 2011 I

MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution

A of May 2 2011

Pellco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --shy r----shy - bullbull

bull gt- -

~ 1 I bullbullbullbull~o ~ ftt

) ilt~ shyJ ~~ If J~ fshy lt ~ f

Feeder Location I Subdivision I I t b~ tjt s

Location

~~g ~ I l If 0 tsect cf 91 Status Tlmelinll

c -shy - 111 )0

i I~ ~I l~f amp (1f rsect ~ tsect middot~ft

~ cg- f ~ tj Q

gtlt igtf It ti bull

-General vicinity of River Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield

Bethesda 14951 Rd Brookede Dr Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Bethesda MD

---shy -Westwood Kenwood - Generat vicinity of River Rd from ~--

Bethesda 14951 Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeside Dr Chamberlain Monlgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__-shy _-shy Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD -----shy r-shy -shy -

Glen Echo Hgts Potomac Palisade Park Washington Waldorf _ Belhesda 14952 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Sangamore Dr and Rive Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Rd between Buller Rd and Ridgefield Rd Belilesda MD -~- ~ -shy ~-- --shy

General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree Bethesda 15106 Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

----shy -shy -I----Longwood Bradley lIIanor Tuscullun Bradley Hills Grove

Bethesda 15106 Orumaldry Green Tree Manor Siratton Wood Fernwood shyMontgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree

Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD --shy -shy -shy ---shy r-shy -----shy ------shy 1---shy --

McCauley Park Kentdale Ests Bradley Park Wet Bethesda Bethesda 15108 Park Burning Tree VaUey Cohasset- Vicinity of Kent_dale Dr Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

between Bradley Blvd and Sorrel Ave 8ethesda MD ~--- ----shy -~-- -shy ----shy -+---- --shy --shy --shy -----------~ -------shy

General vlclnily of Arrowood Rd from Arrowood CI to Burdette Rd Hillmead Rd from Burdette Rd to Bradley Blvd Bradley

Bethesda 15110 Blvd from HIUmead Rd to Glenwood Rd Woodhaven Blvd fran Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Bradley Blvd to Hawthome Rd Bethesd MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution1----_------ -shy --~------ ----shy --shy shy --shy -~-- --shy -~- -~-- -~-- -------Ro~ Hill Est Burning Tree Ets Stonellurst Center Seven locks Hills Carderrock Springs Evergreen Cabin John Park -

Bethesda 15111 General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd between Bradley Blvd and Montgomery County X InConstruction 2nd Quarter 2011 MacArthur Blvd and River Rd between Fans Rd and Fenway

I---shy -_shy --shy -~-Dr Betneda MD

----shy - - 1---shyWildwood Hills Knollwood Windsor Hills Bells Mill Vii BeUs

--shy 1--shy --shy ~i--

Bethesda 15115 Mill Springs - General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd Democracy Montgomery County ilt Complete lsi Quarter 2011

r--- Blvd Bells Mill Rd Bethesda MD -shy --shy ---shy ~ ---~ ---

Edgemoor Bradley Hills - Vicinities of Arlington Rd between Betned 15144 Moorland La and Elm St Wilson La between Corden Ave and Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Aberdeen Rd and Apple Ridge Rd at Custer Rd Bethesda MD

I---shy --shy --shy ---shy I--shy ---shy -shy ----_-shyVicinity of Auburn Norfolk and Rugby Avenues between

Bethesda 15145 Georgetown Road and Wisconsin Avenue and icinity of Wisconsin Avenue between Rugby Avenue and Pooks Hill Road

Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---Bethesda MD

--~ --Icomplete~hes~ i5793shy Pooks Hill Apartment - Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County X 1st Quarter 2011-shy

Vicinity of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Bethesua 1579l Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hltl Road Monlgomery County X In Engineering lrd Qu arter 2011

---~----~-

Bethesda MDbullbull Major MC SAIFI contribution ---IcornpletoBethesda 15797 S-cred Heart Schoolmiddot Pooks HIli Road Montgomery County X 4th Quarter 2010

-=--~-~~-

Bethesda 34013 Westmoreland Oliver 51 Montgomery Counly X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Wesllake Dr 10 Old

~_=1M G~_ M O Goo_ m C C _ bullbull 0 X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Executive Boulevard Bethesda MO -shy shy -----~--r--------~ shy ---

VIcinity of Seven Locks Rd between Tuckerman La and Belnsua 14082 Gainborough Rd Also Tuckerman La between Galnsborough Montgomery Counly X In Engineering 3rd

Rd and Old Georgetown Rd Bethesda MO ~----- ----shy ---~-- ------~-

to

~f A of May 2 2011

Pep~Q Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011

Location Feeder

1---Belhesda

Bethesda

~he~~ Belhesda

IKenwod Pk__ IBelhesdo MDf-----shyI ------~

15793

I selhesda MD 14950

I

I-s~~ -~-F------115153 eveuy arms I

B I F-~ ---)15153 ~-r-y-a-r~-s---

Beverly Farms 15162

~ ___ ~ _~ ~+ ~_ __

Beverly Farms 15162

Che Chas 14271 vy t--- shyChevy Chase 14271

Che Chase 14896 vy

I

IChevy Chase MO 14271

F ~

Location t Suhdlvision Jurisdiction

_ Monlgomery County

Monlgomery County

Vlclnily of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County Sethesda MD General viclnily-of-=G-oc-ldc-s7b-o-ro--=RdCf=-ro-m---Nc-e-wb-c-u-m--=0-r-I-o-=S=-r-dley

Blvd Bradley Blvd~ from Brlle Or to HiIIndale Rd and Chevy Montgomery CountyChase Blvd from Hlilandale Rd 10 Wisconsin Ave Bethesda

I~nity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road -- ~M~--I- ~ C I Rockville MD on gomery oun y

Vicinity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road M I Roclltv_III__M_D_ On gomery oun Vicinity of Falls Rd between West Ritchie Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Fails ~Rdlo Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

IP-ot--o-rn-a_c-M=-D-c--c----__-c----=---=-__---__~__---~ Vicinity of Falls Rd between Wesl Rilchle Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Falls Rd 10 Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

potorna~M~D~_-----~-=------~--~--__-----+--Vicinity of Montgomery Hills Park Areamiddot Montgomery Street from Fraser A venue to Srookvllle Road Montgomery County Vicinity of lyttonsvlUe Rd between Brookeville Rd and Grubb Rd and Grubb Rd between EaslmiddotWesl Highway and Welern Montgomery County Ave Chevy Chase MO

ChevY Chase Section 3middot along Conneclicul Avenue from Chevy Mont orne County Chase Circle to Bradley lane g ry Vicinity of lyttonsville Rd between BrookeVille Rd and Grubb -j--~~~----------I--~~ Rd and Grubb Rd between EastmiddotWest Highway and Western Montjom ry County

tMMontgomery County

Montgomery County

Monlgomery County

I Montgomery County

Briggs Road and Camella Drive General Vicinity of Randolph Rd from New Hampshire Ave 10 Mlddlevale lane and Briggs RdlMonlgomery County Frorn Mlddlevale lane 10 Hathaway Dr Whoaton MD

b Ave Chce=VY7-Cih=a-seMdeg7middot=---=---c---c--~___~~~svi- 14~ Fairview Estates I Randolph Rd EO New Hampshire AJe~ Colesville 14439 Paint Branch Eslales I Randolph Rd SlO Falnand Rd

Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Fairland Colesville 14493 Rd and Fairland Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd

__ iFalriand MO

Gene~al vicinity wesl of Old Georgetown Rd between Wilson laIMonlgOmery County Colesvill 14866 and Singleton Dr Bethesda MObull Major MC SAIFI conlributlon

General vicinity of New Hampshire Ave from Shaw Ave to 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New~

Hampshire Ave Colesville MD

General vicinity of New Hampshire Avo from Shaw Ave to Colesville 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New

Hampshire Ave Colesville MObull Major MC SAIFI contribution

X

~ fPl

t~ ltshy

~ Ii

fit ~~ t ~ ilo

Igtj 1

~ ~ e

rlgt ~

II ~if ~p

e~ 11i~~

Q~ ~Q

~amp g~ ~-

~ ~I iir ~

It ~fIt ~ Igtj

f ~o

ltJ ~

J

-------+--~ -+shy --+-- +-- ---t-X

-R~ J(1ltshyl ltr~ ~ q ~~

In Engineering

In Engineering

I Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

lTd Quarter 2011

-=-I~-~=tnsectontructlon ~__~12~~er_2~ __~ X

x

x

~---+-P---+ -C--ty-----+-shy 1--x- +shy------11-------l-- shy

x

r-shyX

~~ - ~---~~

1__ ~~~ ~_~ ~4~-~ ---~P~--1 --~ ~~ --r shyX

X ~------~--~-------l--

-+shy -j- shy --+shyX

=-o--nt--g-om-e-ry-Co-u-n7ty------t-shy X X

X

--t shy ~-~

X

- ~-----i ~---+---~

X

2nd Quaner 2011

In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

in Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

+--shy I~- ~~----

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 t--shy --- shy

Quarter 2011

In Conslructlon 3rd Quarter 2011

In Progress 3rd Quarter 2011

+--------1 ----I In Conslruction

--+-shyIn Construction

Complete

Complete

In Engineering

Complete

2nd Quaner 2011

t--- shy2nd Quaner 2011

2nd Quaner 2011

4th Quarter 2010

3rd Quaner 2011

4th Quaner 2010

------+--- ~--------1r-------

X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--+---t--~ +~----

X In Engineering 41h Quarter 2011

~--1~ ~ ___ ~

tmiddot

~~~ As or May 2 2011

_--_~ ~c ~_-c-~------_~~~_~-----~p~e=lpc~O=R=e=lia=biI=ity==E=n=h=an==ce=mentpla-20=11------r---r--------r---rcc----c------------c-c-----~

Location

r-

Darnestown

I---Darnestown

Darnestown

Ia~

Feeder Looationl Subdivision Timeline-1ls~tJJs ~~~~~~0

fftS ~~ II

Tree Trimming installation of ACR and SWitCh ana fleJa Inspection In the vicinity of Springfield Popular Hill Esworthy15230 3rd Quarter 2011Monlgomery County x In Engineering and White Rock Roads

r----~ ~~~~~

Ancienl Oak North I Colton lane URD cable replacemenllcuring Mont Orne Count )( Com lete 41h Quarter 2010 15238 _--i~n Ihe vicinity of coll lane g ry y ~ ~~

15286 Vicinity of HI Wood Rd Montgomery County X In Englneerlng3rd Quarter 2011

Darnestown MO 15237 VTiciknilyFof DtaRmesdtoDwn RdmiddottbetweMeOn Ancienl Oak Drive and Montgomery Counly)( In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 1_ ur ey 00 oa I ames own bull __

Viclnily of Darnestown Rd between Ancienl Oak Drive and M I C t 3rd Quaner 2011OamesIown MD 15231 T FIR dOl MD on gomery oun y CompleleLr----- urfey o~~ ~~~es~~l bull I 15254 Vicinily of Muncasler Mill Rd from Laytonsville Rdlo Redland Monl ome CountDerwoord X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 I_~__ Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Winters Run ~ _ ~ ~-g _ ry y

____ ~ ~492 Countryside I Briggs Chaney Rd WIO Old Columbia Pik~e___ Montgomery Counly Complele Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Falnand

Fainand MD 14493 Rd and Falnand Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd Montgomery Counly X lin Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

I--~~ ~~ Fairtnd~_~ -[-----I-----+---__t_Woodside Parkway and Dale Drivemiddot Vicinity of Universily Blvd

IFour Corners 14452 at Indian Spring Dr and ColeSville Rd between Brewsler Ave Montgomery County X lin Engineering 41h Quarter 2011 nd Spring St Sliver Spring MD -+--t I---t-------

Gaithersburg I14063 Vicinity of Quince OrChard Blvd al Sebastian Blvd and W Montgomery County x Complele ~ Diamond Ave al Muddy Branch Rd Galthersburg MD ~- -~ ------t- shy--+shyM~ddy-Brnch Rd nortll of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy

Gaithersburg 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of IMonlgomery Counly X IComplete i---- fieldS R~~lthersburg MDmiddot ____L

~------t~-----I---l-

General vlclnlly of Quince Orchard Rd Pin Oak Or ChestnutGaithersburg 14070 Montgomery Counly X CompleteSt Waler St and Cedar Ave Gaithersburg MD

1 land Place I Monlgomery Village Montgomery County _X__~ lsi Quarter 2011 -~+----l= ~Iete General vicinity of Research Blvd from Darnestown Rd to Mont ome CountGaithersburg 15067 x In Construction bull 2nd Quarter 2011 ~___ middotrhltlrGrOVeRdGalthe~bUrgMD ___ 9 ry y 1__ -+-- ~~-~middotI----+--

Gallllersbur 115235 General Vicinity or Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suyanand Mont ome Count 4th Quarter 2010 x CompleleI--- ~~__g_ ~--+--- Rd and Partnershp Rd Suganand MD ~ __~~ g ry y +------+---------~ l---~--+--~__+-

Vicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and Gailhersburg 41h Quarter 2010

Cenlerway ~Rd-Gait~h_ers_b_u~rg~_M_D___________-j

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County Complete

----+ ~ ------1------1~-~~ ~ 1shyVicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and

Gallhersburg 3rd Quarter 2011 Centerway Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Major MC SAIFI contribution

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County )( In Engineering

r- --- shyG it b 15256 Vicinity of Laytonsville Rd Warfield Rd and Goshen Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

a lers urg ~~~___~ ~ __ ~ 13-theigturg MD ~~ ~ _

GI b 15256 WarfieldRdfromWoodfieldRdtoAddnbroo~wayandGoshenM nt C ty I C I Ii 2 dQ rt 2011 a ers urg Rd from Warfield Rd 10 Brink Rd 0 gomery oun nons rue on n ua er

~~~ 1~5284 Westleigh I Duri Mill Rd EO Quince Orchard Rd --Montgomery County -----~__=_r--x-- -~ Completelt Quart2011 Muddy Branch Roadmiddot Vicinity 01 Shady Grove Rd between

Ufg 15834 iR h C rt d G Ith Rd R ~III MD Montgomery County In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 es~a-~_ ou an a er I OCnll e 1___ _~_ _______1

15834 Vicinity of Shady Grove Rd between Research Court and Galthe M t C I C let mg Rd Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e1

~-~ ---- --- ~~~-r__~----~-~~ r~

mg 15235 General vicinity of Blackrock Rd Dameslown Rd Sugarland County x lin engineering 4th QUarter 2011 _ ~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suyanand MD t--------~~ t------~ -+ ~+-_~

GmiddotII b ~ ~~~523S Ge eral vicinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Sugarland M t C I X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 ers Ufg ~~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suganand MD on gomery oun y 1 t--- shy

G I b 15235 General vcinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suganand M I C t 3rd Quarter 2011X In Planningt lers urg Rd and Partnership Rd Suoanand MD on gomery oun y

(J As of May 2 2011

---- --- -- - ---- ------ -- - --- --- ------- ---- ---- ---- ------- ---

------- ------ -----

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 ------- ---- bullbull J _ bull c bull

_ _ ~ ~ c If 0 f I

I if~ sect~ ~ c-V Imiddot - I II b - ofltgt t l

Location Feeder Location (Subdivision ~Iti -f I oc- rsectc- csect sgt $ Statu Timeline c- c- gt b i 0 ~ ~t Cf)t I~ J1 ~~

~l~ rsectio ff~ lt bullbullbullbullbullbull Q ~ -= f t-i Q

I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ _c___ I plusmn bull tv ~___ _ -

Vicinity of Quince Orchard Blvd at Sebastian Blvd and W ---~-------f Gaithersburg 14063 Diamond Ave at Muddy Branch Rd Gaithersburg MDmiddot West Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ___ _ ____ Riding and[)iamond Sq _ ____ __ _____ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ ____ __ _

Gaithersburg 14069 General vicinltv of Quince Orchard Rd between Longdraft Rd M t C I X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 and Muddy Branch Park Galthe burg MD West Riding II on gomery Dun y nons rue on n ua er

---- ------------ ------ -- --- -- ---- --- -+----------1 Gaithersburg 14886 ~e~r1 ~Icinit~~f Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

1----_________ a___ eurllL -- ------___ ~--- ----__ ------f------------l ------------1 Germanlown 14886 ~~~~~~~~t~~ Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---- --~ ------- --- ----- --------- --- ------1 Germanlown 15238 VGICllnhitY degbf RlfflMefoOrdMRdj degMame essAtolFWn Rdmiddot bundtiJones lane Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

tr----------- _-5 urg_ - aor connon 1-----_ ---- ---~- _ -- ---------1--1----------1-------------1 Germantown 15240 ~~n~y of Citopper~ betwen Mateney Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

~~nown bull _____ ______ _________ ______ _________ _______-

Germantown 115240 ~~in~ty of CI~pper~ between Matenev Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Planning 4th Quarter 2011 ~~~r~~~ ~~wn ~~ _ _ _________-1

Oakland Road and Brookland Drive - General vicinity of River Glen Echo 14951 Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeslde Dr Montgomery County X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD ---- 1---------- --- --1---- ----1------- -----1-------- shy

Glen Echo 1476814769 SurnnerViliage I Sentinel Dr Eta Sangmore Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

Glen Echo 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C t X J PI I 3rd Q rt 2011 Bethesda MD Dr Bethesda MD on gomery Dun y nann ng ua er

r=ccc=c - - ----- -- 1----------Kensinglon 14440 nr~1 Vi~lniy of~~ward Ave Strthmore Ave and Montrose Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

__e~ng_on ~---- ______ ______ 1_-----shyGeneral vicinity of Bel-Pre Rd from Connecticut Ave to layhltl

Layhill MD Rd layhill from Bel-Pre Rd to Cherter Mill Rd and Argyle Club Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd from layhdl Rd to longmead Crossing and Nonnandy

---- CrossingOrlayhlllMD _____ r---- ----- ------ --c---- --- ------- --------Vlcinlly of Olney-laytonsville Rd between Stanbrook la and

Laytonsville 15901 Griffith Rd Griffith Rd between OIneYmiddotLaytonsvilie Rd and Montgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 ~- Dam-scus Rd Laytonsville MD ~_ _+__ __1----_ ______________+ l ytlI 15902 Vlcinily of Brookville RdMunc bullbullter Rd and Muncaster Mill M tel X I PI 3rd Q rt 2011

bull oosv e Rdbetween Pepco 230kV RIW and Air Park Rd on gomery oun I n anmng u er -- -- ------- - ----- - ---- --- ---- ---1----- ---- ------ -- ----- --- 1------ --------+--------shy

layt lie 15903 Vicinity of Fleldcrest Rd and Woodfield Rd between Olney M t C t X I PI 3rd Q rter 2011 onVI laytonsville Rd and Brenloll Dr Gaithersburg MO on gomery oun y n nmng u

-- -------- --- c--- --- --- --- -------- lytonsville 15904 ~~~~~v~e~r~~vllle Rd between Zion Rd and Georgia Ave Monlgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

-~

Vicinity of Olney laytonSville Road Dorsey Road WalfJeld

laytonsville 15905 Road Woodfield Road and Brink Road between Riggs Road ami Monlgom Count X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 Gaithersburg Road and RIggs Road between Oinev laylonsvlUe ry y Road and Ripplemead Drive laytonsville MD

--+-----+-- -- -~ --- ----- --- --------- shyII 1506 Vicinity of Zion Rd from Gregg Rd Soulh to Olney laytonsville M t C t X I PI I 3 d Q rt 011Laytonsv e bull Rd (RIl0B) to Olney Mill Rd on gomery oun y nann ng r ua er lt

---- -1----- --- - GeneraiVijnityof Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to EaslWes 1--------1------ - - --- ------------1 linden 14264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East Montgomery Counll( X In Ptanning 3rd Quarter 2011

Wesl Highway Sliver Spring MD MiieURd---- 6914------- Willi Oak Falrtand Montgomery County ------i-~)(-I_- --- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Metzerolt Rd --- 6913~- Fairland and Cores ville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011=----_ - -- -- ---shyMontgomery 14379 Vicinity of Arrowhead Rd Goshen Rd Snoufte School Rd Mont orne Count X In En Ineertn 4th Quarter 2011 VlIage Wightman Rd and Warfield Rd GaIthersburg MD 9 ry Y ____ ____ 9 g __

reg 5 As of May 2 2011

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 3: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

Page 1 of2 j

---shy-----=---~J 111c(middot

~ Guthrie Lynn 063804 t l ___~bull_____bull__ 1___1 -shy

From cwashingtonjrpepcocom

Sent Friday July 01 2011 529 PM

To Andrewss Office Councilmember Berliners Office CouncilmemberElrichs Office Council member Ervins Office Council member Flqr~Ap- Pfflp~ Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Riemers Office Councilmem9sectriJ~~~Ih~r~~pounCilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Montgomery County CouilcilmiddotV_ I

Subject Follow-up Information from the June 20 Meeting

Montgomery County Councilmembers

In advance of the tree trimming discussion scheduled before the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment Committee (T ampE) for July 18 I am writing to follow up on the questions you raised about the nuisance tree concept Pepco proposed to address the challenge posed by offright-of-way trees In addition you will find attached additional information you requested during our June 20 discussion including

bull Information on the companys Reliability Enhancement Plan investments bull Information on an additional major infrastructure investment the Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway and bull A chart that compares outage duration and frequency at different quartiles of service

Not included is the heat map that graphically represents Pepcos system capacity across its service territory Pepcos System Planning team is finalizing the 2011 version ofthat document and I will forward it to you once it is c01J1pleted

What challenges are you facing when trying to trim trees in Montgomery County Since September oflast year Pepco has trimmed over 1800 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

Does Pepco have greater authority to trim trees on private property in other jurisdictions Pepco is particularly concerned about the number of private property refusals we have encountered in Montgomery County because off right-of-way trees have been a major cause of outages during recent major storms Currently Pepco does not have a recourse when residents refuse to allow the company to trim trees on private property in Montgomery County While the company does not have any greater authority in Prince Georges County or the District of Columbia Montgomery County residents have proven more reluctant to allow the company to implement its enhanced tree trimming program

How does Pepco propose to address the challenge of off right-of-way trees in Montgomery County State and local governments and utilities around the country have addressed the challenge of private tree maintenance in a number of ways For example in some states like California residents grant utilities the authority to trim private trees as a condition of electric service In a local example Salisbury MD shy

7512011

Page 2 of2

served by PHI utility Delmarva Power - requires property owners to trim any nuisance tree or plant growth or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets sidewalks street lighting or City utilitieslgt

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to discussing this concept with you and your colleagues on July 18

Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions and have a safe and happy Independence Day weekend

Charles

Charles L Washington Jr Senior Public Affairs Manager Maryland State Relations PEPCO amp Delmarva Power

202-872-2132 (Office) 202-872-2032 (Fax) 301-261-1576 (Annapolis)

This Email message and any attachment may contain information that is proprietary legally privileged confid~ntial andor subject to copyright belonging to Pepco Holdings Inc or its affiliates (PHI) This Email is intended solely for the use ofthe person(s) to which it is addressed If you are not an intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this Email to the intended recipient(s) you are hereby notified that any dissemination distribution or copying of this Email is strictly prohibited If you have received this message in error please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete this Email and any copies PHI policies expressly prohibit employees from making defamatory or offensive statements and infringing any copyright or any other legal right by Email communication PHI will not accept any liability in respect of such communications

752011

middotMAPP-~ 1amp III MID-ATUNTIC POWER PATHWAY

wwwpowerpathwaycQn1

Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway Overview

Much of the East Coast relies on a congested power system that cant meet rising demand without significant upgrades As per a report on the US energy infrastructure electricity demand has increased by about 25 percent since 1990 while construction of transmission facilities decreased by about 30 percent Meanwhile the demand for power in this region is projected to increase by nearly 20 percent over the next i 0 years

As a result of this increasing demand for power the existing transmission system in the region will not be able to keep up in the years ahead Experts like the Us Department of Energy have said that building new transmission will help address this problem

The MAPP project is a transmission line that would significantly increase the regions ability to transport power Local utilities and electric cooperatives rely on this transmission system to keep the lights on for their customers The MAPP line will bring reliable and more economical power to the region

When you combine this improved ability to transport energy with a stronger focus on energy conservation and development of new clean-air power sources like wind and solar the region will be well positioned to meet the energy challenges in its future

The Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway will connect numerous points on the grid According to a study completed by the US Department of Energys (DOE) National Renewable Energy

Dever

lVarltingon DC Burches Georgetown

Possum Point ~- 1 Indian~ iII Chalk bullbullbullbull bull

Point ~_ _ Cambridge ~ bullbull ~ bullbull~ RIver

ltgt North Anna

ca~ Vienna

Cliffs Salisbury

_ MAPP AC Power

u MAPP DC Power

Existing AC Line

(Jgt Nuclear Generation

Fossil Generation

Substation

TheMt-E~Ii~~~willbeil approxlrnately69 miles Ilnesand83 miles of DC

bull r bull -~ -~ ~~

The DC POrtion cif the line o j miles in CCllvertCountyIA~I~ I

39 miles underWater (across

Laboratory (NREL) in early 2010 Whether were talking about using land-based wind in the Midwest offshore wind in the East or any combination of wind power resources any plausible scenario requires transmission infrastructure upgrades and we need to start planning for that immediately

ASCE Report httpJwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgfact-sheetienergy

PJM Load Forecast Report January 201 0

13 miles in Dorchester County Ma~yland 7 miles in Wicomico County Maryland o 21 miles in Sussex County Delaware

bull The AC portion of the line will consist of o 30 miles in Charles County Maryland a 24 miles in Prince Georges County Maryland o 9 miles in Calvert County Maryland 6 miles in Sussex County Delaware

bull ACiDC converters will be located inCalvert Wicomico and Sussex Counties

bull A majority ofthe line will be built on oradjacentto existing transmission lines

MAPP has a target completion date of 2015

agency approved and permitted route

Inc1V

~dcmotvo J4I power

Project Overview 110810

----- ------ -------

Pepco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 bull camp~

~ ~ 1 I ~ ~

~ ~ 1 q ~q lt ~ 11 -a 16 vb gt ~ ~ ~ bull C gt f E b ~ $i 0 li I

LocallOn Feeder LocatlOnISulldlvlSlon 41Jj ~ - ltif o~ -1Jj~ 6 ~ Statusmiddot middotTmelmemiddot ~ ~ J ~ 1Jj~ b 0 gt ~ ~l ~E Ji 0 lt~

~ J1~ -a sect j ~i q J - ~ J1

lt I bull )1( ~ ~ ~l 1lt bull Be~t4i1 __ 69119 ___ Beverly Farms HuntingliillPlllacRockville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~eIl5Mill_ _____ 34978 Twinbrook -- Montgomery county X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~ 69180 Bevrly Farms Potomac Rockville Montgomery County X 10 Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 _______ Blls Mill ~ Beverly Farms Hunting Hill Rockville Montgomery county X ____ ---- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

B tI d 14834 Genralarea between Old Georgetown Rd and Chellon Rd and M C X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 e les a East-West Highway and Cheltenham Dr Bethesda MD ontgomery ounty n on5 ruc on n ua er

f-- --shyVicinity east of Wisconsin Ave south of EastmiddotWest Highway

Bethesda 14867 Also vicinity between Wisconsin Ave and Old Georgetown Rd Montgomery County X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 north of Easl-West Highwav Bethesda MD

Bradley Hills Chevy Chase Terr Kenwood - The area bounded - --- --- - ----- - ~ --- _

Bethesda 14869 by Hampden La bull Bradley Blvd Wisconsin Ave and Arlington Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

1_____ IR~~e_sd_aMD ______ _~______ __~__ 1____ -- ---------- ---- c-- -----~--~-B Ih d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhouodlng Rdto Vendome M I C ty X Cit 41h Qu rt 2010

e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery oun amp e B ______a_er_______

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendom M t ---- C ty X Cit 4th Q rt 2010 e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery Qun omp e e ua er

r------ The Palisades Cong slonal Country Club ESTS Cabin John ----- 1--- --- ----- f- --- ----- shyBethsda 14943 Glen Echo Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Wathoundlng Rd te Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ Vendolll Dr Bethesda MD ___ _

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C ty X I E I rI 3rd Q rt 2011 e eo a Dr Belhesda MD _ Major MC SAtFI contriilutlon on gomery oun n ng nee ng ua er

Woodburn Memmack Park KenWOOd Park - General -r~-of --- ----- ---- shy

Bethbullbullda 14944 MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Brickyard Rd Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

_t____-IB_ethesdaMD ------ ------ r-- -----shyB th d 14945 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Duvall Dr and adjacenl M t co ty X Cit 1 t Q rt 2011

e es a streets in Bethesda) MD on gomery un omp e e s ua er

Gle~ Echo Hgls Sumner Westhaven Wetgate Glen Cove ---- -- r--- ------Belhesda 14945 Brookdale Westwood Shopping Centermiddot Massachusetts Ave Montgomery County X Complete 1t Quarter 2011

from Avalon Dr 10 Duvall Dr and adjacenttreet In Bethesda MD ----- --- f-- -------- ----- ----Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and Wilson La and along

Bethesda 14948 Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley BlvAlso along Bradley Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brlle Rd Bethesa MD

_ ----------------- _ ------ -- --- ---- ---------- ------ --- shy

Wilson Knolls Oakwood Knolls Locust Ridge Landon Wood English Vii Bradley Hillsmiddot Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and

Belhesda 14948 Wilson La and along Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley Blvd Monlgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 Also along Bradley Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brite Rd

_ __Belllsda~_~__ __ Springlleld bull Vlclnltv of Ridgefield Rd between River Rd and

Belhesda 14949 Kirkwood Dr and River Rd between Brookside Dr and Western Montgomery county X Complete 1st Quarter 2011 _____ __ ___ Ave Bethesda MD ___

General vlclnily of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradley

Bethesda 14950 Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr to Hiliandale Rd and Chevy Monl ornery Count X Com lete 1st Quarter 2011 Chase Blvd from Hllandale Rd to WisconSin Ave Bethesda gyp

MD _________ ____ _ ______ ______

Generailliclnltv of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradlev Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr 10 Hiliandale Rd and Chevy

Bethesda 14950 Chase Blvd from Hillandale Rd to Wisconsin Ave Belhesda Montgomery County X In Englneerlng 3rd Quarter 2011 I

MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution

A of May 2 2011

Pellco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --shy r----shy - bullbull

bull gt- -

~ 1 I bullbullbullbull~o ~ ftt

) ilt~ shyJ ~~ If J~ fshy lt ~ f

Feeder Location I Subdivision I I t b~ tjt s

Location

~~g ~ I l If 0 tsect cf 91 Status Tlmelinll

c -shy - 111 )0

i I~ ~I l~f amp (1f rsect ~ tsect middot~ft

~ cg- f ~ tj Q

gtlt igtf It ti bull

-General vicinity of River Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield

Bethesda 14951 Rd Brookede Dr Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Bethesda MD

---shy -Westwood Kenwood - Generat vicinity of River Rd from ~--

Bethesda 14951 Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeside Dr Chamberlain Monlgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__-shy _-shy Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD -----shy r-shy -shy -

Glen Echo Hgts Potomac Palisade Park Washington Waldorf _ Belhesda 14952 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Sangamore Dr and Rive Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Rd between Buller Rd and Ridgefield Rd Belilesda MD -~- ~ -shy ~-- --shy

General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree Bethesda 15106 Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

----shy -shy -I----Longwood Bradley lIIanor Tuscullun Bradley Hills Grove

Bethesda 15106 Orumaldry Green Tree Manor Siratton Wood Fernwood shyMontgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree

Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD --shy -shy -shy ---shy r-shy -----shy ------shy 1---shy --

McCauley Park Kentdale Ests Bradley Park Wet Bethesda Bethesda 15108 Park Burning Tree VaUey Cohasset- Vicinity of Kent_dale Dr Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

between Bradley Blvd and Sorrel Ave 8ethesda MD ~--- ----shy -~-- -shy ----shy -+---- --shy --shy --shy -----------~ -------shy

General vlclnily of Arrowood Rd from Arrowood CI to Burdette Rd Hillmead Rd from Burdette Rd to Bradley Blvd Bradley

Bethesda 15110 Blvd from HIUmead Rd to Glenwood Rd Woodhaven Blvd fran Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Bradley Blvd to Hawthome Rd Bethesd MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution1----_------ -shy --~------ ----shy --shy shy --shy -~-- --shy -~- -~-- -~-- -------Ro~ Hill Est Burning Tree Ets Stonellurst Center Seven locks Hills Carderrock Springs Evergreen Cabin John Park -

Bethesda 15111 General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd between Bradley Blvd and Montgomery County X InConstruction 2nd Quarter 2011 MacArthur Blvd and River Rd between Fans Rd and Fenway

I---shy -_shy --shy -~-Dr Betneda MD

----shy - - 1---shyWildwood Hills Knollwood Windsor Hills Bells Mill Vii BeUs

--shy 1--shy --shy ~i--

Bethesda 15115 Mill Springs - General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd Democracy Montgomery County ilt Complete lsi Quarter 2011

r--- Blvd Bells Mill Rd Bethesda MD -shy --shy ---shy ~ ---~ ---

Edgemoor Bradley Hills - Vicinities of Arlington Rd between Betned 15144 Moorland La and Elm St Wilson La between Corden Ave and Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Aberdeen Rd and Apple Ridge Rd at Custer Rd Bethesda MD

I---shy --shy --shy ---shy I--shy ---shy -shy ----_-shyVicinity of Auburn Norfolk and Rugby Avenues between

Bethesda 15145 Georgetown Road and Wisconsin Avenue and icinity of Wisconsin Avenue between Rugby Avenue and Pooks Hill Road

Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---Bethesda MD

--~ --Icomplete~hes~ i5793shy Pooks Hill Apartment - Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County X 1st Quarter 2011-shy

Vicinity of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Bethesua 1579l Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hltl Road Monlgomery County X In Engineering lrd Qu arter 2011

---~----~-

Bethesda MDbullbull Major MC SAIFI contribution ---IcornpletoBethesda 15797 S-cred Heart Schoolmiddot Pooks HIli Road Montgomery County X 4th Quarter 2010

-=--~-~~-

Bethesda 34013 Westmoreland Oliver 51 Montgomery Counly X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Wesllake Dr 10 Old

~_=1M G~_ M O Goo_ m C C _ bullbull 0 X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Executive Boulevard Bethesda MO -shy shy -----~--r--------~ shy ---

VIcinity of Seven Locks Rd between Tuckerman La and Belnsua 14082 Gainborough Rd Also Tuckerman La between Galnsborough Montgomery Counly X In Engineering 3rd

Rd and Old Georgetown Rd Bethesda MO ~----- ----shy ---~-- ------~-

to

~f A of May 2 2011

Pep~Q Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011

Location Feeder

1---Belhesda

Bethesda

~he~~ Belhesda

IKenwod Pk__ IBelhesdo MDf-----shyI ------~

15793

I selhesda MD 14950

I

I-s~~ -~-F------115153 eveuy arms I

B I F-~ ---)15153 ~-r-y-a-r~-s---

Beverly Farms 15162

~ ___ ~ _~ ~+ ~_ __

Beverly Farms 15162

Che Chas 14271 vy t--- shyChevy Chase 14271

Che Chase 14896 vy

I

IChevy Chase MO 14271

F ~

Location t Suhdlvision Jurisdiction

_ Monlgomery County

Monlgomery County

Vlclnily of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County Sethesda MD General viclnily-of-=G-oc-ldc-s7b-o-ro--=RdCf=-ro-m---Nc-e-wb-c-u-m--=0-r-I-o-=S=-r-dley

Blvd Bradley Blvd~ from Brlle Or to HiIIndale Rd and Chevy Montgomery CountyChase Blvd from Hlilandale Rd 10 Wisconsin Ave Bethesda

I~nity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road -- ~M~--I- ~ C I Rockville MD on gomery oun y

Vicinity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road M I Roclltv_III__M_D_ On gomery oun Vicinity of Falls Rd between West Ritchie Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Fails ~Rdlo Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

IP-ot--o-rn-a_c-M=-D-c--c----__-c----=---=-__---__~__---~ Vicinity of Falls Rd between Wesl Rilchle Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Falls Rd 10 Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

potorna~M~D~_-----~-=------~--~--__-----+--Vicinity of Montgomery Hills Park Areamiddot Montgomery Street from Fraser A venue to Srookvllle Road Montgomery County Vicinity of lyttonsvlUe Rd between Brookeville Rd and Grubb Rd and Grubb Rd between EaslmiddotWesl Highway and Welern Montgomery County Ave Chevy Chase MO

ChevY Chase Section 3middot along Conneclicul Avenue from Chevy Mont orne County Chase Circle to Bradley lane g ry Vicinity of lyttonsville Rd between BrookeVille Rd and Grubb -j--~~~----------I--~~ Rd and Grubb Rd between EastmiddotWest Highway and Western Montjom ry County

tMMontgomery County

Montgomery County

Monlgomery County

I Montgomery County

Briggs Road and Camella Drive General Vicinity of Randolph Rd from New Hampshire Ave 10 Mlddlevale lane and Briggs RdlMonlgomery County Frorn Mlddlevale lane 10 Hathaway Dr Whoaton MD

b Ave Chce=VY7-Cih=a-seMdeg7middot=---=---c---c--~___~~~svi- 14~ Fairview Estates I Randolph Rd EO New Hampshire AJe~ Colesville 14439 Paint Branch Eslales I Randolph Rd SlO Falnand Rd

Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Fairland Colesville 14493 Rd and Fairland Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd

__ iFalriand MO

Gene~al vicinity wesl of Old Georgetown Rd between Wilson laIMonlgOmery County Colesvill 14866 and Singleton Dr Bethesda MObull Major MC SAIFI conlributlon

General vicinity of New Hampshire Ave from Shaw Ave to 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New~

Hampshire Ave Colesville MD

General vicinity of New Hampshire Avo from Shaw Ave to Colesville 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New

Hampshire Ave Colesville MObull Major MC SAIFI contribution

X

~ fPl

t~ ltshy

~ Ii

fit ~~ t ~ ilo

Igtj 1

~ ~ e

rlgt ~

II ~if ~p

e~ 11i~~

Q~ ~Q

~amp g~ ~-

~ ~I iir ~

It ~fIt ~ Igtj

f ~o

ltJ ~

J

-------+--~ -+shy --+-- +-- ---t-X

-R~ J(1ltshyl ltr~ ~ q ~~

In Engineering

In Engineering

I Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

lTd Quarter 2011

-=-I~-~=tnsectontructlon ~__~12~~er_2~ __~ X

x

x

~---+-P---+ -C--ty-----+-shy 1--x- +shy------11-------l-- shy

x

r-shyX

~~ - ~---~~

1__ ~~~ ~_~ ~4~-~ ---~P~--1 --~ ~~ --r shyX

X ~------~--~-------l--

-+shy -j- shy --+shyX

=-o--nt--g-om-e-ry-Co-u-n7ty------t-shy X X

X

--t shy ~-~

X

- ~-----i ~---+---~

X

2nd Quaner 2011

In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

in Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

+--shy I~- ~~----

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 t--shy --- shy

Quarter 2011

In Conslructlon 3rd Quarter 2011

In Progress 3rd Quarter 2011

+--------1 ----I In Conslruction

--+-shyIn Construction

Complete

Complete

In Engineering

Complete

2nd Quaner 2011

t--- shy2nd Quaner 2011

2nd Quaner 2011

4th Quarter 2010

3rd Quaner 2011

4th Quaner 2010

------+--- ~--------1r-------

X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--+---t--~ +~----

X In Engineering 41h Quarter 2011

~--1~ ~ ___ ~

tmiddot

~~~ As or May 2 2011

_--_~ ~c ~_-c-~------_~~~_~-----~p~e=lpc~O=R=e=lia=biI=ity==E=n=h=an==ce=mentpla-20=11------r---r--------r---rcc----c------------c-c-----~

Location

r-

Darnestown

I---Darnestown

Darnestown

Ia~

Feeder Looationl Subdivision Timeline-1ls~tJJs ~~~~~~0

fftS ~~ II

Tree Trimming installation of ACR and SWitCh ana fleJa Inspection In the vicinity of Springfield Popular Hill Esworthy15230 3rd Quarter 2011Monlgomery County x In Engineering and White Rock Roads

r----~ ~~~~~

Ancienl Oak North I Colton lane URD cable replacemenllcuring Mont Orne Count )( Com lete 41h Quarter 2010 15238 _--i~n Ihe vicinity of coll lane g ry y ~ ~~

15286 Vicinity of HI Wood Rd Montgomery County X In Englneerlng3rd Quarter 2011

Darnestown MO 15237 VTiciknilyFof DtaRmesdtoDwn RdmiddottbetweMeOn Ancienl Oak Drive and Montgomery Counly)( In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 1_ ur ey 00 oa I ames own bull __

Viclnily of Darnestown Rd between Ancienl Oak Drive and M I C t 3rd Quaner 2011OamesIown MD 15231 T FIR dOl MD on gomery oun y CompleleLr----- urfey o~~ ~~~es~~l bull I 15254 Vicinily of Muncasler Mill Rd from Laytonsville Rdlo Redland Monl ome CountDerwoord X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 I_~__ Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Winters Run ~ _ ~ ~-g _ ry y

____ ~ ~492 Countryside I Briggs Chaney Rd WIO Old Columbia Pik~e___ Montgomery Counly Complele Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Falnand

Fainand MD 14493 Rd and Falnand Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd Montgomery Counly X lin Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

I--~~ ~~ Fairtnd~_~ -[-----I-----+---__t_Woodside Parkway and Dale Drivemiddot Vicinity of Universily Blvd

IFour Corners 14452 at Indian Spring Dr and ColeSville Rd between Brewsler Ave Montgomery County X lin Engineering 41h Quarter 2011 nd Spring St Sliver Spring MD -+--t I---t-------

Gaithersburg I14063 Vicinity of Quince OrChard Blvd al Sebastian Blvd and W Montgomery County x Complele ~ Diamond Ave al Muddy Branch Rd Galthersburg MD ~- -~ ------t- shy--+shyM~ddy-Brnch Rd nortll of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy

Gaithersburg 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of IMonlgomery Counly X IComplete i---- fieldS R~~lthersburg MDmiddot ____L

~------t~-----I---l-

General vlclnlly of Quince Orchard Rd Pin Oak Or ChestnutGaithersburg 14070 Montgomery Counly X CompleteSt Waler St and Cedar Ave Gaithersburg MD

1 land Place I Monlgomery Village Montgomery County _X__~ lsi Quarter 2011 -~+----l= ~Iete General vicinity of Research Blvd from Darnestown Rd to Mont ome CountGaithersburg 15067 x In Construction bull 2nd Quarter 2011 ~___ middotrhltlrGrOVeRdGalthe~bUrgMD ___ 9 ry y 1__ -+-- ~~-~middotI----+--

Gallllersbur 115235 General Vicinity or Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suyanand Mont ome Count 4th Quarter 2010 x CompleleI--- ~~__g_ ~--+--- Rd and Partnershp Rd Suganand MD ~ __~~ g ry y +------+---------~ l---~--+--~__+-

Vicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and Gailhersburg 41h Quarter 2010

Cenlerway ~Rd-Gait~h_ers_b_u~rg~_M_D___________-j

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County Complete

----+ ~ ------1------1~-~~ ~ 1shyVicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and

Gallhersburg 3rd Quarter 2011 Centerway Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Major MC SAIFI contribution

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County )( In Engineering

r- --- shyG it b 15256 Vicinity of Laytonsville Rd Warfield Rd and Goshen Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

a lers urg ~~~___~ ~ __ ~ 13-theigturg MD ~~ ~ _

GI b 15256 WarfieldRdfromWoodfieldRdtoAddnbroo~wayandGoshenM nt C ty I C I Ii 2 dQ rt 2011 a ers urg Rd from Warfield Rd 10 Brink Rd 0 gomery oun nons rue on n ua er

~~~ 1~5284 Westleigh I Duri Mill Rd EO Quince Orchard Rd --Montgomery County -----~__=_r--x-- -~ Completelt Quart2011 Muddy Branch Roadmiddot Vicinity 01 Shady Grove Rd between

Ufg 15834 iR h C rt d G Ith Rd R ~III MD Montgomery County In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 es~a-~_ ou an a er I OCnll e 1___ _~_ _______1

15834 Vicinity of Shady Grove Rd between Research Court and Galthe M t C I C let mg Rd Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e1

~-~ ---- --- ~~~-r__~----~-~~ r~

mg 15235 General vicinity of Blackrock Rd Dameslown Rd Sugarland County x lin engineering 4th QUarter 2011 _ ~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suyanand MD t--------~~ t------~ -+ ~+-_~

GmiddotII b ~ ~~~523S Ge eral vicinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Sugarland M t C I X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 ers Ufg ~~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suganand MD on gomery oun y 1 t--- shy

G I b 15235 General vcinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suganand M I C t 3rd Quarter 2011X In Planningt lers urg Rd and Partnership Rd Suoanand MD on gomery oun y

(J As of May 2 2011

---- --- -- - ---- ------ -- - --- --- ------- ---- ---- ---- ------- ---

------- ------ -----

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 ------- ---- bullbull J _ bull c bull

_ _ ~ ~ c If 0 f I

I if~ sect~ ~ c-V Imiddot - I II b - ofltgt t l

Location Feeder Location (Subdivision ~Iti -f I oc- rsectc- csect sgt $ Statu Timeline c- c- gt b i 0 ~ ~t Cf)t I~ J1 ~~

~l~ rsectio ff~ lt bullbullbullbullbullbull Q ~ -= f t-i Q

I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ _c___ I plusmn bull tv ~___ _ -

Vicinity of Quince Orchard Blvd at Sebastian Blvd and W ---~-------f Gaithersburg 14063 Diamond Ave at Muddy Branch Rd Gaithersburg MDmiddot West Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ___ _ ____ Riding and[)iamond Sq _ ____ __ _____ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ ____ __ _

Gaithersburg 14069 General vicinltv of Quince Orchard Rd between Longdraft Rd M t C I X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 and Muddy Branch Park Galthe burg MD West Riding II on gomery Dun y nons rue on n ua er

---- ------------ ------ -- --- -- ---- --- -+----------1 Gaithersburg 14886 ~e~r1 ~Icinit~~f Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

1----_________ a___ eurllL -- ------___ ~--- ----__ ------f------------l ------------1 Germanlown 14886 ~~~~~~~~t~~ Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---- --~ ------- --- ----- --------- --- ------1 Germanlown 15238 VGICllnhitY degbf RlfflMefoOrdMRdj degMame essAtolFWn Rdmiddot bundtiJones lane Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

tr----------- _-5 urg_ - aor connon 1-----_ ---- ---~- _ -- ---------1--1----------1-------------1 Germantown 15240 ~~n~y of Citopper~ betwen Mateney Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

~~nown bull _____ ______ _________ ______ _________ _______-

Germantown 115240 ~~in~ty of CI~pper~ between Matenev Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Planning 4th Quarter 2011 ~~~r~~~ ~~wn ~~ _ _ _________-1

Oakland Road and Brookland Drive - General vicinity of River Glen Echo 14951 Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeslde Dr Montgomery County X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD ---- 1---------- --- --1---- ----1------- -----1-------- shy

Glen Echo 1476814769 SurnnerViliage I Sentinel Dr Eta Sangmore Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

Glen Echo 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C t X J PI I 3rd Q rt 2011 Bethesda MD Dr Bethesda MD on gomery Dun y nann ng ua er

r=ccc=c - - ----- -- 1----------Kensinglon 14440 nr~1 Vi~lniy of~~ward Ave Strthmore Ave and Montrose Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

__e~ng_on ~---- ______ ______ 1_-----shyGeneral vicinity of Bel-Pre Rd from Connecticut Ave to layhltl

Layhill MD Rd layhill from Bel-Pre Rd to Cherter Mill Rd and Argyle Club Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd from layhdl Rd to longmead Crossing and Nonnandy

---- CrossingOrlayhlllMD _____ r---- ----- ------ --c---- --- ------- --------Vlcinlly of Olney-laytonsville Rd between Stanbrook la and

Laytonsville 15901 Griffith Rd Griffith Rd between OIneYmiddotLaytonsvilie Rd and Montgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 ~- Dam-scus Rd Laytonsville MD ~_ _+__ __1----_ ______________+ l ytlI 15902 Vlcinily of Brookville RdMunc bullbullter Rd and Muncaster Mill M tel X I PI 3rd Q rt 2011

bull oosv e Rdbetween Pepco 230kV RIW and Air Park Rd on gomery oun I n anmng u er -- -- ------- - ----- - ---- --- ---- ---1----- ---- ------ -- ----- --- 1------ --------+--------shy

layt lie 15903 Vicinity of Fleldcrest Rd and Woodfield Rd between Olney M t C t X I PI 3rd Q rter 2011 onVI laytonsville Rd and Brenloll Dr Gaithersburg MO on gomery oun y n nmng u

-- -------- --- c--- --- --- --- -------- lytonsville 15904 ~~~~~v~e~r~~vllle Rd between Zion Rd and Georgia Ave Monlgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

-~

Vicinity of Olney laytonSville Road Dorsey Road WalfJeld

laytonsville 15905 Road Woodfield Road and Brink Road between Riggs Road ami Monlgom Count X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 Gaithersburg Road and RIggs Road between Oinev laylonsvlUe ry y Road and Ripplemead Drive laytonsville MD

--+-----+-- -- -~ --- ----- --- --------- shyII 1506 Vicinity of Zion Rd from Gregg Rd Soulh to Olney laytonsville M t C t X I PI I 3 d Q rt 011Laytonsv e bull Rd (RIl0B) to Olney Mill Rd on gomery oun y nann ng r ua er lt

---- -1----- --- - GeneraiVijnityof Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to EaslWes 1--------1------ - - --- ------------1 linden 14264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East Montgomery Counll( X In Ptanning 3rd Quarter 2011

Wesl Highway Sliver Spring MD MiieURd---- 6914------- Willi Oak Falrtand Montgomery County ------i-~)(-I_- --- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Metzerolt Rd --- 6913~- Fairland and Cores ville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011=----_ - -- -- ---shyMontgomery 14379 Vicinity of Arrowhead Rd Goshen Rd Snoufte School Rd Mont orne Count X In En Ineertn 4th Quarter 2011 VlIage Wightman Rd and Warfield Rd GaIthersburg MD 9 ry Y ____ ____ 9 g __

reg 5 As of May 2 2011

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 4: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

Page 2 of2

served by PHI utility Delmarva Power - requires property owners to trim any nuisance tree or plant growth or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets sidewalks street lighting or City utilitieslgt

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to discussing this concept with you and your colleagues on July 18

Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions and have a safe and happy Independence Day weekend

Charles

Charles L Washington Jr Senior Public Affairs Manager Maryland State Relations PEPCO amp Delmarva Power

202-872-2132 (Office) 202-872-2032 (Fax) 301-261-1576 (Annapolis)

This Email message and any attachment may contain information that is proprietary legally privileged confid~ntial andor subject to copyright belonging to Pepco Holdings Inc or its affiliates (PHI) This Email is intended solely for the use ofthe person(s) to which it is addressed If you are not an intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this Email to the intended recipient(s) you are hereby notified that any dissemination distribution or copying of this Email is strictly prohibited If you have received this message in error please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete this Email and any copies PHI policies expressly prohibit employees from making defamatory or offensive statements and infringing any copyright or any other legal right by Email communication PHI will not accept any liability in respect of such communications

752011

middotMAPP-~ 1amp III MID-ATUNTIC POWER PATHWAY

wwwpowerpathwaycQn1

Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway Overview

Much of the East Coast relies on a congested power system that cant meet rising demand without significant upgrades As per a report on the US energy infrastructure electricity demand has increased by about 25 percent since 1990 while construction of transmission facilities decreased by about 30 percent Meanwhile the demand for power in this region is projected to increase by nearly 20 percent over the next i 0 years

As a result of this increasing demand for power the existing transmission system in the region will not be able to keep up in the years ahead Experts like the Us Department of Energy have said that building new transmission will help address this problem

The MAPP project is a transmission line that would significantly increase the regions ability to transport power Local utilities and electric cooperatives rely on this transmission system to keep the lights on for their customers The MAPP line will bring reliable and more economical power to the region

When you combine this improved ability to transport energy with a stronger focus on energy conservation and development of new clean-air power sources like wind and solar the region will be well positioned to meet the energy challenges in its future

The Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway will connect numerous points on the grid According to a study completed by the US Department of Energys (DOE) National Renewable Energy

Dever

lVarltingon DC Burches Georgetown

Possum Point ~- 1 Indian~ iII Chalk bullbullbullbull bull

Point ~_ _ Cambridge ~ bullbull ~ bullbull~ RIver

ltgt North Anna

ca~ Vienna

Cliffs Salisbury

_ MAPP AC Power

u MAPP DC Power

Existing AC Line

(Jgt Nuclear Generation

Fossil Generation

Substation

TheMt-E~Ii~~~willbeil approxlrnately69 miles Ilnesand83 miles of DC

bull r bull -~ -~ ~~

The DC POrtion cif the line o j miles in CCllvertCountyIA~I~ I

39 miles underWater (across

Laboratory (NREL) in early 2010 Whether were talking about using land-based wind in the Midwest offshore wind in the East or any combination of wind power resources any plausible scenario requires transmission infrastructure upgrades and we need to start planning for that immediately

ASCE Report httpJwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgfact-sheetienergy

PJM Load Forecast Report January 201 0

13 miles in Dorchester County Ma~yland 7 miles in Wicomico County Maryland o 21 miles in Sussex County Delaware

bull The AC portion of the line will consist of o 30 miles in Charles County Maryland a 24 miles in Prince Georges County Maryland o 9 miles in Calvert County Maryland 6 miles in Sussex County Delaware

bull ACiDC converters will be located inCalvert Wicomico and Sussex Counties

bull A majority ofthe line will be built on oradjacentto existing transmission lines

MAPP has a target completion date of 2015

agency approved and permitted route

Inc1V

~dcmotvo J4I power

Project Overview 110810

----- ------ -------

Pepco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 bull camp~

~ ~ 1 I ~ ~

~ ~ 1 q ~q lt ~ 11 -a 16 vb gt ~ ~ ~ bull C gt f E b ~ $i 0 li I

LocallOn Feeder LocatlOnISulldlvlSlon 41Jj ~ - ltif o~ -1Jj~ 6 ~ Statusmiddot middotTmelmemiddot ~ ~ J ~ 1Jj~ b 0 gt ~ ~l ~E Ji 0 lt~

~ J1~ -a sect j ~i q J - ~ J1

lt I bull )1( ~ ~ ~l 1lt bull Be~t4i1 __ 69119 ___ Beverly Farms HuntingliillPlllacRockville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~eIl5Mill_ _____ 34978 Twinbrook -- Montgomery county X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~ 69180 Bevrly Farms Potomac Rockville Montgomery County X 10 Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 _______ Blls Mill ~ Beverly Farms Hunting Hill Rockville Montgomery county X ____ ---- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

B tI d 14834 Genralarea between Old Georgetown Rd and Chellon Rd and M C X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 e les a East-West Highway and Cheltenham Dr Bethesda MD ontgomery ounty n on5 ruc on n ua er

f-- --shyVicinity east of Wisconsin Ave south of EastmiddotWest Highway

Bethesda 14867 Also vicinity between Wisconsin Ave and Old Georgetown Rd Montgomery County X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 north of Easl-West Highwav Bethesda MD

Bradley Hills Chevy Chase Terr Kenwood - The area bounded - --- --- - ----- - ~ --- _

Bethesda 14869 by Hampden La bull Bradley Blvd Wisconsin Ave and Arlington Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

1_____ IR~~e_sd_aMD ______ _~______ __~__ 1____ -- ---------- ---- c-- -----~--~-B Ih d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhouodlng Rdto Vendome M I C ty X Cit 41h Qu rt 2010

e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery oun amp e B ______a_er_______

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendom M t ---- C ty X Cit 4th Q rt 2010 e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery Qun omp e e ua er

r------ The Palisades Cong slonal Country Club ESTS Cabin John ----- 1--- --- ----- f- --- ----- shyBethsda 14943 Glen Echo Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Wathoundlng Rd te Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ Vendolll Dr Bethesda MD ___ _

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C ty X I E I rI 3rd Q rt 2011 e eo a Dr Belhesda MD _ Major MC SAtFI contriilutlon on gomery oun n ng nee ng ua er

Woodburn Memmack Park KenWOOd Park - General -r~-of --- ----- ---- shy

Bethbullbullda 14944 MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Brickyard Rd Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

_t____-IB_ethesdaMD ------ ------ r-- -----shyB th d 14945 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Duvall Dr and adjacenl M t co ty X Cit 1 t Q rt 2011

e es a streets in Bethesda) MD on gomery un omp e e s ua er

Gle~ Echo Hgls Sumner Westhaven Wetgate Glen Cove ---- -- r--- ------Belhesda 14945 Brookdale Westwood Shopping Centermiddot Massachusetts Ave Montgomery County X Complete 1t Quarter 2011

from Avalon Dr 10 Duvall Dr and adjacenttreet In Bethesda MD ----- --- f-- -------- ----- ----Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and Wilson La and along

Bethesda 14948 Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley BlvAlso along Bradley Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brlle Rd Bethesa MD

_ ----------------- _ ------ -- --- ---- ---------- ------ --- shy

Wilson Knolls Oakwood Knolls Locust Ridge Landon Wood English Vii Bradley Hillsmiddot Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and

Belhesda 14948 Wilson La and along Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley Blvd Monlgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 Also along Bradley Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brite Rd

_ __Belllsda~_~__ __ Springlleld bull Vlclnltv of Ridgefield Rd between River Rd and

Belhesda 14949 Kirkwood Dr and River Rd between Brookside Dr and Western Montgomery county X Complete 1st Quarter 2011 _____ __ ___ Ave Bethesda MD ___

General vlclnily of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradley

Bethesda 14950 Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr to Hiliandale Rd and Chevy Monl ornery Count X Com lete 1st Quarter 2011 Chase Blvd from Hllandale Rd to WisconSin Ave Bethesda gyp

MD _________ ____ _ ______ ______

Generailliclnltv of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradlev Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr 10 Hiliandale Rd and Chevy

Bethesda 14950 Chase Blvd from Hillandale Rd to Wisconsin Ave Belhesda Montgomery County X In Englneerlng 3rd Quarter 2011 I

MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution

A of May 2 2011

Pellco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --shy r----shy - bullbull

bull gt- -

~ 1 I bullbullbullbull~o ~ ftt

) ilt~ shyJ ~~ If J~ fshy lt ~ f

Feeder Location I Subdivision I I t b~ tjt s

Location

~~g ~ I l If 0 tsect cf 91 Status Tlmelinll

c -shy - 111 )0

i I~ ~I l~f amp (1f rsect ~ tsect middot~ft

~ cg- f ~ tj Q

gtlt igtf It ti bull

-General vicinity of River Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield

Bethesda 14951 Rd Brookede Dr Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Bethesda MD

---shy -Westwood Kenwood - Generat vicinity of River Rd from ~--

Bethesda 14951 Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeside Dr Chamberlain Monlgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__-shy _-shy Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD -----shy r-shy -shy -

Glen Echo Hgts Potomac Palisade Park Washington Waldorf _ Belhesda 14952 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Sangamore Dr and Rive Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Rd between Buller Rd and Ridgefield Rd Belilesda MD -~- ~ -shy ~-- --shy

General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree Bethesda 15106 Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

----shy -shy -I----Longwood Bradley lIIanor Tuscullun Bradley Hills Grove

Bethesda 15106 Orumaldry Green Tree Manor Siratton Wood Fernwood shyMontgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree

Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD --shy -shy -shy ---shy r-shy -----shy ------shy 1---shy --

McCauley Park Kentdale Ests Bradley Park Wet Bethesda Bethesda 15108 Park Burning Tree VaUey Cohasset- Vicinity of Kent_dale Dr Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

between Bradley Blvd and Sorrel Ave 8ethesda MD ~--- ----shy -~-- -shy ----shy -+---- --shy --shy --shy -----------~ -------shy

General vlclnily of Arrowood Rd from Arrowood CI to Burdette Rd Hillmead Rd from Burdette Rd to Bradley Blvd Bradley

Bethesda 15110 Blvd from HIUmead Rd to Glenwood Rd Woodhaven Blvd fran Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Bradley Blvd to Hawthome Rd Bethesd MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution1----_------ -shy --~------ ----shy --shy shy --shy -~-- --shy -~- -~-- -~-- -------Ro~ Hill Est Burning Tree Ets Stonellurst Center Seven locks Hills Carderrock Springs Evergreen Cabin John Park -

Bethesda 15111 General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd between Bradley Blvd and Montgomery County X InConstruction 2nd Quarter 2011 MacArthur Blvd and River Rd between Fans Rd and Fenway

I---shy -_shy --shy -~-Dr Betneda MD

----shy - - 1---shyWildwood Hills Knollwood Windsor Hills Bells Mill Vii BeUs

--shy 1--shy --shy ~i--

Bethesda 15115 Mill Springs - General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd Democracy Montgomery County ilt Complete lsi Quarter 2011

r--- Blvd Bells Mill Rd Bethesda MD -shy --shy ---shy ~ ---~ ---

Edgemoor Bradley Hills - Vicinities of Arlington Rd between Betned 15144 Moorland La and Elm St Wilson La between Corden Ave and Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Aberdeen Rd and Apple Ridge Rd at Custer Rd Bethesda MD

I---shy --shy --shy ---shy I--shy ---shy -shy ----_-shyVicinity of Auburn Norfolk and Rugby Avenues between

Bethesda 15145 Georgetown Road and Wisconsin Avenue and icinity of Wisconsin Avenue between Rugby Avenue and Pooks Hill Road

Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---Bethesda MD

--~ --Icomplete~hes~ i5793shy Pooks Hill Apartment - Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County X 1st Quarter 2011-shy

Vicinity of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Bethesua 1579l Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hltl Road Monlgomery County X In Engineering lrd Qu arter 2011

---~----~-

Bethesda MDbullbull Major MC SAIFI contribution ---IcornpletoBethesda 15797 S-cred Heart Schoolmiddot Pooks HIli Road Montgomery County X 4th Quarter 2010

-=--~-~~-

Bethesda 34013 Westmoreland Oliver 51 Montgomery Counly X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Wesllake Dr 10 Old

~_=1M G~_ M O Goo_ m C C _ bullbull 0 X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Executive Boulevard Bethesda MO -shy shy -----~--r--------~ shy ---

VIcinity of Seven Locks Rd between Tuckerman La and Belnsua 14082 Gainborough Rd Also Tuckerman La between Galnsborough Montgomery Counly X In Engineering 3rd

Rd and Old Georgetown Rd Bethesda MO ~----- ----shy ---~-- ------~-

to

~f A of May 2 2011

Pep~Q Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011

Location Feeder

1---Belhesda

Bethesda

~he~~ Belhesda

IKenwod Pk__ IBelhesdo MDf-----shyI ------~

15793

I selhesda MD 14950

I

I-s~~ -~-F------115153 eveuy arms I

B I F-~ ---)15153 ~-r-y-a-r~-s---

Beverly Farms 15162

~ ___ ~ _~ ~+ ~_ __

Beverly Farms 15162

Che Chas 14271 vy t--- shyChevy Chase 14271

Che Chase 14896 vy

I

IChevy Chase MO 14271

F ~

Location t Suhdlvision Jurisdiction

_ Monlgomery County

Monlgomery County

Vlclnily of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County Sethesda MD General viclnily-of-=G-oc-ldc-s7b-o-ro--=RdCf=-ro-m---Nc-e-wb-c-u-m--=0-r-I-o-=S=-r-dley

Blvd Bradley Blvd~ from Brlle Or to HiIIndale Rd and Chevy Montgomery CountyChase Blvd from Hlilandale Rd 10 Wisconsin Ave Bethesda

I~nity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road -- ~M~--I- ~ C I Rockville MD on gomery oun y

Vicinity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road M I Roclltv_III__M_D_ On gomery oun Vicinity of Falls Rd between West Ritchie Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Fails ~Rdlo Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

IP-ot--o-rn-a_c-M=-D-c--c----__-c----=---=-__---__~__---~ Vicinity of Falls Rd between Wesl Rilchle Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Falls Rd 10 Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

potorna~M~D~_-----~-=------~--~--__-----+--Vicinity of Montgomery Hills Park Areamiddot Montgomery Street from Fraser A venue to Srookvllle Road Montgomery County Vicinity of lyttonsvlUe Rd between Brookeville Rd and Grubb Rd and Grubb Rd between EaslmiddotWesl Highway and Welern Montgomery County Ave Chevy Chase MO

ChevY Chase Section 3middot along Conneclicul Avenue from Chevy Mont orne County Chase Circle to Bradley lane g ry Vicinity of lyttonsville Rd between BrookeVille Rd and Grubb -j--~~~----------I--~~ Rd and Grubb Rd between EastmiddotWest Highway and Western Montjom ry County

tMMontgomery County

Montgomery County

Monlgomery County

I Montgomery County

Briggs Road and Camella Drive General Vicinity of Randolph Rd from New Hampshire Ave 10 Mlddlevale lane and Briggs RdlMonlgomery County Frorn Mlddlevale lane 10 Hathaway Dr Whoaton MD

b Ave Chce=VY7-Cih=a-seMdeg7middot=---=---c---c--~___~~~svi- 14~ Fairview Estates I Randolph Rd EO New Hampshire AJe~ Colesville 14439 Paint Branch Eslales I Randolph Rd SlO Falnand Rd

Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Fairland Colesville 14493 Rd and Fairland Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd

__ iFalriand MO

Gene~al vicinity wesl of Old Georgetown Rd between Wilson laIMonlgOmery County Colesvill 14866 and Singleton Dr Bethesda MObull Major MC SAIFI conlributlon

General vicinity of New Hampshire Ave from Shaw Ave to 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New~

Hampshire Ave Colesville MD

General vicinity of New Hampshire Avo from Shaw Ave to Colesville 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New

Hampshire Ave Colesville MObull Major MC SAIFI contribution

X

~ fPl

t~ ltshy

~ Ii

fit ~~ t ~ ilo

Igtj 1

~ ~ e

rlgt ~

II ~if ~p

e~ 11i~~

Q~ ~Q

~amp g~ ~-

~ ~I iir ~

It ~fIt ~ Igtj

f ~o

ltJ ~

J

-------+--~ -+shy --+-- +-- ---t-X

-R~ J(1ltshyl ltr~ ~ q ~~

In Engineering

In Engineering

I Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

lTd Quarter 2011

-=-I~-~=tnsectontructlon ~__~12~~er_2~ __~ X

x

x

~---+-P---+ -C--ty-----+-shy 1--x- +shy------11-------l-- shy

x

r-shyX

~~ - ~---~~

1__ ~~~ ~_~ ~4~-~ ---~P~--1 --~ ~~ --r shyX

X ~------~--~-------l--

-+shy -j- shy --+shyX

=-o--nt--g-om-e-ry-Co-u-n7ty------t-shy X X

X

--t shy ~-~

X

- ~-----i ~---+---~

X

2nd Quaner 2011

In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

in Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

+--shy I~- ~~----

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 t--shy --- shy

Quarter 2011

In Conslructlon 3rd Quarter 2011

In Progress 3rd Quarter 2011

+--------1 ----I In Conslruction

--+-shyIn Construction

Complete

Complete

In Engineering

Complete

2nd Quaner 2011

t--- shy2nd Quaner 2011

2nd Quaner 2011

4th Quarter 2010

3rd Quaner 2011

4th Quaner 2010

------+--- ~--------1r-------

X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--+---t--~ +~----

X In Engineering 41h Quarter 2011

~--1~ ~ ___ ~

tmiddot

~~~ As or May 2 2011

_--_~ ~c ~_-c-~------_~~~_~-----~p~e=lpc~O=R=e=lia=biI=ity==E=n=h=an==ce=mentpla-20=11------r---r--------r---rcc----c------------c-c-----~

Location

r-

Darnestown

I---Darnestown

Darnestown

Ia~

Feeder Looationl Subdivision Timeline-1ls~tJJs ~~~~~~0

fftS ~~ II

Tree Trimming installation of ACR and SWitCh ana fleJa Inspection In the vicinity of Springfield Popular Hill Esworthy15230 3rd Quarter 2011Monlgomery County x In Engineering and White Rock Roads

r----~ ~~~~~

Ancienl Oak North I Colton lane URD cable replacemenllcuring Mont Orne Count )( Com lete 41h Quarter 2010 15238 _--i~n Ihe vicinity of coll lane g ry y ~ ~~

15286 Vicinity of HI Wood Rd Montgomery County X In Englneerlng3rd Quarter 2011

Darnestown MO 15237 VTiciknilyFof DtaRmesdtoDwn RdmiddottbetweMeOn Ancienl Oak Drive and Montgomery Counly)( In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 1_ ur ey 00 oa I ames own bull __

Viclnily of Darnestown Rd between Ancienl Oak Drive and M I C t 3rd Quaner 2011OamesIown MD 15231 T FIR dOl MD on gomery oun y CompleleLr----- urfey o~~ ~~~es~~l bull I 15254 Vicinily of Muncasler Mill Rd from Laytonsville Rdlo Redland Monl ome CountDerwoord X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 I_~__ Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Winters Run ~ _ ~ ~-g _ ry y

____ ~ ~492 Countryside I Briggs Chaney Rd WIO Old Columbia Pik~e___ Montgomery Counly Complele Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Falnand

Fainand MD 14493 Rd and Falnand Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd Montgomery Counly X lin Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

I--~~ ~~ Fairtnd~_~ -[-----I-----+---__t_Woodside Parkway and Dale Drivemiddot Vicinity of Universily Blvd

IFour Corners 14452 at Indian Spring Dr and ColeSville Rd between Brewsler Ave Montgomery County X lin Engineering 41h Quarter 2011 nd Spring St Sliver Spring MD -+--t I---t-------

Gaithersburg I14063 Vicinity of Quince OrChard Blvd al Sebastian Blvd and W Montgomery County x Complele ~ Diamond Ave al Muddy Branch Rd Galthersburg MD ~- -~ ------t- shy--+shyM~ddy-Brnch Rd nortll of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy

Gaithersburg 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of IMonlgomery Counly X IComplete i---- fieldS R~~lthersburg MDmiddot ____L

~------t~-----I---l-

General vlclnlly of Quince Orchard Rd Pin Oak Or ChestnutGaithersburg 14070 Montgomery Counly X CompleteSt Waler St and Cedar Ave Gaithersburg MD

1 land Place I Monlgomery Village Montgomery County _X__~ lsi Quarter 2011 -~+----l= ~Iete General vicinity of Research Blvd from Darnestown Rd to Mont ome CountGaithersburg 15067 x In Construction bull 2nd Quarter 2011 ~___ middotrhltlrGrOVeRdGalthe~bUrgMD ___ 9 ry y 1__ -+-- ~~-~middotI----+--

Gallllersbur 115235 General Vicinity or Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suyanand Mont ome Count 4th Quarter 2010 x CompleleI--- ~~__g_ ~--+--- Rd and Partnershp Rd Suganand MD ~ __~~ g ry y +------+---------~ l---~--+--~__+-

Vicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and Gailhersburg 41h Quarter 2010

Cenlerway ~Rd-Gait~h_ers_b_u~rg~_M_D___________-j

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County Complete

----+ ~ ------1------1~-~~ ~ 1shyVicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and

Gallhersburg 3rd Quarter 2011 Centerway Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Major MC SAIFI contribution

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County )( In Engineering

r- --- shyG it b 15256 Vicinity of Laytonsville Rd Warfield Rd and Goshen Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

a lers urg ~~~___~ ~ __ ~ 13-theigturg MD ~~ ~ _

GI b 15256 WarfieldRdfromWoodfieldRdtoAddnbroo~wayandGoshenM nt C ty I C I Ii 2 dQ rt 2011 a ers urg Rd from Warfield Rd 10 Brink Rd 0 gomery oun nons rue on n ua er

~~~ 1~5284 Westleigh I Duri Mill Rd EO Quince Orchard Rd --Montgomery County -----~__=_r--x-- -~ Completelt Quart2011 Muddy Branch Roadmiddot Vicinity 01 Shady Grove Rd between

Ufg 15834 iR h C rt d G Ith Rd R ~III MD Montgomery County In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 es~a-~_ ou an a er I OCnll e 1___ _~_ _______1

15834 Vicinity of Shady Grove Rd between Research Court and Galthe M t C I C let mg Rd Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e1

~-~ ---- --- ~~~-r__~----~-~~ r~

mg 15235 General vicinity of Blackrock Rd Dameslown Rd Sugarland County x lin engineering 4th QUarter 2011 _ ~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suyanand MD t--------~~ t------~ -+ ~+-_~

GmiddotII b ~ ~~~523S Ge eral vicinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Sugarland M t C I X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 ers Ufg ~~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suganand MD on gomery oun y 1 t--- shy

G I b 15235 General vcinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suganand M I C t 3rd Quarter 2011X In Planningt lers urg Rd and Partnership Rd Suoanand MD on gomery oun y

(J As of May 2 2011

---- --- -- - ---- ------ -- - --- --- ------- ---- ---- ---- ------- ---

------- ------ -----

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 ------- ---- bullbull J _ bull c bull

_ _ ~ ~ c If 0 f I

I if~ sect~ ~ c-V Imiddot - I II b - ofltgt t l

Location Feeder Location (Subdivision ~Iti -f I oc- rsectc- csect sgt $ Statu Timeline c- c- gt b i 0 ~ ~t Cf)t I~ J1 ~~

~l~ rsectio ff~ lt bullbullbullbullbullbull Q ~ -= f t-i Q

I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ _c___ I plusmn bull tv ~___ _ -

Vicinity of Quince Orchard Blvd at Sebastian Blvd and W ---~-------f Gaithersburg 14063 Diamond Ave at Muddy Branch Rd Gaithersburg MDmiddot West Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ___ _ ____ Riding and[)iamond Sq _ ____ __ _____ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ ____ __ _

Gaithersburg 14069 General vicinltv of Quince Orchard Rd between Longdraft Rd M t C I X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 and Muddy Branch Park Galthe burg MD West Riding II on gomery Dun y nons rue on n ua er

---- ------------ ------ -- --- -- ---- --- -+----------1 Gaithersburg 14886 ~e~r1 ~Icinit~~f Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

1----_________ a___ eurllL -- ------___ ~--- ----__ ------f------------l ------------1 Germanlown 14886 ~~~~~~~~t~~ Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---- --~ ------- --- ----- --------- --- ------1 Germanlown 15238 VGICllnhitY degbf RlfflMefoOrdMRdj degMame essAtolFWn Rdmiddot bundtiJones lane Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

tr----------- _-5 urg_ - aor connon 1-----_ ---- ---~- _ -- ---------1--1----------1-------------1 Germantown 15240 ~~n~y of Citopper~ betwen Mateney Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

~~nown bull _____ ______ _________ ______ _________ _______-

Germantown 115240 ~~in~ty of CI~pper~ between Matenev Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Planning 4th Quarter 2011 ~~~r~~~ ~~wn ~~ _ _ _________-1

Oakland Road and Brookland Drive - General vicinity of River Glen Echo 14951 Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeslde Dr Montgomery County X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD ---- 1---------- --- --1---- ----1------- -----1-------- shy

Glen Echo 1476814769 SurnnerViliage I Sentinel Dr Eta Sangmore Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

Glen Echo 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C t X J PI I 3rd Q rt 2011 Bethesda MD Dr Bethesda MD on gomery Dun y nann ng ua er

r=ccc=c - - ----- -- 1----------Kensinglon 14440 nr~1 Vi~lniy of~~ward Ave Strthmore Ave and Montrose Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

__e~ng_on ~---- ______ ______ 1_-----shyGeneral vicinity of Bel-Pre Rd from Connecticut Ave to layhltl

Layhill MD Rd layhill from Bel-Pre Rd to Cherter Mill Rd and Argyle Club Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd from layhdl Rd to longmead Crossing and Nonnandy

---- CrossingOrlayhlllMD _____ r---- ----- ------ --c---- --- ------- --------Vlcinlly of Olney-laytonsville Rd between Stanbrook la and

Laytonsville 15901 Griffith Rd Griffith Rd between OIneYmiddotLaytonsvilie Rd and Montgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 ~- Dam-scus Rd Laytonsville MD ~_ _+__ __1----_ ______________+ l ytlI 15902 Vlcinily of Brookville RdMunc bullbullter Rd and Muncaster Mill M tel X I PI 3rd Q rt 2011

bull oosv e Rdbetween Pepco 230kV RIW and Air Park Rd on gomery oun I n anmng u er -- -- ------- - ----- - ---- --- ---- ---1----- ---- ------ -- ----- --- 1------ --------+--------shy

layt lie 15903 Vicinity of Fleldcrest Rd and Woodfield Rd between Olney M t C t X I PI 3rd Q rter 2011 onVI laytonsville Rd and Brenloll Dr Gaithersburg MO on gomery oun y n nmng u

-- -------- --- c--- --- --- --- -------- lytonsville 15904 ~~~~~v~e~r~~vllle Rd between Zion Rd and Georgia Ave Monlgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

-~

Vicinity of Olney laytonSville Road Dorsey Road WalfJeld

laytonsville 15905 Road Woodfield Road and Brink Road between Riggs Road ami Monlgom Count X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 Gaithersburg Road and RIggs Road between Oinev laylonsvlUe ry y Road and Ripplemead Drive laytonsville MD

--+-----+-- -- -~ --- ----- --- --------- shyII 1506 Vicinity of Zion Rd from Gregg Rd Soulh to Olney laytonsville M t C t X I PI I 3 d Q rt 011Laytonsv e bull Rd (RIl0B) to Olney Mill Rd on gomery oun y nann ng r ua er lt

---- -1----- --- - GeneraiVijnityof Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to EaslWes 1--------1------ - - --- ------------1 linden 14264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East Montgomery Counll( X In Ptanning 3rd Quarter 2011

Wesl Highway Sliver Spring MD MiieURd---- 6914------- Willi Oak Falrtand Montgomery County ------i-~)(-I_- --- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Metzerolt Rd --- 6913~- Fairland and Cores ville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011=----_ - -- -- ---shyMontgomery 14379 Vicinity of Arrowhead Rd Goshen Rd Snoufte School Rd Mont orne Count X In En Ineertn 4th Quarter 2011 VlIage Wightman Rd and Warfield Rd GaIthersburg MD 9 ry Y ____ ____ 9 g __

reg 5 As of May 2 2011

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 5: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

middotMAPP-~ 1amp III MID-ATUNTIC POWER PATHWAY

wwwpowerpathwaycQn1

Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway Overview

Much of the East Coast relies on a congested power system that cant meet rising demand without significant upgrades As per a report on the US energy infrastructure electricity demand has increased by about 25 percent since 1990 while construction of transmission facilities decreased by about 30 percent Meanwhile the demand for power in this region is projected to increase by nearly 20 percent over the next i 0 years

As a result of this increasing demand for power the existing transmission system in the region will not be able to keep up in the years ahead Experts like the Us Department of Energy have said that building new transmission will help address this problem

The MAPP project is a transmission line that would significantly increase the regions ability to transport power Local utilities and electric cooperatives rely on this transmission system to keep the lights on for their customers The MAPP line will bring reliable and more economical power to the region

When you combine this improved ability to transport energy with a stronger focus on energy conservation and development of new clean-air power sources like wind and solar the region will be well positioned to meet the energy challenges in its future

The Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway will connect numerous points on the grid According to a study completed by the US Department of Energys (DOE) National Renewable Energy

Dever

lVarltingon DC Burches Georgetown

Possum Point ~- 1 Indian~ iII Chalk bullbullbullbull bull

Point ~_ _ Cambridge ~ bullbull ~ bullbull~ RIver

ltgt North Anna

ca~ Vienna

Cliffs Salisbury

_ MAPP AC Power

u MAPP DC Power

Existing AC Line

(Jgt Nuclear Generation

Fossil Generation

Substation

TheMt-E~Ii~~~willbeil approxlrnately69 miles Ilnesand83 miles of DC

bull r bull -~ -~ ~~

The DC POrtion cif the line o j miles in CCllvertCountyIA~I~ I

39 miles underWater (across

Laboratory (NREL) in early 2010 Whether were talking about using land-based wind in the Midwest offshore wind in the East or any combination of wind power resources any plausible scenario requires transmission infrastructure upgrades and we need to start planning for that immediately

ASCE Report httpJwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgfact-sheetienergy

PJM Load Forecast Report January 201 0

13 miles in Dorchester County Ma~yland 7 miles in Wicomico County Maryland o 21 miles in Sussex County Delaware

bull The AC portion of the line will consist of o 30 miles in Charles County Maryland a 24 miles in Prince Georges County Maryland o 9 miles in Calvert County Maryland 6 miles in Sussex County Delaware

bull ACiDC converters will be located inCalvert Wicomico and Sussex Counties

bull A majority ofthe line will be built on oradjacentto existing transmission lines

MAPP has a target completion date of 2015

agency approved and permitted route

Inc1V

~dcmotvo J4I power

Project Overview 110810

----- ------ -------

Pepco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 bull camp~

~ ~ 1 I ~ ~

~ ~ 1 q ~q lt ~ 11 -a 16 vb gt ~ ~ ~ bull C gt f E b ~ $i 0 li I

LocallOn Feeder LocatlOnISulldlvlSlon 41Jj ~ - ltif o~ -1Jj~ 6 ~ Statusmiddot middotTmelmemiddot ~ ~ J ~ 1Jj~ b 0 gt ~ ~l ~E Ji 0 lt~

~ J1~ -a sect j ~i q J - ~ J1

lt I bull )1( ~ ~ ~l 1lt bull Be~t4i1 __ 69119 ___ Beverly Farms HuntingliillPlllacRockville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~eIl5Mill_ _____ 34978 Twinbrook -- Montgomery county X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~ 69180 Bevrly Farms Potomac Rockville Montgomery County X 10 Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 _______ Blls Mill ~ Beverly Farms Hunting Hill Rockville Montgomery county X ____ ---- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

B tI d 14834 Genralarea between Old Georgetown Rd and Chellon Rd and M C X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 e les a East-West Highway and Cheltenham Dr Bethesda MD ontgomery ounty n on5 ruc on n ua er

f-- --shyVicinity east of Wisconsin Ave south of EastmiddotWest Highway

Bethesda 14867 Also vicinity between Wisconsin Ave and Old Georgetown Rd Montgomery County X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 north of Easl-West Highwav Bethesda MD

Bradley Hills Chevy Chase Terr Kenwood - The area bounded - --- --- - ----- - ~ --- _

Bethesda 14869 by Hampden La bull Bradley Blvd Wisconsin Ave and Arlington Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

1_____ IR~~e_sd_aMD ______ _~______ __~__ 1____ -- ---------- ---- c-- -----~--~-B Ih d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhouodlng Rdto Vendome M I C ty X Cit 41h Qu rt 2010

e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery oun amp e B ______a_er_______

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendom M t ---- C ty X Cit 4th Q rt 2010 e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery Qun omp e e ua er

r------ The Palisades Cong slonal Country Club ESTS Cabin John ----- 1--- --- ----- f- --- ----- shyBethsda 14943 Glen Echo Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Wathoundlng Rd te Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ Vendolll Dr Bethesda MD ___ _

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C ty X I E I rI 3rd Q rt 2011 e eo a Dr Belhesda MD _ Major MC SAtFI contriilutlon on gomery oun n ng nee ng ua er

Woodburn Memmack Park KenWOOd Park - General -r~-of --- ----- ---- shy

Bethbullbullda 14944 MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Brickyard Rd Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

_t____-IB_ethesdaMD ------ ------ r-- -----shyB th d 14945 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Duvall Dr and adjacenl M t co ty X Cit 1 t Q rt 2011

e es a streets in Bethesda) MD on gomery un omp e e s ua er

Gle~ Echo Hgls Sumner Westhaven Wetgate Glen Cove ---- -- r--- ------Belhesda 14945 Brookdale Westwood Shopping Centermiddot Massachusetts Ave Montgomery County X Complete 1t Quarter 2011

from Avalon Dr 10 Duvall Dr and adjacenttreet In Bethesda MD ----- --- f-- -------- ----- ----Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and Wilson La and along

Bethesda 14948 Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley BlvAlso along Bradley Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brlle Rd Bethesa MD

_ ----------------- _ ------ -- --- ---- ---------- ------ --- shy

Wilson Knolls Oakwood Knolls Locust Ridge Landon Wood English Vii Bradley Hillsmiddot Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and

Belhesda 14948 Wilson La and along Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley Blvd Monlgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 Also along Bradley Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brite Rd

_ __Belllsda~_~__ __ Springlleld bull Vlclnltv of Ridgefield Rd between River Rd and

Belhesda 14949 Kirkwood Dr and River Rd between Brookside Dr and Western Montgomery county X Complete 1st Quarter 2011 _____ __ ___ Ave Bethesda MD ___

General vlclnily of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradley

Bethesda 14950 Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr to Hiliandale Rd and Chevy Monl ornery Count X Com lete 1st Quarter 2011 Chase Blvd from Hllandale Rd to WisconSin Ave Bethesda gyp

MD _________ ____ _ ______ ______

Generailliclnltv of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradlev Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr 10 Hiliandale Rd and Chevy

Bethesda 14950 Chase Blvd from Hillandale Rd to Wisconsin Ave Belhesda Montgomery County X In Englneerlng 3rd Quarter 2011 I

MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution

A of May 2 2011

Pellco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --shy r----shy - bullbull

bull gt- -

~ 1 I bullbullbullbull~o ~ ftt

) ilt~ shyJ ~~ If J~ fshy lt ~ f

Feeder Location I Subdivision I I t b~ tjt s

Location

~~g ~ I l If 0 tsect cf 91 Status Tlmelinll

c -shy - 111 )0

i I~ ~I l~f amp (1f rsect ~ tsect middot~ft

~ cg- f ~ tj Q

gtlt igtf It ti bull

-General vicinity of River Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield

Bethesda 14951 Rd Brookede Dr Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Bethesda MD

---shy -Westwood Kenwood - Generat vicinity of River Rd from ~--

Bethesda 14951 Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeside Dr Chamberlain Monlgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__-shy _-shy Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD -----shy r-shy -shy -

Glen Echo Hgts Potomac Palisade Park Washington Waldorf _ Belhesda 14952 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Sangamore Dr and Rive Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Rd between Buller Rd and Ridgefield Rd Belilesda MD -~- ~ -shy ~-- --shy

General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree Bethesda 15106 Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

----shy -shy -I----Longwood Bradley lIIanor Tuscullun Bradley Hills Grove

Bethesda 15106 Orumaldry Green Tree Manor Siratton Wood Fernwood shyMontgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree

Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD --shy -shy -shy ---shy r-shy -----shy ------shy 1---shy --

McCauley Park Kentdale Ests Bradley Park Wet Bethesda Bethesda 15108 Park Burning Tree VaUey Cohasset- Vicinity of Kent_dale Dr Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

between Bradley Blvd and Sorrel Ave 8ethesda MD ~--- ----shy -~-- -shy ----shy -+---- --shy --shy --shy -----------~ -------shy

General vlclnily of Arrowood Rd from Arrowood CI to Burdette Rd Hillmead Rd from Burdette Rd to Bradley Blvd Bradley

Bethesda 15110 Blvd from HIUmead Rd to Glenwood Rd Woodhaven Blvd fran Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Bradley Blvd to Hawthome Rd Bethesd MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution1----_------ -shy --~------ ----shy --shy shy --shy -~-- --shy -~- -~-- -~-- -------Ro~ Hill Est Burning Tree Ets Stonellurst Center Seven locks Hills Carderrock Springs Evergreen Cabin John Park -

Bethesda 15111 General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd between Bradley Blvd and Montgomery County X InConstruction 2nd Quarter 2011 MacArthur Blvd and River Rd between Fans Rd and Fenway

I---shy -_shy --shy -~-Dr Betneda MD

----shy - - 1---shyWildwood Hills Knollwood Windsor Hills Bells Mill Vii BeUs

--shy 1--shy --shy ~i--

Bethesda 15115 Mill Springs - General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd Democracy Montgomery County ilt Complete lsi Quarter 2011

r--- Blvd Bells Mill Rd Bethesda MD -shy --shy ---shy ~ ---~ ---

Edgemoor Bradley Hills - Vicinities of Arlington Rd between Betned 15144 Moorland La and Elm St Wilson La between Corden Ave and Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Aberdeen Rd and Apple Ridge Rd at Custer Rd Bethesda MD

I---shy --shy --shy ---shy I--shy ---shy -shy ----_-shyVicinity of Auburn Norfolk and Rugby Avenues between

Bethesda 15145 Georgetown Road and Wisconsin Avenue and icinity of Wisconsin Avenue between Rugby Avenue and Pooks Hill Road

Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---Bethesda MD

--~ --Icomplete~hes~ i5793shy Pooks Hill Apartment - Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County X 1st Quarter 2011-shy

Vicinity of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Bethesua 1579l Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hltl Road Monlgomery County X In Engineering lrd Qu arter 2011

---~----~-

Bethesda MDbullbull Major MC SAIFI contribution ---IcornpletoBethesda 15797 S-cred Heart Schoolmiddot Pooks HIli Road Montgomery County X 4th Quarter 2010

-=--~-~~-

Bethesda 34013 Westmoreland Oliver 51 Montgomery Counly X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Wesllake Dr 10 Old

~_=1M G~_ M O Goo_ m C C _ bullbull 0 X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Executive Boulevard Bethesda MO -shy shy -----~--r--------~ shy ---

VIcinity of Seven Locks Rd between Tuckerman La and Belnsua 14082 Gainborough Rd Also Tuckerman La between Galnsborough Montgomery Counly X In Engineering 3rd

Rd and Old Georgetown Rd Bethesda MO ~----- ----shy ---~-- ------~-

to

~f A of May 2 2011

Pep~Q Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011

Location Feeder

1---Belhesda

Bethesda

~he~~ Belhesda

IKenwod Pk__ IBelhesdo MDf-----shyI ------~

15793

I selhesda MD 14950

I

I-s~~ -~-F------115153 eveuy arms I

B I F-~ ---)15153 ~-r-y-a-r~-s---

Beverly Farms 15162

~ ___ ~ _~ ~+ ~_ __

Beverly Farms 15162

Che Chas 14271 vy t--- shyChevy Chase 14271

Che Chase 14896 vy

I

IChevy Chase MO 14271

F ~

Location t Suhdlvision Jurisdiction

_ Monlgomery County

Monlgomery County

Vlclnily of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County Sethesda MD General viclnily-of-=G-oc-ldc-s7b-o-ro--=RdCf=-ro-m---Nc-e-wb-c-u-m--=0-r-I-o-=S=-r-dley

Blvd Bradley Blvd~ from Brlle Or to HiIIndale Rd and Chevy Montgomery CountyChase Blvd from Hlilandale Rd 10 Wisconsin Ave Bethesda

I~nity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road -- ~M~--I- ~ C I Rockville MD on gomery oun y

Vicinity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road M I Roclltv_III__M_D_ On gomery oun Vicinity of Falls Rd between West Ritchie Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Fails ~Rdlo Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

IP-ot--o-rn-a_c-M=-D-c--c----__-c----=---=-__---__~__---~ Vicinity of Falls Rd between Wesl Rilchle Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Falls Rd 10 Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

potorna~M~D~_-----~-=------~--~--__-----+--Vicinity of Montgomery Hills Park Areamiddot Montgomery Street from Fraser A venue to Srookvllle Road Montgomery County Vicinity of lyttonsvlUe Rd between Brookeville Rd and Grubb Rd and Grubb Rd between EaslmiddotWesl Highway and Welern Montgomery County Ave Chevy Chase MO

ChevY Chase Section 3middot along Conneclicul Avenue from Chevy Mont orne County Chase Circle to Bradley lane g ry Vicinity of lyttonsville Rd between BrookeVille Rd and Grubb -j--~~~----------I--~~ Rd and Grubb Rd between EastmiddotWest Highway and Western Montjom ry County

tMMontgomery County

Montgomery County

Monlgomery County

I Montgomery County

Briggs Road and Camella Drive General Vicinity of Randolph Rd from New Hampshire Ave 10 Mlddlevale lane and Briggs RdlMonlgomery County Frorn Mlddlevale lane 10 Hathaway Dr Whoaton MD

b Ave Chce=VY7-Cih=a-seMdeg7middot=---=---c---c--~___~~~svi- 14~ Fairview Estates I Randolph Rd EO New Hampshire AJe~ Colesville 14439 Paint Branch Eslales I Randolph Rd SlO Falnand Rd

Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Fairland Colesville 14493 Rd and Fairland Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd

__ iFalriand MO

Gene~al vicinity wesl of Old Georgetown Rd between Wilson laIMonlgOmery County Colesvill 14866 and Singleton Dr Bethesda MObull Major MC SAIFI conlributlon

General vicinity of New Hampshire Ave from Shaw Ave to 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New~

Hampshire Ave Colesville MD

General vicinity of New Hampshire Avo from Shaw Ave to Colesville 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New

Hampshire Ave Colesville MObull Major MC SAIFI contribution

X

~ fPl

t~ ltshy

~ Ii

fit ~~ t ~ ilo

Igtj 1

~ ~ e

rlgt ~

II ~if ~p

e~ 11i~~

Q~ ~Q

~amp g~ ~-

~ ~I iir ~

It ~fIt ~ Igtj

f ~o

ltJ ~

J

-------+--~ -+shy --+-- +-- ---t-X

-R~ J(1ltshyl ltr~ ~ q ~~

In Engineering

In Engineering

I Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

lTd Quarter 2011

-=-I~-~=tnsectontructlon ~__~12~~er_2~ __~ X

x

x

~---+-P---+ -C--ty-----+-shy 1--x- +shy------11-------l-- shy

x

r-shyX

~~ - ~---~~

1__ ~~~ ~_~ ~4~-~ ---~P~--1 --~ ~~ --r shyX

X ~------~--~-------l--

-+shy -j- shy --+shyX

=-o--nt--g-om-e-ry-Co-u-n7ty------t-shy X X

X

--t shy ~-~

X

- ~-----i ~---+---~

X

2nd Quaner 2011

In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

in Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

+--shy I~- ~~----

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 t--shy --- shy

Quarter 2011

In Conslructlon 3rd Quarter 2011

In Progress 3rd Quarter 2011

+--------1 ----I In Conslruction

--+-shyIn Construction

Complete

Complete

In Engineering

Complete

2nd Quaner 2011

t--- shy2nd Quaner 2011

2nd Quaner 2011

4th Quarter 2010

3rd Quaner 2011

4th Quaner 2010

------+--- ~--------1r-------

X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--+---t--~ +~----

X In Engineering 41h Quarter 2011

~--1~ ~ ___ ~

tmiddot

~~~ As or May 2 2011

_--_~ ~c ~_-c-~------_~~~_~-----~p~e=lpc~O=R=e=lia=biI=ity==E=n=h=an==ce=mentpla-20=11------r---r--------r---rcc----c------------c-c-----~

Location

r-

Darnestown

I---Darnestown

Darnestown

Ia~

Feeder Looationl Subdivision Timeline-1ls~tJJs ~~~~~~0

fftS ~~ II

Tree Trimming installation of ACR and SWitCh ana fleJa Inspection In the vicinity of Springfield Popular Hill Esworthy15230 3rd Quarter 2011Monlgomery County x In Engineering and White Rock Roads

r----~ ~~~~~

Ancienl Oak North I Colton lane URD cable replacemenllcuring Mont Orne Count )( Com lete 41h Quarter 2010 15238 _--i~n Ihe vicinity of coll lane g ry y ~ ~~

15286 Vicinity of HI Wood Rd Montgomery County X In Englneerlng3rd Quarter 2011

Darnestown MO 15237 VTiciknilyFof DtaRmesdtoDwn RdmiddottbetweMeOn Ancienl Oak Drive and Montgomery Counly)( In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 1_ ur ey 00 oa I ames own bull __

Viclnily of Darnestown Rd between Ancienl Oak Drive and M I C t 3rd Quaner 2011OamesIown MD 15231 T FIR dOl MD on gomery oun y CompleleLr----- urfey o~~ ~~~es~~l bull I 15254 Vicinily of Muncasler Mill Rd from Laytonsville Rdlo Redland Monl ome CountDerwoord X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 I_~__ Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Winters Run ~ _ ~ ~-g _ ry y

____ ~ ~492 Countryside I Briggs Chaney Rd WIO Old Columbia Pik~e___ Montgomery Counly Complele Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Falnand

Fainand MD 14493 Rd and Falnand Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd Montgomery Counly X lin Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

I--~~ ~~ Fairtnd~_~ -[-----I-----+---__t_Woodside Parkway and Dale Drivemiddot Vicinity of Universily Blvd

IFour Corners 14452 at Indian Spring Dr and ColeSville Rd between Brewsler Ave Montgomery County X lin Engineering 41h Quarter 2011 nd Spring St Sliver Spring MD -+--t I---t-------

Gaithersburg I14063 Vicinity of Quince OrChard Blvd al Sebastian Blvd and W Montgomery County x Complele ~ Diamond Ave al Muddy Branch Rd Galthersburg MD ~- -~ ------t- shy--+shyM~ddy-Brnch Rd nortll of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy

Gaithersburg 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of IMonlgomery Counly X IComplete i---- fieldS R~~lthersburg MDmiddot ____L

~------t~-----I---l-

General vlclnlly of Quince Orchard Rd Pin Oak Or ChestnutGaithersburg 14070 Montgomery Counly X CompleteSt Waler St and Cedar Ave Gaithersburg MD

1 land Place I Monlgomery Village Montgomery County _X__~ lsi Quarter 2011 -~+----l= ~Iete General vicinity of Research Blvd from Darnestown Rd to Mont ome CountGaithersburg 15067 x In Construction bull 2nd Quarter 2011 ~___ middotrhltlrGrOVeRdGalthe~bUrgMD ___ 9 ry y 1__ -+-- ~~-~middotI----+--

Gallllersbur 115235 General Vicinity or Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suyanand Mont ome Count 4th Quarter 2010 x CompleleI--- ~~__g_ ~--+--- Rd and Partnershp Rd Suganand MD ~ __~~ g ry y +------+---------~ l---~--+--~__+-

Vicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and Gailhersburg 41h Quarter 2010

Cenlerway ~Rd-Gait~h_ers_b_u~rg~_M_D___________-j

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County Complete

----+ ~ ------1------1~-~~ ~ 1shyVicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and

Gallhersburg 3rd Quarter 2011 Centerway Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Major MC SAIFI contribution

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County )( In Engineering

r- --- shyG it b 15256 Vicinity of Laytonsville Rd Warfield Rd and Goshen Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

a lers urg ~~~___~ ~ __ ~ 13-theigturg MD ~~ ~ _

GI b 15256 WarfieldRdfromWoodfieldRdtoAddnbroo~wayandGoshenM nt C ty I C I Ii 2 dQ rt 2011 a ers urg Rd from Warfield Rd 10 Brink Rd 0 gomery oun nons rue on n ua er

~~~ 1~5284 Westleigh I Duri Mill Rd EO Quince Orchard Rd --Montgomery County -----~__=_r--x-- -~ Completelt Quart2011 Muddy Branch Roadmiddot Vicinity 01 Shady Grove Rd between

Ufg 15834 iR h C rt d G Ith Rd R ~III MD Montgomery County In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 es~a-~_ ou an a er I OCnll e 1___ _~_ _______1

15834 Vicinity of Shady Grove Rd between Research Court and Galthe M t C I C let mg Rd Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e1

~-~ ---- --- ~~~-r__~----~-~~ r~

mg 15235 General vicinity of Blackrock Rd Dameslown Rd Sugarland County x lin engineering 4th QUarter 2011 _ ~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suyanand MD t--------~~ t------~ -+ ~+-_~

GmiddotII b ~ ~~~523S Ge eral vicinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Sugarland M t C I X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 ers Ufg ~~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suganand MD on gomery oun y 1 t--- shy

G I b 15235 General vcinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suganand M I C t 3rd Quarter 2011X In Planningt lers urg Rd and Partnership Rd Suoanand MD on gomery oun y

(J As of May 2 2011

---- --- -- - ---- ------ -- - --- --- ------- ---- ---- ---- ------- ---

------- ------ -----

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 ------- ---- bullbull J _ bull c bull

_ _ ~ ~ c If 0 f I

I if~ sect~ ~ c-V Imiddot - I II b - ofltgt t l

Location Feeder Location (Subdivision ~Iti -f I oc- rsectc- csect sgt $ Statu Timeline c- c- gt b i 0 ~ ~t Cf)t I~ J1 ~~

~l~ rsectio ff~ lt bullbullbullbullbullbull Q ~ -= f t-i Q

I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ _c___ I plusmn bull tv ~___ _ -

Vicinity of Quince Orchard Blvd at Sebastian Blvd and W ---~-------f Gaithersburg 14063 Diamond Ave at Muddy Branch Rd Gaithersburg MDmiddot West Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ___ _ ____ Riding and[)iamond Sq _ ____ __ _____ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ ____ __ _

Gaithersburg 14069 General vicinltv of Quince Orchard Rd between Longdraft Rd M t C I X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 and Muddy Branch Park Galthe burg MD West Riding II on gomery Dun y nons rue on n ua er

---- ------------ ------ -- --- -- ---- --- -+----------1 Gaithersburg 14886 ~e~r1 ~Icinit~~f Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

1----_________ a___ eurllL -- ------___ ~--- ----__ ------f------------l ------------1 Germanlown 14886 ~~~~~~~~t~~ Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---- --~ ------- --- ----- --------- --- ------1 Germanlown 15238 VGICllnhitY degbf RlfflMefoOrdMRdj degMame essAtolFWn Rdmiddot bundtiJones lane Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

tr----------- _-5 urg_ - aor connon 1-----_ ---- ---~- _ -- ---------1--1----------1-------------1 Germantown 15240 ~~n~y of Citopper~ betwen Mateney Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

~~nown bull _____ ______ _________ ______ _________ _______-

Germantown 115240 ~~in~ty of CI~pper~ between Matenev Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Planning 4th Quarter 2011 ~~~r~~~ ~~wn ~~ _ _ _________-1

Oakland Road and Brookland Drive - General vicinity of River Glen Echo 14951 Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeslde Dr Montgomery County X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD ---- 1---------- --- --1---- ----1------- -----1-------- shy

Glen Echo 1476814769 SurnnerViliage I Sentinel Dr Eta Sangmore Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

Glen Echo 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C t X J PI I 3rd Q rt 2011 Bethesda MD Dr Bethesda MD on gomery Dun y nann ng ua er

r=ccc=c - - ----- -- 1----------Kensinglon 14440 nr~1 Vi~lniy of~~ward Ave Strthmore Ave and Montrose Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

__e~ng_on ~---- ______ ______ 1_-----shyGeneral vicinity of Bel-Pre Rd from Connecticut Ave to layhltl

Layhill MD Rd layhill from Bel-Pre Rd to Cherter Mill Rd and Argyle Club Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd from layhdl Rd to longmead Crossing and Nonnandy

---- CrossingOrlayhlllMD _____ r---- ----- ------ --c---- --- ------- --------Vlcinlly of Olney-laytonsville Rd between Stanbrook la and

Laytonsville 15901 Griffith Rd Griffith Rd between OIneYmiddotLaytonsvilie Rd and Montgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 ~- Dam-scus Rd Laytonsville MD ~_ _+__ __1----_ ______________+ l ytlI 15902 Vlcinily of Brookville RdMunc bullbullter Rd and Muncaster Mill M tel X I PI 3rd Q rt 2011

bull oosv e Rdbetween Pepco 230kV RIW and Air Park Rd on gomery oun I n anmng u er -- -- ------- - ----- - ---- --- ---- ---1----- ---- ------ -- ----- --- 1------ --------+--------shy

layt lie 15903 Vicinity of Fleldcrest Rd and Woodfield Rd between Olney M t C t X I PI 3rd Q rter 2011 onVI laytonsville Rd and Brenloll Dr Gaithersburg MO on gomery oun y n nmng u

-- -------- --- c--- --- --- --- -------- lytonsville 15904 ~~~~~v~e~r~~vllle Rd between Zion Rd and Georgia Ave Monlgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

-~

Vicinity of Olney laytonSville Road Dorsey Road WalfJeld

laytonsville 15905 Road Woodfield Road and Brink Road between Riggs Road ami Monlgom Count X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 Gaithersburg Road and RIggs Road between Oinev laylonsvlUe ry y Road and Ripplemead Drive laytonsville MD

--+-----+-- -- -~ --- ----- --- --------- shyII 1506 Vicinity of Zion Rd from Gregg Rd Soulh to Olney laytonsville M t C t X I PI I 3 d Q rt 011Laytonsv e bull Rd (RIl0B) to Olney Mill Rd on gomery oun y nann ng r ua er lt

---- -1----- --- - GeneraiVijnityof Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to EaslWes 1--------1------ - - --- ------------1 linden 14264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East Montgomery Counll( X In Ptanning 3rd Quarter 2011

Wesl Highway Sliver Spring MD MiieURd---- 6914------- Willi Oak Falrtand Montgomery County ------i-~)(-I_- --- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Metzerolt Rd --- 6913~- Fairland and Cores ville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011=----_ - -- -- ---shyMontgomery 14379 Vicinity of Arrowhead Rd Goshen Rd Snoufte School Rd Mont orne Count X In En Ineertn 4th Quarter 2011 VlIage Wightman Rd and Warfield Rd GaIthersburg MD 9 ry Y ____ ____ 9 g __

reg 5 As of May 2 2011

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 6: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

----- ------ -------

Pepco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 bull camp~

~ ~ 1 I ~ ~

~ ~ 1 q ~q lt ~ 11 -a 16 vb gt ~ ~ ~ bull C gt f E b ~ $i 0 li I

LocallOn Feeder LocatlOnISulldlvlSlon 41Jj ~ - ltif o~ -1Jj~ 6 ~ Statusmiddot middotTmelmemiddot ~ ~ J ~ 1Jj~ b 0 gt ~ ~l ~E Ji 0 lt~

~ J1~ -a sect j ~i q J - ~ J1

lt I bull )1( ~ ~ ~l 1lt bull Be~t4i1 __ 69119 ___ Beverly Farms HuntingliillPlllacRockville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~eIl5Mill_ _____ 34978 Twinbrook -- Montgomery county X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ~ 69180 Bevrly Farms Potomac Rockville Montgomery County X 10 Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 _______ Blls Mill ~ Beverly Farms Hunting Hill Rockville Montgomery county X ____ ---- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

B tI d 14834 Genralarea between Old Georgetown Rd and Chellon Rd and M C X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 e les a East-West Highway and Cheltenham Dr Bethesda MD ontgomery ounty n on5 ruc on n ua er

f-- --shyVicinity east of Wisconsin Ave south of EastmiddotWest Highway

Bethesda 14867 Also vicinity between Wisconsin Ave and Old Georgetown Rd Montgomery County X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 north of Easl-West Highwav Bethesda MD

Bradley Hills Chevy Chase Terr Kenwood - The area bounded - --- --- - ----- - ~ --- _

Bethesda 14869 by Hampden La bull Bradley Blvd Wisconsin Ave and Arlington Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

1_____ IR~~e_sd_aMD ______ _~______ __~__ 1____ -- ---------- ---- c-- -----~--~-B Ih d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhouodlng Rdto Vendome M I C ty X Cit 41h Qu rt 2010

e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery oun amp e B ______a_er_______

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendom M t ---- C ty X Cit 4th Q rt 2010 e es a Or Bethesda MD on gomery Qun omp e e ua er

r------ The Palisades Cong slonal Country Club ESTS Cabin John ----- 1--- --- ----- f- --- ----- shyBethsda 14943 Glen Echo Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Wathoundlng Rd te Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ Vendolll Dr Bethesda MD ___ _

B th d 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C ty X I E I rI 3rd Q rt 2011 e eo a Dr Belhesda MD _ Major MC SAtFI contriilutlon on gomery oun n ng nee ng ua er

Woodburn Memmack Park KenWOOd Park - General -r~-of --- ----- ---- shy

Bethbullbullda 14944 MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Brickyard Rd Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

_t____-IB_ethesdaMD ------ ------ r-- -----shyB th d 14945 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Duvall Dr and adjacenl M t co ty X Cit 1 t Q rt 2011

e es a streets in Bethesda) MD on gomery un omp e e s ua er

Gle~ Echo Hgls Sumner Westhaven Wetgate Glen Cove ---- -- r--- ------Belhesda 14945 Brookdale Westwood Shopping Centermiddot Massachusetts Ave Montgomery County X Complete 1t Quarter 2011

from Avalon Dr 10 Duvall Dr and adjacenttreet In Bethesda MD ----- --- f-- -------- ----- ----Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and Wilson La and along

Bethesda 14948 Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley BlvAlso along Bradley Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brlle Rd Bethesa MD

_ ----------------- _ ------ -- --- ---- ---------- ------ --- shy

Wilson Knolls Oakwood Knolls Locust Ridge Landon Wood English Vii Bradley Hillsmiddot Pyle Rd between Goldsboro Rd and

Belhesda 14948 Wilson La and along Wilson La from Pyle Rd and Bradley Blvd Monlgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 Also along Bradley Blvd between Aberdeen Rd and Brite Rd

_ __Belllsda~_~__ __ Springlleld bull Vlclnltv of Ridgefield Rd between River Rd and

Belhesda 14949 Kirkwood Dr and River Rd between Brookside Dr and Western Montgomery county X Complete 1st Quarter 2011 _____ __ ___ Ave Bethesda MD ___

General vlclnily of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradley

Bethesda 14950 Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr to Hiliandale Rd and Chevy Monl ornery Count X Com lete 1st Quarter 2011 Chase Blvd from Hllandale Rd to WisconSin Ave Bethesda gyp

MD _________ ____ _ ______ ______

Generailliclnltv of Goldsboro Rd from Newburn Dr to Bradlev Blvd Bradley Blvd from Brite Dr 10 Hiliandale Rd and Chevy

Bethesda 14950 Chase Blvd from Hillandale Rd to Wisconsin Ave Belhesda Montgomery County X In Englneerlng 3rd Quarter 2011 I

MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution

A of May 2 2011

Pellco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --shy r----shy - bullbull

bull gt- -

~ 1 I bullbullbullbull~o ~ ftt

) ilt~ shyJ ~~ If J~ fshy lt ~ f

Feeder Location I Subdivision I I t b~ tjt s

Location

~~g ~ I l If 0 tsect cf 91 Status Tlmelinll

c -shy - 111 )0

i I~ ~I l~f amp (1f rsect ~ tsect middot~ft

~ cg- f ~ tj Q

gtlt igtf It ti bull

-General vicinity of River Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield

Bethesda 14951 Rd Brookede Dr Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Bethesda MD

---shy -Westwood Kenwood - Generat vicinity of River Rd from ~--

Bethesda 14951 Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeside Dr Chamberlain Monlgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__-shy _-shy Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD -----shy r-shy -shy -

Glen Echo Hgts Potomac Palisade Park Washington Waldorf _ Belhesda 14952 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Sangamore Dr and Rive Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Rd between Buller Rd and Ridgefield Rd Belilesda MD -~- ~ -shy ~-- --shy

General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree Bethesda 15106 Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

----shy -shy -I----Longwood Bradley lIIanor Tuscullun Bradley Hills Grove

Bethesda 15106 Orumaldry Green Tree Manor Siratton Wood Fernwood shyMontgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree

Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD --shy -shy -shy ---shy r-shy -----shy ------shy 1---shy --

McCauley Park Kentdale Ests Bradley Park Wet Bethesda Bethesda 15108 Park Burning Tree VaUey Cohasset- Vicinity of Kent_dale Dr Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

between Bradley Blvd and Sorrel Ave 8ethesda MD ~--- ----shy -~-- -shy ----shy -+---- --shy --shy --shy -----------~ -------shy

General vlclnily of Arrowood Rd from Arrowood CI to Burdette Rd Hillmead Rd from Burdette Rd to Bradley Blvd Bradley

Bethesda 15110 Blvd from HIUmead Rd to Glenwood Rd Woodhaven Blvd fran Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Bradley Blvd to Hawthome Rd Bethesd MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution1----_------ -shy --~------ ----shy --shy shy --shy -~-- --shy -~- -~-- -~-- -------Ro~ Hill Est Burning Tree Ets Stonellurst Center Seven locks Hills Carderrock Springs Evergreen Cabin John Park -

Bethesda 15111 General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd between Bradley Blvd and Montgomery County X InConstruction 2nd Quarter 2011 MacArthur Blvd and River Rd between Fans Rd and Fenway

I---shy -_shy --shy -~-Dr Betneda MD

----shy - - 1---shyWildwood Hills Knollwood Windsor Hills Bells Mill Vii BeUs

--shy 1--shy --shy ~i--

Bethesda 15115 Mill Springs - General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd Democracy Montgomery County ilt Complete lsi Quarter 2011

r--- Blvd Bells Mill Rd Bethesda MD -shy --shy ---shy ~ ---~ ---

Edgemoor Bradley Hills - Vicinities of Arlington Rd between Betned 15144 Moorland La and Elm St Wilson La between Corden Ave and Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Aberdeen Rd and Apple Ridge Rd at Custer Rd Bethesda MD

I---shy --shy --shy ---shy I--shy ---shy -shy ----_-shyVicinity of Auburn Norfolk and Rugby Avenues between

Bethesda 15145 Georgetown Road and Wisconsin Avenue and icinity of Wisconsin Avenue between Rugby Avenue and Pooks Hill Road

Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---Bethesda MD

--~ --Icomplete~hes~ i5793shy Pooks Hill Apartment - Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County X 1st Quarter 2011-shy

Vicinity of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Bethesua 1579l Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hltl Road Monlgomery County X In Engineering lrd Qu arter 2011

---~----~-

Bethesda MDbullbull Major MC SAIFI contribution ---IcornpletoBethesda 15797 S-cred Heart Schoolmiddot Pooks HIli Road Montgomery County X 4th Quarter 2010

-=--~-~~-

Bethesda 34013 Westmoreland Oliver 51 Montgomery Counly X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Wesllake Dr 10 Old

~_=1M G~_ M O Goo_ m C C _ bullbull 0 X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Executive Boulevard Bethesda MO -shy shy -----~--r--------~ shy ---

VIcinity of Seven Locks Rd between Tuckerman La and Belnsua 14082 Gainborough Rd Also Tuckerman La between Galnsborough Montgomery Counly X In Engineering 3rd

Rd and Old Georgetown Rd Bethesda MO ~----- ----shy ---~-- ------~-

to

~f A of May 2 2011

Pep~Q Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011

Location Feeder

1---Belhesda

Bethesda

~he~~ Belhesda

IKenwod Pk__ IBelhesdo MDf-----shyI ------~

15793

I selhesda MD 14950

I

I-s~~ -~-F------115153 eveuy arms I

B I F-~ ---)15153 ~-r-y-a-r~-s---

Beverly Farms 15162

~ ___ ~ _~ ~+ ~_ __

Beverly Farms 15162

Che Chas 14271 vy t--- shyChevy Chase 14271

Che Chase 14896 vy

I

IChevy Chase MO 14271

F ~

Location t Suhdlvision Jurisdiction

_ Monlgomery County

Monlgomery County

Vlclnily of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County Sethesda MD General viclnily-of-=G-oc-ldc-s7b-o-ro--=RdCf=-ro-m---Nc-e-wb-c-u-m--=0-r-I-o-=S=-r-dley

Blvd Bradley Blvd~ from Brlle Or to HiIIndale Rd and Chevy Montgomery CountyChase Blvd from Hlilandale Rd 10 Wisconsin Ave Bethesda

I~nity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road -- ~M~--I- ~ C I Rockville MD on gomery oun y

Vicinity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road M I Roclltv_III__M_D_ On gomery oun Vicinity of Falls Rd between West Ritchie Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Fails ~Rdlo Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

IP-ot--o-rn-a_c-M=-D-c--c----__-c----=---=-__---__~__---~ Vicinity of Falls Rd between Wesl Rilchle Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Falls Rd 10 Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

potorna~M~D~_-----~-=------~--~--__-----+--Vicinity of Montgomery Hills Park Areamiddot Montgomery Street from Fraser A venue to Srookvllle Road Montgomery County Vicinity of lyttonsvlUe Rd between Brookeville Rd and Grubb Rd and Grubb Rd between EaslmiddotWesl Highway and Welern Montgomery County Ave Chevy Chase MO

ChevY Chase Section 3middot along Conneclicul Avenue from Chevy Mont orne County Chase Circle to Bradley lane g ry Vicinity of lyttonsville Rd between BrookeVille Rd and Grubb -j--~~~----------I--~~ Rd and Grubb Rd between EastmiddotWest Highway and Western Montjom ry County

tMMontgomery County

Montgomery County

Monlgomery County

I Montgomery County

Briggs Road and Camella Drive General Vicinity of Randolph Rd from New Hampshire Ave 10 Mlddlevale lane and Briggs RdlMonlgomery County Frorn Mlddlevale lane 10 Hathaway Dr Whoaton MD

b Ave Chce=VY7-Cih=a-seMdeg7middot=---=---c---c--~___~~~svi- 14~ Fairview Estates I Randolph Rd EO New Hampshire AJe~ Colesville 14439 Paint Branch Eslales I Randolph Rd SlO Falnand Rd

Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Fairland Colesville 14493 Rd and Fairland Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd

__ iFalriand MO

Gene~al vicinity wesl of Old Georgetown Rd between Wilson laIMonlgOmery County Colesvill 14866 and Singleton Dr Bethesda MObull Major MC SAIFI conlributlon

General vicinity of New Hampshire Ave from Shaw Ave to 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New~

Hampshire Ave Colesville MD

General vicinity of New Hampshire Avo from Shaw Ave to Colesville 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New

Hampshire Ave Colesville MObull Major MC SAIFI contribution

X

~ fPl

t~ ltshy

~ Ii

fit ~~ t ~ ilo

Igtj 1

~ ~ e

rlgt ~

II ~if ~p

e~ 11i~~

Q~ ~Q

~amp g~ ~-

~ ~I iir ~

It ~fIt ~ Igtj

f ~o

ltJ ~

J

-------+--~ -+shy --+-- +-- ---t-X

-R~ J(1ltshyl ltr~ ~ q ~~

In Engineering

In Engineering

I Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

lTd Quarter 2011

-=-I~-~=tnsectontructlon ~__~12~~er_2~ __~ X

x

x

~---+-P---+ -C--ty-----+-shy 1--x- +shy------11-------l-- shy

x

r-shyX

~~ - ~---~~

1__ ~~~ ~_~ ~4~-~ ---~P~--1 --~ ~~ --r shyX

X ~------~--~-------l--

-+shy -j- shy --+shyX

=-o--nt--g-om-e-ry-Co-u-n7ty------t-shy X X

X

--t shy ~-~

X

- ~-----i ~---+---~

X

2nd Quaner 2011

In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

in Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

+--shy I~- ~~----

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 t--shy --- shy

Quarter 2011

In Conslructlon 3rd Quarter 2011

In Progress 3rd Quarter 2011

+--------1 ----I In Conslruction

--+-shyIn Construction

Complete

Complete

In Engineering

Complete

2nd Quaner 2011

t--- shy2nd Quaner 2011

2nd Quaner 2011

4th Quarter 2010

3rd Quaner 2011

4th Quaner 2010

------+--- ~--------1r-------

X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--+---t--~ +~----

X In Engineering 41h Quarter 2011

~--1~ ~ ___ ~

tmiddot

~~~ As or May 2 2011

_--_~ ~c ~_-c-~------_~~~_~-----~p~e=lpc~O=R=e=lia=biI=ity==E=n=h=an==ce=mentpla-20=11------r---r--------r---rcc----c------------c-c-----~

Location

r-

Darnestown

I---Darnestown

Darnestown

Ia~

Feeder Looationl Subdivision Timeline-1ls~tJJs ~~~~~~0

fftS ~~ II

Tree Trimming installation of ACR and SWitCh ana fleJa Inspection In the vicinity of Springfield Popular Hill Esworthy15230 3rd Quarter 2011Monlgomery County x In Engineering and White Rock Roads

r----~ ~~~~~

Ancienl Oak North I Colton lane URD cable replacemenllcuring Mont Orne Count )( Com lete 41h Quarter 2010 15238 _--i~n Ihe vicinity of coll lane g ry y ~ ~~

15286 Vicinity of HI Wood Rd Montgomery County X In Englneerlng3rd Quarter 2011

Darnestown MO 15237 VTiciknilyFof DtaRmesdtoDwn RdmiddottbetweMeOn Ancienl Oak Drive and Montgomery Counly)( In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 1_ ur ey 00 oa I ames own bull __

Viclnily of Darnestown Rd between Ancienl Oak Drive and M I C t 3rd Quaner 2011OamesIown MD 15231 T FIR dOl MD on gomery oun y CompleleLr----- urfey o~~ ~~~es~~l bull I 15254 Vicinily of Muncasler Mill Rd from Laytonsville Rdlo Redland Monl ome CountDerwoord X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 I_~__ Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Winters Run ~ _ ~ ~-g _ ry y

____ ~ ~492 Countryside I Briggs Chaney Rd WIO Old Columbia Pik~e___ Montgomery Counly Complele Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Falnand

Fainand MD 14493 Rd and Falnand Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd Montgomery Counly X lin Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

I--~~ ~~ Fairtnd~_~ -[-----I-----+---__t_Woodside Parkway and Dale Drivemiddot Vicinity of Universily Blvd

IFour Corners 14452 at Indian Spring Dr and ColeSville Rd between Brewsler Ave Montgomery County X lin Engineering 41h Quarter 2011 nd Spring St Sliver Spring MD -+--t I---t-------

Gaithersburg I14063 Vicinity of Quince OrChard Blvd al Sebastian Blvd and W Montgomery County x Complele ~ Diamond Ave al Muddy Branch Rd Galthersburg MD ~- -~ ------t- shy--+shyM~ddy-Brnch Rd nortll of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy

Gaithersburg 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of IMonlgomery Counly X IComplete i---- fieldS R~~lthersburg MDmiddot ____L

~------t~-----I---l-

General vlclnlly of Quince Orchard Rd Pin Oak Or ChestnutGaithersburg 14070 Montgomery Counly X CompleteSt Waler St and Cedar Ave Gaithersburg MD

1 land Place I Monlgomery Village Montgomery County _X__~ lsi Quarter 2011 -~+----l= ~Iete General vicinity of Research Blvd from Darnestown Rd to Mont ome CountGaithersburg 15067 x In Construction bull 2nd Quarter 2011 ~___ middotrhltlrGrOVeRdGalthe~bUrgMD ___ 9 ry y 1__ -+-- ~~-~middotI----+--

Gallllersbur 115235 General Vicinity or Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suyanand Mont ome Count 4th Quarter 2010 x CompleleI--- ~~__g_ ~--+--- Rd and Partnershp Rd Suganand MD ~ __~~ g ry y +------+---------~ l---~--+--~__+-

Vicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and Gailhersburg 41h Quarter 2010

Cenlerway ~Rd-Gait~h_ers_b_u~rg~_M_D___________-j

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County Complete

----+ ~ ------1------1~-~~ ~ 1shyVicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and

Gallhersburg 3rd Quarter 2011 Centerway Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Major MC SAIFI contribution

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County )( In Engineering

r- --- shyG it b 15256 Vicinity of Laytonsville Rd Warfield Rd and Goshen Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

a lers urg ~~~___~ ~ __ ~ 13-theigturg MD ~~ ~ _

GI b 15256 WarfieldRdfromWoodfieldRdtoAddnbroo~wayandGoshenM nt C ty I C I Ii 2 dQ rt 2011 a ers urg Rd from Warfield Rd 10 Brink Rd 0 gomery oun nons rue on n ua er

~~~ 1~5284 Westleigh I Duri Mill Rd EO Quince Orchard Rd --Montgomery County -----~__=_r--x-- -~ Completelt Quart2011 Muddy Branch Roadmiddot Vicinity 01 Shady Grove Rd between

Ufg 15834 iR h C rt d G Ith Rd R ~III MD Montgomery County In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 es~a-~_ ou an a er I OCnll e 1___ _~_ _______1

15834 Vicinity of Shady Grove Rd between Research Court and Galthe M t C I C let mg Rd Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e1

~-~ ---- --- ~~~-r__~----~-~~ r~

mg 15235 General vicinity of Blackrock Rd Dameslown Rd Sugarland County x lin engineering 4th QUarter 2011 _ ~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suyanand MD t--------~~ t------~ -+ ~+-_~

GmiddotII b ~ ~~~523S Ge eral vicinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Sugarland M t C I X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 ers Ufg ~~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suganand MD on gomery oun y 1 t--- shy

G I b 15235 General vcinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suganand M I C t 3rd Quarter 2011X In Planningt lers urg Rd and Partnership Rd Suoanand MD on gomery oun y

(J As of May 2 2011

---- --- -- - ---- ------ -- - --- --- ------- ---- ---- ---- ------- ---

------- ------ -----

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 ------- ---- bullbull J _ bull c bull

_ _ ~ ~ c If 0 f I

I if~ sect~ ~ c-V Imiddot - I II b - ofltgt t l

Location Feeder Location (Subdivision ~Iti -f I oc- rsectc- csect sgt $ Statu Timeline c- c- gt b i 0 ~ ~t Cf)t I~ J1 ~~

~l~ rsectio ff~ lt bullbullbullbullbullbull Q ~ -= f t-i Q

I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ _c___ I plusmn bull tv ~___ _ -

Vicinity of Quince Orchard Blvd at Sebastian Blvd and W ---~-------f Gaithersburg 14063 Diamond Ave at Muddy Branch Rd Gaithersburg MDmiddot West Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ___ _ ____ Riding and[)iamond Sq _ ____ __ _____ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ ____ __ _

Gaithersburg 14069 General vicinltv of Quince Orchard Rd between Longdraft Rd M t C I X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 and Muddy Branch Park Galthe burg MD West Riding II on gomery Dun y nons rue on n ua er

---- ------------ ------ -- --- -- ---- --- -+----------1 Gaithersburg 14886 ~e~r1 ~Icinit~~f Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

1----_________ a___ eurllL -- ------___ ~--- ----__ ------f------------l ------------1 Germanlown 14886 ~~~~~~~~t~~ Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---- --~ ------- --- ----- --------- --- ------1 Germanlown 15238 VGICllnhitY degbf RlfflMefoOrdMRdj degMame essAtolFWn Rdmiddot bundtiJones lane Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

tr----------- _-5 urg_ - aor connon 1-----_ ---- ---~- _ -- ---------1--1----------1-------------1 Germantown 15240 ~~n~y of Citopper~ betwen Mateney Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

~~nown bull _____ ______ _________ ______ _________ _______-

Germantown 115240 ~~in~ty of CI~pper~ between Matenev Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Planning 4th Quarter 2011 ~~~r~~~ ~~wn ~~ _ _ _________-1

Oakland Road and Brookland Drive - General vicinity of River Glen Echo 14951 Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeslde Dr Montgomery County X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD ---- 1---------- --- --1---- ----1------- -----1-------- shy

Glen Echo 1476814769 SurnnerViliage I Sentinel Dr Eta Sangmore Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

Glen Echo 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C t X J PI I 3rd Q rt 2011 Bethesda MD Dr Bethesda MD on gomery Dun y nann ng ua er

r=ccc=c - - ----- -- 1----------Kensinglon 14440 nr~1 Vi~lniy of~~ward Ave Strthmore Ave and Montrose Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

__e~ng_on ~---- ______ ______ 1_-----shyGeneral vicinity of Bel-Pre Rd from Connecticut Ave to layhltl

Layhill MD Rd layhill from Bel-Pre Rd to Cherter Mill Rd and Argyle Club Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd from layhdl Rd to longmead Crossing and Nonnandy

---- CrossingOrlayhlllMD _____ r---- ----- ------ --c---- --- ------- --------Vlcinlly of Olney-laytonsville Rd between Stanbrook la and

Laytonsville 15901 Griffith Rd Griffith Rd between OIneYmiddotLaytonsvilie Rd and Montgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 ~- Dam-scus Rd Laytonsville MD ~_ _+__ __1----_ ______________+ l ytlI 15902 Vlcinily of Brookville RdMunc bullbullter Rd and Muncaster Mill M tel X I PI 3rd Q rt 2011

bull oosv e Rdbetween Pepco 230kV RIW and Air Park Rd on gomery oun I n anmng u er -- -- ------- - ----- - ---- --- ---- ---1----- ---- ------ -- ----- --- 1------ --------+--------shy

layt lie 15903 Vicinity of Fleldcrest Rd and Woodfield Rd between Olney M t C t X I PI 3rd Q rter 2011 onVI laytonsville Rd and Brenloll Dr Gaithersburg MO on gomery oun y n nmng u

-- -------- --- c--- --- --- --- -------- lytonsville 15904 ~~~~~v~e~r~~vllle Rd between Zion Rd and Georgia Ave Monlgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

-~

Vicinity of Olney laytonSville Road Dorsey Road WalfJeld

laytonsville 15905 Road Woodfield Road and Brink Road between Riggs Road ami Monlgom Count X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 Gaithersburg Road and RIggs Road between Oinev laylonsvlUe ry y Road and Ripplemead Drive laytonsville MD

--+-----+-- -- -~ --- ----- --- --------- shyII 1506 Vicinity of Zion Rd from Gregg Rd Soulh to Olney laytonsville M t C t X I PI I 3 d Q rt 011Laytonsv e bull Rd (RIl0B) to Olney Mill Rd on gomery oun y nann ng r ua er lt

---- -1----- --- - GeneraiVijnityof Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to EaslWes 1--------1------ - - --- ------------1 linden 14264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East Montgomery Counll( X In Ptanning 3rd Quarter 2011

Wesl Highway Sliver Spring MD MiieURd---- 6914------- Willi Oak Falrtand Montgomery County ------i-~)(-I_- --- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Metzerolt Rd --- 6913~- Fairland and Cores ville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011=----_ - -- -- ---shyMontgomery 14379 Vicinity of Arrowhead Rd Goshen Rd Snoufte School Rd Mont orne Count X In En Ineertn 4th Quarter 2011 VlIage Wightman Rd and Warfield Rd GaIthersburg MD 9 ry Y ____ ____ 9 g __

reg 5 As of May 2 2011

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 7: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

Pellco Reliabilitv Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --shy r----shy - bullbull

bull gt- -

~ 1 I bullbullbullbull~o ~ ftt

) ilt~ shyJ ~~ If J~ fshy lt ~ f

Feeder Location I Subdivision I I t b~ tjt s

Location

~~g ~ I l If 0 tsect cf 91 Status Tlmelinll

c -shy - 111 )0

i I~ ~I l~f amp (1f rsect ~ tsect middot~ft

~ cg- f ~ tj Q

gtlt igtf It ti bull

-General vicinity of River Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield

Bethesda 14951 Rd Brookede Dr Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010 Bethesda MD

---shy -Westwood Kenwood - Generat vicinity of River Rd from ~--

Bethesda 14951 Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeside Dr Chamberlain Monlgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__-shy _-shy Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD -----shy r-shy -shy -

Glen Echo Hgts Potomac Palisade Park Washington Waldorf _ Belhesda 14952 Massachusetts Ave from Avalon Dr to Sangamore Dr and Rive Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Rd between Buller Rd and Ridgefield Rd Belilesda MD -~- ~ -shy ~-- --shy

General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree Bethesda 15106 Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

----shy -shy -I----Longwood Bradley lIIanor Tuscullun Bradley Hills Grove

Bethesda 15106 Orumaldry Green Tree Manor Siratton Wood Fernwood shyMontgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011General vicinity of Bradley Blvd Burning Tree Rd Green Tree

Rd and Beech Tree Rd Belhesda MD --shy -shy -shy ---shy r-shy -----shy ------shy 1---shy --

McCauley Park Kentdale Ests Bradley Park Wet Bethesda Bethesda 15108 Park Burning Tree VaUey Cohasset- Vicinity of Kent_dale Dr Montgomery County X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

between Bradley Blvd and Sorrel Ave 8ethesda MD ~--- ----shy -~-- -shy ----shy -+---- --shy --shy --shy -----------~ -------shy

General vlclnily of Arrowood Rd from Arrowood CI to Burdette Rd Hillmead Rd from Burdette Rd to Bradley Blvd Bradley

Bethesda 15110 Blvd from HIUmead Rd to Glenwood Rd Woodhaven Blvd fran Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Bradley Blvd to Hawthome Rd Bethesd MD - Major MC SAIFI contribution1----_------ -shy --~------ ----shy --shy shy --shy -~-- --shy -~- -~-- -~-- -------Ro~ Hill Est Burning Tree Ets Stonellurst Center Seven locks Hills Carderrock Springs Evergreen Cabin John Park -

Bethesda 15111 General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd between Bradley Blvd and Montgomery County X InConstruction 2nd Quarter 2011 MacArthur Blvd and River Rd between Fans Rd and Fenway

I---shy -_shy --shy -~-Dr Betneda MD

----shy - - 1---shyWildwood Hills Knollwood Windsor Hills Bells Mill Vii BeUs

--shy 1--shy --shy ~i--

Bethesda 15115 Mill Springs - General vicinity of Seven Locks Rd Democracy Montgomery County ilt Complete lsi Quarter 2011

r--- Blvd Bells Mill Rd Bethesda MD -shy --shy ---shy ~ ---~ ---

Edgemoor Bradley Hills - Vicinities of Arlington Rd between Betned 15144 Moorland La and Elm St Wilson La between Corden Ave and Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Aberdeen Rd and Apple Ridge Rd at Custer Rd Bethesda MD

I---shy --shy --shy ---shy I--shy ---shy -shy ----_-shyVicinity of Auburn Norfolk and Rugby Avenues between

Bethesda 15145 Georgetown Road and Wisconsin Avenue and icinity of Wisconsin Avenue between Rugby Avenue and Pooks Hill Road

Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---Bethesda MD

--~ --Icomplete~hes~ i5793shy Pooks Hill Apartment - Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County X 1st Quarter 2011-shy

Vicinity of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Bethesua 1579l Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hltl Road Monlgomery County X In Engineering lrd Qu arter 2011

---~----~-

Bethesda MDbullbull Major MC SAIFI contribution ---IcornpletoBethesda 15797 S-cred Heart Schoolmiddot Pooks HIli Road Montgomery County X 4th Quarter 2010

-=--~-~~-

Bethesda 34013 Westmoreland Oliver 51 Montgomery Counly X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Wesllake Dr 10 Old

~_=1M G~_ M O Goo_ m C C _ bullbull 0 X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 Executive Boulevard Bethesda MO -shy shy -----~--r--------~ shy ---

VIcinity of Seven Locks Rd between Tuckerman La and Belnsua 14082 Gainborough Rd Also Tuckerman La between Galnsborough Montgomery Counly X In Engineering 3rd

Rd and Old Georgetown Rd Bethesda MO ~----- ----shy ---~-- ------~-

to

~f A of May 2 2011

Pep~Q Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011

Location Feeder

1---Belhesda

Bethesda

~he~~ Belhesda

IKenwod Pk__ IBelhesdo MDf-----shyI ------~

15793

I selhesda MD 14950

I

I-s~~ -~-F------115153 eveuy arms I

B I F-~ ---)15153 ~-r-y-a-r~-s---

Beverly Farms 15162

~ ___ ~ _~ ~+ ~_ __

Beverly Farms 15162

Che Chas 14271 vy t--- shyChevy Chase 14271

Che Chase 14896 vy

I

IChevy Chase MO 14271

F ~

Location t Suhdlvision Jurisdiction

_ Monlgomery County

Monlgomery County

Vlclnily of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County Sethesda MD General viclnily-of-=G-oc-ldc-s7b-o-ro--=RdCf=-ro-m---Nc-e-wb-c-u-m--=0-r-I-o-=S=-r-dley

Blvd Bradley Blvd~ from Brlle Or to HiIIndale Rd and Chevy Montgomery CountyChase Blvd from Hlilandale Rd 10 Wisconsin Ave Bethesda

I~nity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road -- ~M~--I- ~ C I Rockville MD on gomery oun y

Vicinity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road M I Roclltv_III__M_D_ On gomery oun Vicinity of Falls Rd between West Ritchie Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Fails ~Rdlo Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

IP-ot--o-rn-a_c-M=-D-c--c----__-c----=---=-__---__~__---~ Vicinity of Falls Rd between Wesl Rilchle Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Falls Rd 10 Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

potorna~M~D~_-----~-=------~--~--__-----+--Vicinity of Montgomery Hills Park Areamiddot Montgomery Street from Fraser A venue to Srookvllle Road Montgomery County Vicinity of lyttonsvlUe Rd between Brookeville Rd and Grubb Rd and Grubb Rd between EaslmiddotWesl Highway and Welern Montgomery County Ave Chevy Chase MO

ChevY Chase Section 3middot along Conneclicul Avenue from Chevy Mont orne County Chase Circle to Bradley lane g ry Vicinity of lyttonsville Rd between BrookeVille Rd and Grubb -j--~~~----------I--~~ Rd and Grubb Rd between EastmiddotWest Highway and Western Montjom ry County

tMMontgomery County

Montgomery County

Monlgomery County

I Montgomery County

Briggs Road and Camella Drive General Vicinity of Randolph Rd from New Hampshire Ave 10 Mlddlevale lane and Briggs RdlMonlgomery County Frorn Mlddlevale lane 10 Hathaway Dr Whoaton MD

b Ave Chce=VY7-Cih=a-seMdeg7middot=---=---c---c--~___~~~svi- 14~ Fairview Estates I Randolph Rd EO New Hampshire AJe~ Colesville 14439 Paint Branch Eslales I Randolph Rd SlO Falnand Rd

Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Fairland Colesville 14493 Rd and Fairland Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd

__ iFalriand MO

Gene~al vicinity wesl of Old Georgetown Rd between Wilson laIMonlgOmery County Colesvill 14866 and Singleton Dr Bethesda MObull Major MC SAIFI conlributlon

General vicinity of New Hampshire Ave from Shaw Ave to 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New~

Hampshire Ave Colesville MD

General vicinity of New Hampshire Avo from Shaw Ave to Colesville 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New

Hampshire Ave Colesville MObull Major MC SAIFI contribution

X

~ fPl

t~ ltshy

~ Ii

fit ~~ t ~ ilo

Igtj 1

~ ~ e

rlgt ~

II ~if ~p

e~ 11i~~

Q~ ~Q

~amp g~ ~-

~ ~I iir ~

It ~fIt ~ Igtj

f ~o

ltJ ~

J

-------+--~ -+shy --+-- +-- ---t-X

-R~ J(1ltshyl ltr~ ~ q ~~

In Engineering

In Engineering

I Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

lTd Quarter 2011

-=-I~-~=tnsectontructlon ~__~12~~er_2~ __~ X

x

x

~---+-P---+ -C--ty-----+-shy 1--x- +shy------11-------l-- shy

x

r-shyX

~~ - ~---~~

1__ ~~~ ~_~ ~4~-~ ---~P~--1 --~ ~~ --r shyX

X ~------~--~-------l--

-+shy -j- shy --+shyX

=-o--nt--g-om-e-ry-Co-u-n7ty------t-shy X X

X

--t shy ~-~

X

- ~-----i ~---+---~

X

2nd Quaner 2011

In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

in Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

+--shy I~- ~~----

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 t--shy --- shy

Quarter 2011

In Conslructlon 3rd Quarter 2011

In Progress 3rd Quarter 2011

+--------1 ----I In Conslruction

--+-shyIn Construction

Complete

Complete

In Engineering

Complete

2nd Quaner 2011

t--- shy2nd Quaner 2011

2nd Quaner 2011

4th Quarter 2010

3rd Quaner 2011

4th Quaner 2010

------+--- ~--------1r-------

X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--+---t--~ +~----

X In Engineering 41h Quarter 2011

~--1~ ~ ___ ~

tmiddot

~~~ As or May 2 2011

_--_~ ~c ~_-c-~------_~~~_~-----~p~e=lpc~O=R=e=lia=biI=ity==E=n=h=an==ce=mentpla-20=11------r---r--------r---rcc----c------------c-c-----~

Location

r-

Darnestown

I---Darnestown

Darnestown

Ia~

Feeder Looationl Subdivision Timeline-1ls~tJJs ~~~~~~0

fftS ~~ II

Tree Trimming installation of ACR and SWitCh ana fleJa Inspection In the vicinity of Springfield Popular Hill Esworthy15230 3rd Quarter 2011Monlgomery County x In Engineering and White Rock Roads

r----~ ~~~~~

Ancienl Oak North I Colton lane URD cable replacemenllcuring Mont Orne Count )( Com lete 41h Quarter 2010 15238 _--i~n Ihe vicinity of coll lane g ry y ~ ~~

15286 Vicinity of HI Wood Rd Montgomery County X In Englneerlng3rd Quarter 2011

Darnestown MO 15237 VTiciknilyFof DtaRmesdtoDwn RdmiddottbetweMeOn Ancienl Oak Drive and Montgomery Counly)( In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 1_ ur ey 00 oa I ames own bull __

Viclnily of Darnestown Rd between Ancienl Oak Drive and M I C t 3rd Quaner 2011OamesIown MD 15231 T FIR dOl MD on gomery oun y CompleleLr----- urfey o~~ ~~~es~~l bull I 15254 Vicinily of Muncasler Mill Rd from Laytonsville Rdlo Redland Monl ome CountDerwoord X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 I_~__ Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Winters Run ~ _ ~ ~-g _ ry y

____ ~ ~492 Countryside I Briggs Chaney Rd WIO Old Columbia Pik~e___ Montgomery Counly Complele Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Falnand

Fainand MD 14493 Rd and Falnand Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd Montgomery Counly X lin Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

I--~~ ~~ Fairtnd~_~ -[-----I-----+---__t_Woodside Parkway and Dale Drivemiddot Vicinity of Universily Blvd

IFour Corners 14452 at Indian Spring Dr and ColeSville Rd between Brewsler Ave Montgomery County X lin Engineering 41h Quarter 2011 nd Spring St Sliver Spring MD -+--t I---t-------

Gaithersburg I14063 Vicinity of Quince OrChard Blvd al Sebastian Blvd and W Montgomery County x Complele ~ Diamond Ave al Muddy Branch Rd Galthersburg MD ~- -~ ------t- shy--+shyM~ddy-Brnch Rd nortll of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy

Gaithersburg 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of IMonlgomery Counly X IComplete i---- fieldS R~~lthersburg MDmiddot ____L

~------t~-----I---l-

General vlclnlly of Quince Orchard Rd Pin Oak Or ChestnutGaithersburg 14070 Montgomery Counly X CompleteSt Waler St and Cedar Ave Gaithersburg MD

1 land Place I Monlgomery Village Montgomery County _X__~ lsi Quarter 2011 -~+----l= ~Iete General vicinity of Research Blvd from Darnestown Rd to Mont ome CountGaithersburg 15067 x In Construction bull 2nd Quarter 2011 ~___ middotrhltlrGrOVeRdGalthe~bUrgMD ___ 9 ry y 1__ -+-- ~~-~middotI----+--

Gallllersbur 115235 General Vicinity or Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suyanand Mont ome Count 4th Quarter 2010 x CompleleI--- ~~__g_ ~--+--- Rd and Partnershp Rd Suganand MD ~ __~~ g ry y +------+---------~ l---~--+--~__+-

Vicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and Gailhersburg 41h Quarter 2010

Cenlerway ~Rd-Gait~h_ers_b_u~rg~_M_D___________-j

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County Complete

----+ ~ ------1------1~-~~ ~ 1shyVicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and

Gallhersburg 3rd Quarter 2011 Centerway Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Major MC SAIFI contribution

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County )( In Engineering

r- --- shyG it b 15256 Vicinity of Laytonsville Rd Warfield Rd and Goshen Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

a lers urg ~~~___~ ~ __ ~ 13-theigturg MD ~~ ~ _

GI b 15256 WarfieldRdfromWoodfieldRdtoAddnbroo~wayandGoshenM nt C ty I C I Ii 2 dQ rt 2011 a ers urg Rd from Warfield Rd 10 Brink Rd 0 gomery oun nons rue on n ua er

~~~ 1~5284 Westleigh I Duri Mill Rd EO Quince Orchard Rd --Montgomery County -----~__=_r--x-- -~ Completelt Quart2011 Muddy Branch Roadmiddot Vicinity 01 Shady Grove Rd between

Ufg 15834 iR h C rt d G Ith Rd R ~III MD Montgomery County In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 es~a-~_ ou an a er I OCnll e 1___ _~_ _______1

15834 Vicinity of Shady Grove Rd between Research Court and Galthe M t C I C let mg Rd Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e1

~-~ ---- --- ~~~-r__~----~-~~ r~

mg 15235 General vicinity of Blackrock Rd Dameslown Rd Sugarland County x lin engineering 4th QUarter 2011 _ ~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suyanand MD t--------~~ t------~ -+ ~+-_~

GmiddotII b ~ ~~~523S Ge eral vicinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Sugarland M t C I X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 ers Ufg ~~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suganand MD on gomery oun y 1 t--- shy

G I b 15235 General vcinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suganand M I C t 3rd Quarter 2011X In Planningt lers urg Rd and Partnership Rd Suoanand MD on gomery oun y

(J As of May 2 2011

---- --- -- - ---- ------ -- - --- --- ------- ---- ---- ---- ------- ---

------- ------ -----

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 ------- ---- bullbull J _ bull c bull

_ _ ~ ~ c If 0 f I

I if~ sect~ ~ c-V Imiddot - I II b - ofltgt t l

Location Feeder Location (Subdivision ~Iti -f I oc- rsectc- csect sgt $ Statu Timeline c- c- gt b i 0 ~ ~t Cf)t I~ J1 ~~

~l~ rsectio ff~ lt bullbullbullbullbullbull Q ~ -= f t-i Q

I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ _c___ I plusmn bull tv ~___ _ -

Vicinity of Quince Orchard Blvd at Sebastian Blvd and W ---~-------f Gaithersburg 14063 Diamond Ave at Muddy Branch Rd Gaithersburg MDmiddot West Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ___ _ ____ Riding and[)iamond Sq _ ____ __ _____ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ ____ __ _

Gaithersburg 14069 General vicinltv of Quince Orchard Rd between Longdraft Rd M t C I X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 and Muddy Branch Park Galthe burg MD West Riding II on gomery Dun y nons rue on n ua er

---- ------------ ------ -- --- -- ---- --- -+----------1 Gaithersburg 14886 ~e~r1 ~Icinit~~f Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

1----_________ a___ eurllL -- ------___ ~--- ----__ ------f------------l ------------1 Germanlown 14886 ~~~~~~~~t~~ Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---- --~ ------- --- ----- --------- --- ------1 Germanlown 15238 VGICllnhitY degbf RlfflMefoOrdMRdj degMame essAtolFWn Rdmiddot bundtiJones lane Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

tr----------- _-5 urg_ - aor connon 1-----_ ---- ---~- _ -- ---------1--1----------1-------------1 Germantown 15240 ~~n~y of Citopper~ betwen Mateney Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

~~nown bull _____ ______ _________ ______ _________ _______-

Germantown 115240 ~~in~ty of CI~pper~ between Matenev Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Planning 4th Quarter 2011 ~~~r~~~ ~~wn ~~ _ _ _________-1

Oakland Road and Brookland Drive - General vicinity of River Glen Echo 14951 Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeslde Dr Montgomery County X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD ---- 1---------- --- --1---- ----1------- -----1-------- shy

Glen Echo 1476814769 SurnnerViliage I Sentinel Dr Eta Sangmore Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

Glen Echo 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C t X J PI I 3rd Q rt 2011 Bethesda MD Dr Bethesda MD on gomery Dun y nann ng ua er

r=ccc=c - - ----- -- 1----------Kensinglon 14440 nr~1 Vi~lniy of~~ward Ave Strthmore Ave and Montrose Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

__e~ng_on ~---- ______ ______ 1_-----shyGeneral vicinity of Bel-Pre Rd from Connecticut Ave to layhltl

Layhill MD Rd layhill from Bel-Pre Rd to Cherter Mill Rd and Argyle Club Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd from layhdl Rd to longmead Crossing and Nonnandy

---- CrossingOrlayhlllMD _____ r---- ----- ------ --c---- --- ------- --------Vlcinlly of Olney-laytonsville Rd between Stanbrook la and

Laytonsville 15901 Griffith Rd Griffith Rd between OIneYmiddotLaytonsvilie Rd and Montgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 ~- Dam-scus Rd Laytonsville MD ~_ _+__ __1----_ ______________+ l ytlI 15902 Vlcinily of Brookville RdMunc bullbullter Rd and Muncaster Mill M tel X I PI 3rd Q rt 2011

bull oosv e Rdbetween Pepco 230kV RIW and Air Park Rd on gomery oun I n anmng u er -- -- ------- - ----- - ---- --- ---- ---1----- ---- ------ -- ----- --- 1------ --------+--------shy

layt lie 15903 Vicinity of Fleldcrest Rd and Woodfield Rd between Olney M t C t X I PI 3rd Q rter 2011 onVI laytonsville Rd and Brenloll Dr Gaithersburg MO on gomery oun y n nmng u

-- -------- --- c--- --- --- --- -------- lytonsville 15904 ~~~~~v~e~r~~vllle Rd between Zion Rd and Georgia Ave Monlgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

-~

Vicinity of Olney laytonSville Road Dorsey Road WalfJeld

laytonsville 15905 Road Woodfield Road and Brink Road between Riggs Road ami Monlgom Count X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 Gaithersburg Road and RIggs Road between Oinev laylonsvlUe ry y Road and Ripplemead Drive laytonsville MD

--+-----+-- -- -~ --- ----- --- --------- shyII 1506 Vicinity of Zion Rd from Gregg Rd Soulh to Olney laytonsville M t C t X I PI I 3 d Q rt 011Laytonsv e bull Rd (RIl0B) to Olney Mill Rd on gomery oun y nann ng r ua er lt

---- -1----- --- - GeneraiVijnityof Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to EaslWes 1--------1------ - - --- ------------1 linden 14264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East Montgomery Counll( X In Ptanning 3rd Quarter 2011

Wesl Highway Sliver Spring MD MiieURd---- 6914------- Willi Oak Falrtand Montgomery County ------i-~)(-I_- --- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Metzerolt Rd --- 6913~- Fairland and Cores ville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011=----_ - -- -- ---shyMontgomery 14379 Vicinity of Arrowhead Rd Goshen Rd Snoufte School Rd Mont orne Count X In En Ineertn 4th Quarter 2011 VlIage Wightman Rd and Warfield Rd GaIthersburg MD 9 ry Y ____ ____ 9 g __

reg 5 As of May 2 2011

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 8: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

Pep~Q Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011

Location Feeder

1---Belhesda

Bethesda

~he~~ Belhesda

IKenwod Pk__ IBelhesdo MDf-----shyI ------~

15793

I selhesda MD 14950

I

I-s~~ -~-F------115153 eveuy arms I

B I F-~ ---)15153 ~-r-y-a-r~-s---

Beverly Farms 15162

~ ___ ~ _~ ~+ ~_ __

Beverly Farms 15162

Che Chas 14271 vy t--- shyChevy Chase 14271

Che Chase 14896 vy

I

IChevy Chase MO 14271

F ~

Location t Suhdlvision Jurisdiction

_ Monlgomery County

Monlgomery County

Vlclnily of Johnson Ave Ewing Ave Willmett Dr and Beech Ave between Old Georgetown Road and Pooks Hill Road Montgomery County Sethesda MD General viclnily-of-=G-oc-ldc-s7b-o-ro--=RdCf=-ro-m---Nc-e-wb-c-u-m--=0-r-I-o-=S=-r-dley

Blvd Bradley Blvd~ from Brlle Or to HiIIndale Rd and Chevy Montgomery CountyChase Blvd from Hlilandale Rd 10 Wisconsin Ave Bethesda

I~nity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road -- ~M~--I- ~ C I Rockville MD on gomery oun y

Vicinity of Pepco RlW between Coppola Court and Falls Road M I Roclltv_III__M_D_ On gomery oun Vicinity of Falls Rd between West Ritchie Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Fails ~Rdlo Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

IP-ot--o-rn-a_c-M=-D-c--c----__-c----=---=-__---__~__---~ Vicinity of Falls Rd between Wesl Rilchle Pkwy and Monumenl SI and Seven locks Rd from Falls Rd 10 Fortune Terrace Montgomery County

potorna~M~D~_-----~-=------~--~--__-----+--Vicinity of Montgomery Hills Park Areamiddot Montgomery Street from Fraser A venue to Srookvllle Road Montgomery County Vicinity of lyttonsvlUe Rd between Brookeville Rd and Grubb Rd and Grubb Rd between EaslmiddotWesl Highway and Welern Montgomery County Ave Chevy Chase MO

ChevY Chase Section 3middot along Conneclicul Avenue from Chevy Mont orne County Chase Circle to Bradley lane g ry Vicinity of lyttonsville Rd between BrookeVille Rd and Grubb -j--~~~----------I--~~ Rd and Grubb Rd between EastmiddotWest Highway and Western Montjom ry County

tMMontgomery County

Montgomery County

Monlgomery County

I Montgomery County

Briggs Road and Camella Drive General Vicinity of Randolph Rd from New Hampshire Ave 10 Mlddlevale lane and Briggs RdlMonlgomery County Frorn Mlddlevale lane 10 Hathaway Dr Whoaton MD

b Ave Chce=VY7-Cih=a-seMdeg7middot=---=---c---c--~___~~~svi- 14~ Fairview Estates I Randolph Rd EO New Hampshire AJe~ Colesville 14439 Paint Branch Eslales I Randolph Rd SlO Falnand Rd

Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Fairland Colesville 14493 Rd and Fairland Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd

__ iFalriand MO

Gene~al vicinity wesl of Old Georgetown Rd between Wilson laIMonlgOmery County Colesvill 14866 and Singleton Dr Bethesda MObull Major MC SAIFI conlributlon

General vicinity of New Hampshire Ave from Shaw Ave to 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New~

Hampshire Ave Colesville MD

General vicinity of New Hampshire Avo from Shaw Ave to Colesville 15023 Randolph Rd and Randolph Rd from Georgia Ave 10 New

Hampshire Ave Colesville MObull Major MC SAIFI contribution

X

~ fPl

t~ ltshy

~ Ii

fit ~~ t ~ ilo

Igtj 1

~ ~ e

rlgt ~

II ~if ~p

e~ 11i~~

Q~ ~Q

~amp g~ ~-

~ ~I iir ~

It ~fIt ~ Igtj

f ~o

ltJ ~

J

-------+--~ -+shy --+-- +-- ---t-X

-R~ J(1ltshyl ltr~ ~ q ~~

In Engineering

In Engineering

I Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

lTd Quarter 2011

-=-I~-~=tnsectontructlon ~__~12~~er_2~ __~ X

x

x

~---+-P---+ -C--ty-----+-shy 1--x- +shy------11-------l-- shy

x

r-shyX

~~ - ~---~~

1__ ~~~ ~_~ ~4~-~ ---~P~--1 --~ ~~ --r shyX

X ~------~--~-------l--

-+shy -j- shy --+shyX

=-o--nt--g-om-e-ry-Co-u-n7ty------t-shy X X

X

--t shy ~-~

X

- ~-----i ~---+---~

X

2nd Quaner 2011

In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

in Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

+--shy I~- ~~----

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 t--shy --- shy

Quarter 2011

In Conslructlon 3rd Quarter 2011

In Progress 3rd Quarter 2011

+--------1 ----I In Conslruction

--+-shyIn Construction

Complete

Complete

In Engineering

Complete

2nd Quaner 2011

t--- shy2nd Quaner 2011

2nd Quaner 2011

4th Quarter 2010

3rd Quaner 2011

4th Quaner 2010

------+--- ~--------1r-------

X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--+---t--~ +~----

X In Engineering 41h Quarter 2011

~--1~ ~ ___ ~

tmiddot

~~~ As or May 2 2011

_--_~ ~c ~_-c-~------_~~~_~-----~p~e=lpc~O=R=e=lia=biI=ity==E=n=h=an==ce=mentpla-20=11------r---r--------r---rcc----c------------c-c-----~

Location

r-

Darnestown

I---Darnestown

Darnestown

Ia~

Feeder Looationl Subdivision Timeline-1ls~tJJs ~~~~~~0

fftS ~~ II

Tree Trimming installation of ACR and SWitCh ana fleJa Inspection In the vicinity of Springfield Popular Hill Esworthy15230 3rd Quarter 2011Monlgomery County x In Engineering and White Rock Roads

r----~ ~~~~~

Ancienl Oak North I Colton lane URD cable replacemenllcuring Mont Orne Count )( Com lete 41h Quarter 2010 15238 _--i~n Ihe vicinity of coll lane g ry y ~ ~~

15286 Vicinity of HI Wood Rd Montgomery County X In Englneerlng3rd Quarter 2011

Darnestown MO 15237 VTiciknilyFof DtaRmesdtoDwn RdmiddottbetweMeOn Ancienl Oak Drive and Montgomery Counly)( In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 1_ ur ey 00 oa I ames own bull __

Viclnily of Darnestown Rd between Ancienl Oak Drive and M I C t 3rd Quaner 2011OamesIown MD 15231 T FIR dOl MD on gomery oun y CompleleLr----- urfey o~~ ~~~es~~l bull I 15254 Vicinily of Muncasler Mill Rd from Laytonsville Rdlo Redland Monl ome CountDerwoord X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 I_~__ Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Winters Run ~ _ ~ ~-g _ ry y

____ ~ ~492 Countryside I Briggs Chaney Rd WIO Old Columbia Pik~e___ Montgomery Counly Complele Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Falnand

Fainand MD 14493 Rd and Falnand Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd Montgomery Counly X lin Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

I--~~ ~~ Fairtnd~_~ -[-----I-----+---__t_Woodside Parkway and Dale Drivemiddot Vicinity of Universily Blvd

IFour Corners 14452 at Indian Spring Dr and ColeSville Rd between Brewsler Ave Montgomery County X lin Engineering 41h Quarter 2011 nd Spring St Sliver Spring MD -+--t I---t-------

Gaithersburg I14063 Vicinity of Quince OrChard Blvd al Sebastian Blvd and W Montgomery County x Complele ~ Diamond Ave al Muddy Branch Rd Galthersburg MD ~- -~ ------t- shy--+shyM~ddy-Brnch Rd nortll of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy

Gaithersburg 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of IMonlgomery Counly X IComplete i---- fieldS R~~lthersburg MDmiddot ____L

~------t~-----I---l-

General vlclnlly of Quince Orchard Rd Pin Oak Or ChestnutGaithersburg 14070 Montgomery Counly X CompleteSt Waler St and Cedar Ave Gaithersburg MD

1 land Place I Monlgomery Village Montgomery County _X__~ lsi Quarter 2011 -~+----l= ~Iete General vicinity of Research Blvd from Darnestown Rd to Mont ome CountGaithersburg 15067 x In Construction bull 2nd Quarter 2011 ~___ middotrhltlrGrOVeRdGalthe~bUrgMD ___ 9 ry y 1__ -+-- ~~-~middotI----+--

Gallllersbur 115235 General Vicinity or Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suyanand Mont ome Count 4th Quarter 2010 x CompleleI--- ~~__g_ ~--+--- Rd and Partnershp Rd Suganand MD ~ __~~ g ry y +------+---------~ l---~--+--~__+-

Vicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and Gailhersburg 41h Quarter 2010

Cenlerway ~Rd-Gait~h_ers_b_u~rg~_M_D___________-j

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County Complete

----+ ~ ------1------1~-~~ ~ 1shyVicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and

Gallhersburg 3rd Quarter 2011 Centerway Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Major MC SAIFI contribution

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County )( In Engineering

r- --- shyG it b 15256 Vicinity of Laytonsville Rd Warfield Rd and Goshen Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

a lers urg ~~~___~ ~ __ ~ 13-theigturg MD ~~ ~ _

GI b 15256 WarfieldRdfromWoodfieldRdtoAddnbroo~wayandGoshenM nt C ty I C I Ii 2 dQ rt 2011 a ers urg Rd from Warfield Rd 10 Brink Rd 0 gomery oun nons rue on n ua er

~~~ 1~5284 Westleigh I Duri Mill Rd EO Quince Orchard Rd --Montgomery County -----~__=_r--x-- -~ Completelt Quart2011 Muddy Branch Roadmiddot Vicinity 01 Shady Grove Rd between

Ufg 15834 iR h C rt d G Ith Rd R ~III MD Montgomery County In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 es~a-~_ ou an a er I OCnll e 1___ _~_ _______1

15834 Vicinity of Shady Grove Rd between Research Court and Galthe M t C I C let mg Rd Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e1

~-~ ---- --- ~~~-r__~----~-~~ r~

mg 15235 General vicinity of Blackrock Rd Dameslown Rd Sugarland County x lin engineering 4th QUarter 2011 _ ~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suyanand MD t--------~~ t------~ -+ ~+-_~

GmiddotII b ~ ~~~523S Ge eral vicinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Sugarland M t C I X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 ers Ufg ~~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suganand MD on gomery oun y 1 t--- shy

G I b 15235 General vcinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suganand M I C t 3rd Quarter 2011X In Planningt lers urg Rd and Partnership Rd Suoanand MD on gomery oun y

(J As of May 2 2011

---- --- -- - ---- ------ -- - --- --- ------- ---- ---- ---- ------- ---

------- ------ -----

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 ------- ---- bullbull J _ bull c bull

_ _ ~ ~ c If 0 f I

I if~ sect~ ~ c-V Imiddot - I II b - ofltgt t l

Location Feeder Location (Subdivision ~Iti -f I oc- rsectc- csect sgt $ Statu Timeline c- c- gt b i 0 ~ ~t Cf)t I~ J1 ~~

~l~ rsectio ff~ lt bullbullbullbullbullbull Q ~ -= f t-i Q

I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ _c___ I plusmn bull tv ~___ _ -

Vicinity of Quince Orchard Blvd at Sebastian Blvd and W ---~-------f Gaithersburg 14063 Diamond Ave at Muddy Branch Rd Gaithersburg MDmiddot West Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ___ _ ____ Riding and[)iamond Sq _ ____ __ _____ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ ____ __ _

Gaithersburg 14069 General vicinltv of Quince Orchard Rd between Longdraft Rd M t C I X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 and Muddy Branch Park Galthe burg MD West Riding II on gomery Dun y nons rue on n ua er

---- ------------ ------ -- --- -- ---- --- -+----------1 Gaithersburg 14886 ~e~r1 ~Icinit~~f Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

1----_________ a___ eurllL -- ------___ ~--- ----__ ------f------------l ------------1 Germanlown 14886 ~~~~~~~~t~~ Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---- --~ ------- --- ----- --------- --- ------1 Germanlown 15238 VGICllnhitY degbf RlfflMefoOrdMRdj degMame essAtolFWn Rdmiddot bundtiJones lane Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

tr----------- _-5 urg_ - aor connon 1-----_ ---- ---~- _ -- ---------1--1----------1-------------1 Germantown 15240 ~~n~y of Citopper~ betwen Mateney Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

~~nown bull _____ ______ _________ ______ _________ _______-

Germantown 115240 ~~in~ty of CI~pper~ between Matenev Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Planning 4th Quarter 2011 ~~~r~~~ ~~wn ~~ _ _ _________-1

Oakland Road and Brookland Drive - General vicinity of River Glen Echo 14951 Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeslde Dr Montgomery County X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD ---- 1---------- --- --1---- ----1------- -----1-------- shy

Glen Echo 1476814769 SurnnerViliage I Sentinel Dr Eta Sangmore Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

Glen Echo 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C t X J PI I 3rd Q rt 2011 Bethesda MD Dr Bethesda MD on gomery Dun y nann ng ua er

r=ccc=c - - ----- -- 1----------Kensinglon 14440 nr~1 Vi~lniy of~~ward Ave Strthmore Ave and Montrose Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

__e~ng_on ~---- ______ ______ 1_-----shyGeneral vicinity of Bel-Pre Rd from Connecticut Ave to layhltl

Layhill MD Rd layhill from Bel-Pre Rd to Cherter Mill Rd and Argyle Club Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd from layhdl Rd to longmead Crossing and Nonnandy

---- CrossingOrlayhlllMD _____ r---- ----- ------ --c---- --- ------- --------Vlcinlly of Olney-laytonsville Rd between Stanbrook la and

Laytonsville 15901 Griffith Rd Griffith Rd between OIneYmiddotLaytonsvilie Rd and Montgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 ~- Dam-scus Rd Laytonsville MD ~_ _+__ __1----_ ______________+ l ytlI 15902 Vlcinily of Brookville RdMunc bullbullter Rd and Muncaster Mill M tel X I PI 3rd Q rt 2011

bull oosv e Rdbetween Pepco 230kV RIW and Air Park Rd on gomery oun I n anmng u er -- -- ------- - ----- - ---- --- ---- ---1----- ---- ------ -- ----- --- 1------ --------+--------shy

layt lie 15903 Vicinity of Fleldcrest Rd and Woodfield Rd between Olney M t C t X I PI 3rd Q rter 2011 onVI laytonsville Rd and Brenloll Dr Gaithersburg MO on gomery oun y n nmng u

-- -------- --- c--- --- --- --- -------- lytonsville 15904 ~~~~~v~e~r~~vllle Rd between Zion Rd and Georgia Ave Monlgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

-~

Vicinity of Olney laytonSville Road Dorsey Road WalfJeld

laytonsville 15905 Road Woodfield Road and Brink Road between Riggs Road ami Monlgom Count X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 Gaithersburg Road and RIggs Road between Oinev laylonsvlUe ry y Road and Ripplemead Drive laytonsville MD

--+-----+-- -- -~ --- ----- --- --------- shyII 1506 Vicinity of Zion Rd from Gregg Rd Soulh to Olney laytonsville M t C t X I PI I 3 d Q rt 011Laytonsv e bull Rd (RIl0B) to Olney Mill Rd on gomery oun y nann ng r ua er lt

---- -1----- --- - GeneraiVijnityof Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to EaslWes 1--------1------ - - --- ------------1 linden 14264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East Montgomery Counll( X In Ptanning 3rd Quarter 2011

Wesl Highway Sliver Spring MD MiieURd---- 6914------- Willi Oak Falrtand Montgomery County ------i-~)(-I_- --- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Metzerolt Rd --- 6913~- Fairland and Cores ville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011=----_ - -- -- ---shyMontgomery 14379 Vicinity of Arrowhead Rd Goshen Rd Snoufte School Rd Mont orne Count X In En Ineertn 4th Quarter 2011 VlIage Wightman Rd and Warfield Rd GaIthersburg MD 9 ry Y ____ ____ 9 g __

reg 5 As of May 2 2011

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 9: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

_--_~ ~c ~_-c-~------_~~~_~-----~p~e=lpc~O=R=e=lia=biI=ity==E=n=h=an==ce=mentpla-20=11------r---r--------r---rcc----c------------c-c-----~

Location

r-

Darnestown

I---Darnestown

Darnestown

Ia~

Feeder Looationl Subdivision Timeline-1ls~tJJs ~~~~~~0

fftS ~~ II

Tree Trimming installation of ACR and SWitCh ana fleJa Inspection In the vicinity of Springfield Popular Hill Esworthy15230 3rd Quarter 2011Monlgomery County x In Engineering and White Rock Roads

r----~ ~~~~~

Ancienl Oak North I Colton lane URD cable replacemenllcuring Mont Orne Count )( Com lete 41h Quarter 2010 15238 _--i~n Ihe vicinity of coll lane g ry y ~ ~~

15286 Vicinity of HI Wood Rd Montgomery County X In Englneerlng3rd Quarter 2011

Darnestown MO 15237 VTiciknilyFof DtaRmesdtoDwn RdmiddottbetweMeOn Ancienl Oak Drive and Montgomery Counly)( In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 1_ ur ey 00 oa I ames own bull __

Viclnily of Darnestown Rd between Ancienl Oak Drive and M I C t 3rd Quaner 2011OamesIown MD 15231 T FIR dOl MD on gomery oun y CompleleLr----- urfey o~~ ~~~es~~l bull I 15254 Vicinily of Muncasler Mill Rd from Laytonsville Rdlo Redland Monl ome CountDerwoord X Complele 4th Quarter 2010 I_~__ Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Winters Run ~ _ ~ ~-g _ ry y

____ ~ ~492 Countryside I Briggs Chaney Rd WIO Old Columbia Pik~e___ Montgomery Counly Complele Vicinity of Musgrove Rd between Columbia Pike and Falnand

Fainand MD 14493 Rd and Falnand Rd between Musgrove Rd and Tamarack Rd Montgomery Counly X lin Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

I--~~ ~~ Fairtnd~_~ -[-----I-----+---__t_Woodside Parkway and Dale Drivemiddot Vicinity of Universily Blvd

IFour Corners 14452 at Indian Spring Dr and ColeSville Rd between Brewsler Ave Montgomery County X lin Engineering 41h Quarter 2011 nd Spring St Sliver Spring MD -+--t I---t-------

Gaithersburg I14063 Vicinity of Quince OrChard Blvd al Sebastian Blvd and W Montgomery County x Complele ~ Diamond Ave al Muddy Branch Rd Galthersburg MD ~- -~ ------t- shy--+shyM~ddy-Brnch Rd nortll of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy

Gaithersburg 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of IMonlgomery Counly X IComplete i---- fieldS R~~lthersburg MDmiddot ____L

~------t~-----I---l-

General vlclnlly of Quince Orchard Rd Pin Oak Or ChestnutGaithersburg 14070 Montgomery Counly X CompleteSt Waler St and Cedar Ave Gaithersburg MD

1 land Place I Monlgomery Village Montgomery County _X__~ lsi Quarter 2011 -~+----l= ~Iete General vicinity of Research Blvd from Darnestown Rd to Mont ome CountGaithersburg 15067 x In Construction bull 2nd Quarter 2011 ~___ middotrhltlrGrOVeRdGalthe~bUrgMD ___ 9 ry y 1__ -+-- ~~-~middotI----+--

Gallllersbur 115235 General Vicinity or Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suyanand Mont ome Count 4th Quarter 2010 x CompleleI--- ~~__g_ ~--+--- Rd and Partnershp Rd Suganand MD ~ __~~ g ry y +------+---------~ l---~--+--~__+-

Vicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and Gailhersburg 41h Quarter 2010

Cenlerway ~Rd-Gait~h_ers_b_u~rg~_M_D___________-j

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County Complete

----+ ~ ------1------1~-~~ ~ 1shyVicinity of Emory Grove Rd between Sirawberry Knoll RD and

Gallhersburg 3rd Quarter 2011 Centerway Rd Gaithersburg MDbull Major MC SAIFI contribution

15251 Grover Rd and Goshen Rd between Odenhal Ave and Montgomery County )( In Engineering

r- --- shyG it b 15256 Vicinity of Laytonsville Rd Warfield Rd and Goshen Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

a lers urg ~~~___~ ~ __ ~ 13-theigturg MD ~~ ~ _

GI b 15256 WarfieldRdfromWoodfieldRdtoAddnbroo~wayandGoshenM nt C ty I C I Ii 2 dQ rt 2011 a ers urg Rd from Warfield Rd 10 Brink Rd 0 gomery oun nons rue on n ua er

~~~ 1~5284 Westleigh I Duri Mill Rd EO Quince Orchard Rd --Montgomery County -----~__=_r--x-- -~ Completelt Quart2011 Muddy Branch Roadmiddot Vicinity 01 Shady Grove Rd between

Ufg 15834 iR h C rt d G Ith Rd R ~III MD Montgomery County In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 es~a-~_ ou an a er I OCnll e 1___ _~_ _______1

15834 Vicinity of Shady Grove Rd between Research Court and Galthe M t C I C let mg Rd Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e1

~-~ ---- --- ~~~-r__~----~-~~ r~

mg 15235 General vicinity of Blackrock Rd Dameslown Rd Sugarland County x lin engineering 4th QUarter 2011 _ ~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suyanand MD t--------~~ t------~ -+ ~+-_~

GmiddotII b ~ ~~~523S Ge eral vicinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Sugarland M t C I X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011 ers Ufg ~~_ Rd and Partnership Rd Suganand MD on gomery oun y 1 t--- shy

G I b 15235 General vcinity of Blackrock Rd Darnestown Rd Suganand M I C t 3rd Quarter 2011X In Planningt lers urg Rd and Partnership Rd Suoanand MD on gomery oun y

(J As of May 2 2011

---- --- -- - ---- ------ -- - --- --- ------- ---- ---- ---- ------- ---

------- ------ -----

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 ------- ---- bullbull J _ bull c bull

_ _ ~ ~ c If 0 f I

I if~ sect~ ~ c-V Imiddot - I II b - ofltgt t l

Location Feeder Location (Subdivision ~Iti -f I oc- rsectc- csect sgt $ Statu Timeline c- c- gt b i 0 ~ ~t Cf)t I~ J1 ~~

~l~ rsectio ff~ lt bullbullbullbullbullbull Q ~ -= f t-i Q

I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ _c___ I plusmn bull tv ~___ _ -

Vicinity of Quince Orchard Blvd at Sebastian Blvd and W ---~-------f Gaithersburg 14063 Diamond Ave at Muddy Branch Rd Gaithersburg MDmiddot West Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ___ _ ____ Riding and[)iamond Sq _ ____ __ _____ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ ____ __ _

Gaithersburg 14069 General vicinltv of Quince Orchard Rd between Longdraft Rd M t C I X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 and Muddy Branch Park Galthe burg MD West Riding II on gomery Dun y nons rue on n ua er

---- ------------ ------ -- --- -- ---- --- -+----------1 Gaithersburg 14886 ~e~r1 ~Icinit~~f Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

1----_________ a___ eurllL -- ------___ ~--- ----__ ------f------------l ------------1 Germanlown 14886 ~~~~~~~~t~~ Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---- --~ ------- --- ----- --------- --- ------1 Germanlown 15238 VGICllnhitY degbf RlfflMefoOrdMRdj degMame essAtolFWn Rdmiddot bundtiJones lane Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

tr----------- _-5 urg_ - aor connon 1-----_ ---- ---~- _ -- ---------1--1----------1-------------1 Germantown 15240 ~~n~y of Citopper~ betwen Mateney Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

~~nown bull _____ ______ _________ ______ _________ _______-

Germantown 115240 ~~in~ty of CI~pper~ between Matenev Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Planning 4th Quarter 2011 ~~~r~~~ ~~wn ~~ _ _ _________-1

Oakland Road and Brookland Drive - General vicinity of River Glen Echo 14951 Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeslde Dr Montgomery County X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD ---- 1---------- --- --1---- ----1------- -----1-------- shy

Glen Echo 1476814769 SurnnerViliage I Sentinel Dr Eta Sangmore Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

Glen Echo 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C t X J PI I 3rd Q rt 2011 Bethesda MD Dr Bethesda MD on gomery Dun y nann ng ua er

r=ccc=c - - ----- -- 1----------Kensinglon 14440 nr~1 Vi~lniy of~~ward Ave Strthmore Ave and Montrose Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

__e~ng_on ~---- ______ ______ 1_-----shyGeneral vicinity of Bel-Pre Rd from Connecticut Ave to layhltl

Layhill MD Rd layhill from Bel-Pre Rd to Cherter Mill Rd and Argyle Club Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd from layhdl Rd to longmead Crossing and Nonnandy

---- CrossingOrlayhlllMD _____ r---- ----- ------ --c---- --- ------- --------Vlcinlly of Olney-laytonsville Rd between Stanbrook la and

Laytonsville 15901 Griffith Rd Griffith Rd between OIneYmiddotLaytonsvilie Rd and Montgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 ~- Dam-scus Rd Laytonsville MD ~_ _+__ __1----_ ______________+ l ytlI 15902 Vlcinily of Brookville RdMunc bullbullter Rd and Muncaster Mill M tel X I PI 3rd Q rt 2011

bull oosv e Rdbetween Pepco 230kV RIW and Air Park Rd on gomery oun I n anmng u er -- -- ------- - ----- - ---- --- ---- ---1----- ---- ------ -- ----- --- 1------ --------+--------shy

layt lie 15903 Vicinity of Fleldcrest Rd and Woodfield Rd between Olney M t C t X I PI 3rd Q rter 2011 onVI laytonsville Rd and Brenloll Dr Gaithersburg MO on gomery oun y n nmng u

-- -------- --- c--- --- --- --- -------- lytonsville 15904 ~~~~~v~e~r~~vllle Rd between Zion Rd and Georgia Ave Monlgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

-~

Vicinity of Olney laytonSville Road Dorsey Road WalfJeld

laytonsville 15905 Road Woodfield Road and Brink Road between Riggs Road ami Monlgom Count X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 Gaithersburg Road and RIggs Road between Oinev laylonsvlUe ry y Road and Ripplemead Drive laytonsville MD

--+-----+-- -- -~ --- ----- --- --------- shyII 1506 Vicinity of Zion Rd from Gregg Rd Soulh to Olney laytonsville M t C t X I PI I 3 d Q rt 011Laytonsv e bull Rd (RIl0B) to Olney Mill Rd on gomery oun y nann ng r ua er lt

---- -1----- --- - GeneraiVijnityof Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to EaslWes 1--------1------ - - --- ------------1 linden 14264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East Montgomery Counll( X In Ptanning 3rd Quarter 2011

Wesl Highway Sliver Spring MD MiieURd---- 6914------- Willi Oak Falrtand Montgomery County ------i-~)(-I_- --- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Metzerolt Rd --- 6913~- Fairland and Cores ville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011=----_ - -- -- ---shyMontgomery 14379 Vicinity of Arrowhead Rd Goshen Rd Snoufte School Rd Mont orne Count X In En Ineertn 4th Quarter 2011 VlIage Wightman Rd and Warfield Rd GaIthersburg MD 9 ry Y ____ ____ 9 g __

reg 5 As of May 2 2011

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 10: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

---- --- -- - ---- ------ -- - --- --- ------- ---- ---- ---- ------- ---

------- ------ -----

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 ------- ---- bullbull J _ bull c bull

_ _ ~ ~ c If 0 f I

I if~ sect~ ~ c-V Imiddot - I II b - ofltgt t l

Location Feeder Location (Subdivision ~Iti -f I oc- rsectc- csect sgt $ Statu Timeline c- c- gt b i 0 ~ ~t Cf)t I~ J1 ~~

~l~ rsectio ff~ lt bullbullbullbullbullbull Q ~ -= f t-i Q

I I ~ ~ ~ ~_ _c___ I plusmn bull tv ~___ _ -

Vicinity of Quince Orchard Blvd at Sebastian Blvd and W ---~-------f Gaithersburg 14063 Diamond Ave at Muddy Branch Rd Gaithersburg MDmiddot West Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011 ___ _ ____ Riding and[)iamond Sq _ ____ __ _____ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ ____ __ _

Gaithersburg 14069 General vicinltv of Quince Orchard Rd between Longdraft Rd M t C I X I C t II 2 d Q rt 2011 and Muddy Branch Park Galthe burg MD West Riding II on gomery Dun y nons rue on n ua er

---- ------------ ------ -- --- -- ---- --- -+----------1 Gaithersburg 14886 ~e~r1 ~Icinit~~f Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

1----_________ a___ eurllL -- ------___ ~--- ----__ ------f------------l ------------1 Germanlown 14886 ~~~~~~~~t~~ Blunt Rd from Frederick Rd to Brink Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

---- --~ ------- --- ----- --------- --- ------1 Germanlown 15238 VGICllnhitY degbf RlfflMefoOrdMRdj degMame essAtolFWn Rdmiddot bundtiJones lane Montgomery County X In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

tr----------- _-5 urg_ - aor connon 1-----_ ---- ---~- _ -- ---------1--1----------1-------------1 Germantown 15240 ~~n~y of Citopper~ betwen Mateney Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

~~nown bull _____ ______ _________ ______ _________ _______-

Germantown 115240 ~~in~ty of CI~pper~ between Matenev Rd and Game Preserve Montgomery County X In Planning 4th Quarter 2011 ~~~r~~~ ~~wn ~~ _ _ _________-1

Oakland Road and Brookland Drive - General vicinity of River Glen Echo 14951 Rd from Goldsboro Rd to Ridgefield Rd Brookeslde Dr Montgomery County X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

Chamberlain Ave and Dorset Ave Bethesda MD ---- 1---------- --- --1---- ----1------- -----1-------- shy

Glen Echo 1476814769 SurnnerViliage I Sentinel Dr Eta Sangmore Rd Montgomery County X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

Glen Echo 14943 Vicinity of MacArthur Blvd from Walhounding Rd to Vendome M t C t X J PI I 3rd Q rt 2011 Bethesda MD Dr Bethesda MD on gomery Dun y nann ng ua er

r=ccc=c - - ----- -- 1----------Kensinglon 14440 nr~1 Vi~lniy of~~ward Ave Strthmore Ave and Montrose Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

__e~ng_on ~---- ______ ______ 1_-----shyGeneral vicinity of Bel-Pre Rd from Connecticut Ave to layhltl

Layhill MD Rd layhill from Bel-Pre Rd to Cherter Mill Rd and Argyle Club Montgomery County X In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd from layhdl Rd to longmead Crossing and Nonnandy

---- CrossingOrlayhlllMD _____ r---- ----- ------ --c---- --- ------- --------Vlcinlly of Olney-laytonsville Rd between Stanbrook la and

Laytonsville 15901 Griffith Rd Griffith Rd between OIneYmiddotLaytonsvilie Rd and Montgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 ~- Dam-scus Rd Laytonsville MD ~_ _+__ __1----_ ______________+ l ytlI 15902 Vlcinily of Brookville RdMunc bullbullter Rd and Muncaster Mill M tel X I PI 3rd Q rt 2011

bull oosv e Rdbetween Pepco 230kV RIW and Air Park Rd on gomery oun I n anmng u er -- -- ------- - ----- - ---- --- ---- ---1----- ---- ------ -- ----- --- 1------ --------+--------shy

layt lie 15903 Vicinity of Fleldcrest Rd and Woodfield Rd between Olney M t C t X I PI 3rd Q rter 2011 onVI laytonsville Rd and Brenloll Dr Gaithersburg MO on gomery oun y n nmng u

-- -------- --- c--- --- --- --- -------- lytonsville 15904 ~~~~~v~e~r~~vllle Rd between Zion Rd and Georgia Ave Monlgomery County X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011

-~

Vicinity of Olney laytonSville Road Dorsey Road WalfJeld

laytonsville 15905 Road Woodfield Road and Brink Road between Riggs Road ami Monlgom Count X In Planning 3rd Quarter 2011 Gaithersburg Road and RIggs Road between Oinev laylonsvlUe ry y Road and Ripplemead Drive laytonsville MD

--+-----+-- -- -~ --- ----- --- --------- shyII 1506 Vicinity of Zion Rd from Gregg Rd Soulh to Olney laytonsville M t C t X I PI I 3 d Q rt 011Laytonsv e bull Rd (RIl0B) to Olney Mill Rd on gomery oun y nann ng r ua er lt

---- -1----- --- - GeneraiVijnityof Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to EaslWes 1--------1------ - - --- ------------1 linden 14264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East Montgomery Counll( X In Ptanning 3rd Quarter 2011

Wesl Highway Sliver Spring MD MiieURd---- 6914------- Willi Oak Falrtand Montgomery County ------i-~)(-I_- --- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

Metzerolt Rd --- 6913~- Fairland and Cores ville Montgomery County X In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011=----_ - -- -- ---shyMontgomery 14379 Vicinity of Arrowhead Rd Goshen Rd Snoufte School Rd Mont orne Count X In En Ineertn 4th Quarter 2011 VlIage Wightman Rd and Warfield Rd GaIthersburg MD 9 ry Y ____ ____ 9 g __

reg 5 As of May 2 2011

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 11: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

---

-----

---

9

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011

bullbull

Location Feeder 1Location I StibdiYl6lon ~~~il 0H

~t$ s

f~I Status it -bull

In Engineering

In Planning

Timeline

3rd Quarter 2011

+-----3rd Quarter 2011

1---------- ---------

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

In Engineering 3rd Quarter 2011

--t----In Constructlon 2nd Quarter 2011

Complete 2nd Quarter 2011

In Englneenng lrd Quarter 2011

Complete 4th Quarter 2010

In Engineering

ill Constru~- 2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011 2nd Quartr 2011 3rd Quarter 2011

lrd Quarter 2011

I--- ---

4th Quarter 2011

Q~fl1gtJi

f---- shy -----shyMuddy Branclt Muddy Branch Rd north 01 Field Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthersbur 14066 Branch Rd to Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north 01 Montgomery County x

FIelds RdGalthersb=u=r9MD___--------------c---f----shy --+------1--- ---J----Mudd Branth Muddy Branch Rd north of Fields Rd Fields Rd from Muddy Galthrsbur x t------------g

---- Iolds Rd Galthersb fjME----___________ 14066 Branch Rd 10 Shady Grove Rd and Shady Grove Rd north of Montgomery County

------11 -------I--------I------------j General vicinity of Brookville Rd from Stewart Ave to East-We

Norbeck 114264 Highway and Jones Mill Rd between Jones Bridge Rd and East1Montgomery County x Wet Highway Sliver Spring MD - Major Me SAIFI contribution

+---------+- --1shyBowie Mill Road - Vicinity of Muncaster Mill Rd between Redland Rd and Needwood Rd Bowie Mill Rd betweenNorbeck 15 Montgomery County xMuncater Mill Rd and Cashell Rd and Cashell Rd between

~ ___1-1Brook_m Rd and Emory La Norbeck MD __ 1 shy

~----+General vicinity of Emory La Muncater Mill Rd and Needwood1 t C tNorbeck x

-I---t--- f-------I- ---+-~-----R_d Norbeck MD Mon gomery oun y

19000 Block of Georgia Avenue Patrick Henry Drive Genoral ------l------Norbeck vicinity of GeorgIa Ave from Emory La to Olney Laytonsville Montgomery County X

______-iIRd Brookeville Rd Olney MD

Dominion Dnve Woodale Drive Batchellors Foret Road -Norbeck ~

115127 General viCinity 01 Georgia Ave BaChelors Forest Rd Sandy IMontgomery County x ______-tISprlcng---R=d~ Bro_oke~RdcOIn=eyCMD___________ f------t------t----+---__t_

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between eatchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Norbeck 115128 Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and LayhlU Road EdnorlMontgomery County x Rd between Norwood Rd and Woodaie Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood R

1-ii1-iJaNorbeck 1- bull - IAUemvodl Norbeck Rd EO Georgia Ave Montgomery County Old Bailimore Road - Vicinity of Georgia A ve to Old Baltimore

Norbeck 115129 Rd Olney Sandy Spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Montgomery County x I Grove Rd Olney MD

Norbeck _~~SM79 -- DerWood Emory~Grove Shady Grove Montgomery County - --- -- - f-- ----1--- ---- - ---shy

Norb~k_____ ~ ___ J69082 Emory Grove Derwood Mt Zion Montgomery Counly --- X --- --==_--~ I----- ___ In Construction Norbeck j69080 Emory Grove Shady Grove Mt Zion Montgomery County ~ In Construction Norbeck ---__ -- _ ~9077 Norbeck to Rockville Derwood and Shady Grove Montgomery County _____ ~_____ _ __-- ---x ~ __ I----- In Planning

Vicinity of Glen Mill Road between Darnestown Road and Lloyd North Potomac 115160 d Piney Meeting House Road between 230 kV right 01 Montgomery County x In Planning

bull Cavanaugh Olive Potomac MD

I vicinity 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Foret Rd Sandy Montgomery County Olnev 15127 Spring _Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD Vicinity 01 Georgia Ave to Old BaHimore Rd Olney Sandy

Olney 11612~~spring Rd to Prince Philip Dr down to Brook Grove Rd Olney~IMontgOmery County x Complete

_ MO ___~--~~~~----~~--~~ --1---1--1shyGeneral vicinity 01 Dorsey Rd lrom LaytonslIlIIe Olney Rd to

Olne MD 115120 Gaithersburg Rd Riggs Rd from LaytonSville Olney Rd to Unl Mont ornery County x In Engineering Y Mt Zion Rd Muncaster Rd from Olney Rd to Muncster MIll Rd 9

------Olney MD - -- -1 151-- r~~ea~~~lmty 01 Georgia Ave Bachelors Forest Rd Sandy Montgomery County --1----shy x lin Engineering ----+Ih (llJ~rter 2011Spnng Rd Brooke Rd Olney MD- ------r shy~---

Vicinity of Georgia Ave between Batchellor Forest Rd an Norbeck Rd Norbeck Rd between Georgia and Twin Valley Ln

Olnov MD Norwood Road between Twin Valley Ln and Layhill Road EdnorlMontgomory County x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011 Rd between Norwood Rd and Wooddale Dr and Layhill Rd between Norwood Rd and Merrifield Dr Olney MD

e As or Ma~ 2 2011

15128

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 12: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 ~I-C

gt

1lt

location Feeder L~cal~n IS~bdlvlsion

gt bullbull

-

Viclnily of Georgia Ave to Old Baltimore Rd Olney Sandy Olney MO 15129 Spring Rd to Prince Philip Or down to Brook Grove Rd Olnev

MO

~~ 69195 Kensington Unden ROCkville 69191 Unden Rockville

Prkl-wn ~ 69198 Kensington linden RockviUe

Williamsburg Gdns Fawsell Farms Potomac Ranch General Potomac 14961 vicinity bounded by falls Rd north to BriCkyard Rd and

MacArthur Blvd and west to River Rd Polomac MD

Ishy 1----

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query MiH Rd Travllah Rd Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to rravllall Terr and Stoney Creek Rd from

Travllah Rd to Stoney Creek Way Polomac MD r- ~- i-~

Potomac farm Ests Vista Glen Mill Vii Justment Woods

Pntomac 14910 Hollinridge Horilon Hili Glen Glen Elm Fann Ests The Est at Greenbriar Preserve Palatine Beallmount Grove Hannibd Fanns

- _

Vicinity of Glen Rd from Falls Rd to Query Mill Rd Travllah Rd

Potomac 14970 from Glen Rd to Travllah Terr and Stoney Creek Rd fram Trvllall Rd to Stoney Creek Way Potomac MDmiddot Major MC SAIFI conh1butlon

-shy -shyGeneral vicinity of River Rd from Falls Rd to Bradley Blvd and

Potomac 1~971 PerSimmon Tree Rd from River Rd to Bradley Blvd Potomac

14973 MO

~IO~middot=----= The Village I falls Rd SIO River Rd

Pine Knolls East Gate of Potomac Elberon Lake Normandy

Potomac 14974 Ests Old Flels Fox Knollsmiddot Vicinity of Bell Mill Rd between Falls Rd and Great Arbor Dr and Falls Rd between Bells Mill Rd and Marseille Dr Potomac MD

_shy _ Williamsburg Ests Potomac Ranch Mana Woods River Falls

PDtotnaC 14976 Carderock Vicinity of Falls Rd between River Rd and Brickyard Rd Brtckyard Rd between Falls Rd and McArthur Blvd Potomac MO----

Potomac 14971 Vicinity of River Road between Bradley Blvd and Seven Locks Road and Bradley Blvd south of River Road bull --_

Vicinity of Pepco RIW between Coppola Court and Falls Road Potomac 15153

Rockville MD _

General viclnKy of Gainsborough Rd from Regeney Rd to Seve

Potomac 15158 Locks Rd Regency Estates Montrose Rd Including Montroe Woods North farm Merrimack Park Rollins Park Rockville MD bull

shy shy ~-

Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devllwood Dr and Seven Lock Potomac 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Gainsbora Rd and fortune

__ __shy I~raceJ ~otomaeJ MD

Potomac 14088 14083 Inverness I Tuckerman Rd WIO Seven Locks Rd

c_ shy

Fails Rd between River Rd and MacArthur Blvd and vicinity Potomac 14913shy _shy p_tomac MD - Martingale Ct

General vlclnity of Falls Rd from Victory La to North Glen Rd Potomac 15155 and Glen Rd from falls Rd to Piney Meeting House Rd

Potomac MD Vicinity of Clopper Road at Steeple Road Richter Farm Road

Quince Orchard 15233 --bull ~---69060ilshy

~Hopklns Road Quince Orcllanl Bureau of Standards Middlebrook Montgomry Village

p ~_l

shy

He~ ~

[ir

Montgomery County

Montgomery Counly Montgomery County Montgomery County

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

-~

Montgomery County

_shy

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgome1 County

Montgomery County

_

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

i- If f Ilf ~ gt t$ ~ ~ Ijllf)ql lt pound~

If tit b b 4f f ~~ 0 SS

4 $ l 1lf olt-l amp shy Status Timeine sect Jo b t 0 i ~ ~ 01 II c1 f ~

- q Je If It ~ il $ q ~ sect-1i tj

~~ p

(-- -~ltI

X In Engineering 41h Quarier 2011

- shy f-shy -X- r----shy 2nd Quarter 2011In Construction

~ In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

- ----- f--- I---lltshy _- In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

shy -shy ---~-- - _ -shy

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

_shy - imiddot-middotmiddotshy _ shy ~-~ 1--- _ ---~_-_ --

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

X In Engineering lrd Quarter 2011

-shy _ shy - -~ shy shy _

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

X - shy

In Engineering 13rd Quarter 2011_shy I---shy

X Complete lsi Quarter 2011

shy _ -shy shy

X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

__shy _ shy ~- _ shy _shy - --cshy - - -c- _ X Complete 1st Quarter 2011

Xmiddot Complete 4th Quarter 2010 - 1---shy_ Ishy shy e-

X Complete 4th Quarter 2010

shy r--- X In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

- 1---shy I---- ishy ~ middot-c X Complete

--rshy -shy --shy -shy -~-__shy -

X In Construction 3rd Quarter 2011 i- - 1--- - ~-middotr _- --

X In Planning lrd Quarter 2011

_ r- _shy shy _shyX Complete

---shy r--shy - 2nd Quarter 2011 X In Construction

--

As of May 2 2011

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 13: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

Pepco Rellabilitpound Enhancement Planmiddot 2011 --~~ ~-~

~ I

Location Feede koc~tion ISubdivsion

-shy

JU~~~ictiO

t ~ sectp sf itamp

ltI

l sect6s cJltI

f I b b sectraquoca lt

q ~ sect $ sect 0

II Ji ~ IIji s tu

$ f iii ~ ~

sect f

ltI~ ~ltI

ca

F ~

(j b

0

11 ~ IEi

f~flI ~f

QI S

Timeline

I Bureau of Standnt Middlebrook Montgomery Village __~~~ Montgomery County General vicinity of Seneca Rd from Darnestown Rd to River Rd

~~~~~I---~~ ~~2nd Quarter 2011

and River Rd from Seneca Rd to Sugartand Rd Darnestown Montgomery County

MD~~~~=-~~~__~~__~~~~~~~__+-___________________~ ~--~ General vicinity of Tuckerman La from Westlake Dr to Old

Georgetown Rd and DId GeorgetOWTl Rd from Lux Lato Montgomery County

~Uloce orc~a_+52~

Rockville 14081

4th Quarter 2011In Engineering x ~- ~--+~--t--

4th Quarter 2010x Complete gecul~ve Boulevard Bethesda MD Vicinity of Old Georgetown Rd and Rockledge Dr aethesda MD

~-~ -t--- t-~ +--+shy ~+~--~~~

JRockville 14081

~kllIe__~ _ 1bullbull_ RockVille 149 --~-----

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

~--~I-~~---~

CompleteMontgomery County x ------1-1 ~

Tuckerman La between Westlake Dr and Marcliff Dr Tilden La IM

t C t between Old Georgetown Rd ant4 nM Ch c 11_raquo_ un on gomery oun y

0 Owens Court I West MontgOme~-~ ~~~e~middotmiddot ~~ Montgomery County I_~t----+X- ~~~ ~~1----b Ro~~creek ManorllspenHill~RltUJIOVi~ersMill_~d _ Montgomery County ~ ~~ I~- Complete

X

Rockville 4th Quarter 2010 4931 General vicinity of Parklawn Dr Twlnbrook Parkway Fisher La M t C t 1C let Rockville MD on gomery oun y omp e

~~-~~ F~-~ ~-- ~ u __ ~ --t--shy --~f-- --~ I 4941 ~en=ral vl~~ty of Montrose Rd Rockville Pike White Flint Mall Montgomery County X CompleleRockville 4th Quarter 2010

J lsi Quarter 2011 ~rter2~

~ockvill ~_~ =r~5i64 ~- GeL~fA~enue JSeven Locks Rd SID Montr~se Rd____~ Montgomery County I~~____~~- ~-~ x-t-~~- ~----~ 1--shy Icmplete

Rockville 15286 Rockshrie - Emily Drive Monlgomery County X Complele~kiile ~__ -~~ __[34977 _~ Twlnbrook Montgomery County X In Construction _____

Rockville ~JS~~18~ ~_~ Worchester and Washington Aves ~ Montgomery County ~gtL--f--~ ~_~~ ~_~ _ COfnplele 1shy -

Rockville 14045 General vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allantlc Ave and the area bounded by Lewis Ave and Viers Mill Rd

~ __~__ ~+_______+Roc-villebullcMO---------------------------shyGeneral vicinity of Viers Mill Rd from Furman Rd to Allanlic

Rockville 114045

Montgomery County X In Engineering

In Planning Ave and the area bounded by LewiS Ave and Viers Mill Rd IMontgomery County

___--lIRockville~~O --shy ~~ l-------f----f-----_+__ -+-_1shyVicinity of Montrose Rd between Seven Locks Rd and Evelyn

Rockville 115164 Dr and Seven Locks Rd between Devilwood Dr and Fortune Montgomery County X In Planning i_______-+Terra~-e Rckvllle MD ~~----

I Vicinity of Post Oak Rd between Devilwood Dr and Seven Loc Rockville 15163 Rd and Seven Locks Rd between Galnboro Rd and Fortune Montgomery County

-+~--~~I---t------~

___-+T~er~ra~cP0tomac MD +-shyGeneral vicinity of Watts Branch Dr from Valley Dr to Glen Mill

ROCkville 15161 Dr Scali Or from Carriage CI to Viers Dr and Valley Dr from IMontgomery County X In Planning Glen Mill Rd to Watts Branch Or Bethesda MD

~---+~

Rockville Vicinity of Wooton PKWYfrom Greenplace Terrace to Falls Rd 1M I C t Vicinity West of Falls Rd from Wooton Pkwy to Victory Ln on gomery oun y X In Planning

nQ~uarter 2911

3nt Quarter 2011

~~-------

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

f---shy ~----+-~ ~--1vi~lnity of Falls Rd from Victory Ln to Tuckerman Ln Vicinity of Tuckerman Ln from Falls Rd to Long Pine Trail Vicinity of Postoak Rd from Tuckerman Ln North East 10 Vlctooy Ln and

-------+--~ I-----~---+~~---I ~____+----I_______~ I~-~-- +------

Rockville

t------

Rockville

15151 Montgomery County

I----shy ~--t_So_u_t_h_o_n~Vlc_to_ry--L_n_t_o_G_a_i_n_b_o_r_o_u=g_h_R_d_

15156 Vicinity of Tuckennan Lane be1ween Galnsboro Rd and Wesake Dr Seven Locks Rdlgtetween Tuckerman Lane and IMontgomery County Post Oak Dr and Georgetown Dr at Regency Rd Bethesda MO

X In Planning

-+~-~--I----

X In Planning

Rockville 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd trom Atwell Rd to Grove t ~-~~i~ nln t------shy Point Court Potomac MO an g

Rockville 14049 Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Parklawn ~~__________J ~~______jDr~Rockvllle MD

~ -t-------j ---shy

x In Engineering

3nt Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

3rd Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

a As of May 2 2011

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 14: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

--

Pepco Reliability Enhancement Plan - 2011 I

Location Feedr toeation I Subdivision

I

~~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

General vicinity of Galnsborough Rd from Rampgampncy Rd to Seve Locks Rd Regency Estats Montrose Rd including Montrose RocKville 15158 Montgomery County xWoods North Farm Merr1miock Park Rollins Park Rockvillamp MO

Rockville Falls 15154 Vicinity of Falls Rd and Greal Falls Rd from Atwell Rd to Grove Mont ome xOrchard ~ ~ POiJlt ~ourt Potomac MOmiddot Falls Orch~rd g ry --- -t-------Rockville Vicinity of Falls Rd and Great Falls Rd lrom Atwell Rd 10 Grove M I C nt15154 xPoint Court Potomac MDbullbull Fallsmeade North on gomery ou yFaUsmeade North

15853 Vicinity of Muddy Branch Road norlh of Darnestown Road and Mont ome CountShady Grove QUInce Orchard Road II ry Y

5 S -[1263 Rockcreek Stream Valley Park Areamiddot Talbot Ave from lanier Or M I C t X I ver prm9 10 onlgomery 51 on gomery oun y

Silver Spring and Chevy Chase Village General vicinity of Silver Spring 14264 Connecticut A venue Brookville Road East West Hwy and Monlgomery County X

1_____+JonampS Mill Road_~~

Gampral vicinity of Linden Lane and Woodstock Ave and Mont omamp Counl XSilver Spring 14267 Sioneybrook Or and HIli Rd KenSIngton MO 9 ry Y 14860 Oalo Drive I Are betweampn Colesville Rd and Georgia Ave ---~ Monlgomery Counly ---~

VicinllV of Wisconsin Avamp betwampen Cedar Lane and Pooks Hill M I C tSliver Spring 15797 XIRd Bethesda MD on gomery oun y

----I---]~--vlcitiityof Belpre Road Grand Pre Road Georgia Avenue and SilvaSpring 14906 Hewill Avenue bamptwampen Connecticut Avenuamp and Bluff Point Montgomery County

_ ~ Lane~iI~er Spring MD Vicinity of Viers Mill Rd belwampen Connecticut AVamp and Newport Mill Rd Claridge Rd betwampen Viers Mill Rd and Mampdway RdSliver Spring 14046 Monlgomery County xand Livingston St between Medway Rd and Randolph Rd Sliver Spring MO

Vicinity of Randolph Rd belween Viers Mill Rd and Denlampy Rd Sliver Spring 14050 land oenley Rd from Randolph Rd to Georgia Ave and Georgia I Montgomery County X

Ave from Ara Or 10 Aspen Hill Rd Silver Spring MO -----~---- ---I-- --- ~-l--

Vicinity of Randolph Rd between Viers Mill Rd and Oenley Rd SllverSpg 14050 and Denley Rd from Randolph Rd 10 Georgia Ave and Georgia IMonlgomery County x

Ave from ArB Or to Aspen Hili Rd Silver Spring MO

General vicinities of Hililop Rd belweampn Maple Ave and Piney i Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymouth 51

Takoma Park 114986 Mancllester Rd from Pinampy Branch Rd to Schuyler Rd and IMontgomery County X ~ ~~~ belwampampn Mancheslampr Rd and Fenton SI Silver

f +------+----

General viCinities of Hilltop Rd bamptween Maplamp Ave and Pinampy Branch Rd Flower Ave from Piney Branch Rd to Plymoulh 51

Takoma Park 14986 Manchestampr Rd from Plnampy Branch Rd 10 Schuyfampr Rd and IMontgomery County x Wayne Ave betwampen Manchestampr Rd and Fampnton 51 Silver Spring MObullbull Major MC SAfFI contribution

~--~ --~-1--~ General vicinities of Maple Ave bamptwampampn Philadampfphla Ave and--~

Takoma Park 14987 ~~gi~~I~~~S~~~I~~~middot~~~~~rlng Monlgomery Counly X

MD__________________+ I ----l I Takoma ~ark ~ 14-9--s1----iTakoma Park Arampamiddot Maple Ave from Tulip Avo 10 Valtampy View Av Montgomery county--~ ~X ~------~I--------t

-1~151~~~ViCinllyOfSPrlngparkAreaSI190MiIIROadfrOmEaSlemAVe IT k P k

~--

In Engineering

+---- ---In Construction

t---X

----+ In Construction

Complele

Complete ~----+---I------

X lin Engineering

----- +----+-----+-~---+--In Engineering

f---- --l-----

In Engineering

~---- ~-~~

In Planning

~ -+- ~------ ~-+---- - ~-----------1--

Complete

4th Quarter 2011

Timeline

2nd Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

I

3rd Quarter 2011 I

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2011

41h Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

I

4th Quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2010

~-+-----j-------j ~---t----- I~~--~-----I

In Enginamperlng 3rd Quarter 2011

-- ----+------

Complele lsi Quarter 2011

In Construcllon 2nd Quarter 2011

C I 2 dQ rt 2011 a oma ar to approximately 600 II east of Sheridan Slrampe II onstruc on n ua ampr

Takoma Park ---~ ~ 69144 Seek Lane While Oak Colesville Takoma Park In Construction 2nd Quarter 2011

~ 9 As of May 22011

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 15: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

Location

Wheaton

Wheaton

Vicinity of Georgia Avenue from University Blvd North to R__ndolph RD Whealon MD

Vicinity of Georgi Avenue from University Blvd North to

Montgomery County

Montgomery County

x In Engineering 4th Quarter 2011

x In Planning 4th Quarter 2011

14835

14335 Randlph RD Wheaton MO

f- 10 A 01 May 2 2011 ~)

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 16: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

pepco

Six-Point Reliability Enhancement Plan

1 Trimming Trees Many of Pepcos recent outages are a direct result of trees falling on power lines Pepco is aggressively trimming trees along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees Pepco also will work with counties communities apd homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the companys right of way area

2 Improving Priority Feeders A feeder is an electric power line that distributes power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area Each year across Montgomery County Pepco selects and replaces feeders that are performing poorly As part of the Reliability Enhancement Plan Pepco has expanded this program by 45 perce~t

3 Meeting Increased Customer Demand for Energy Similar to upgrading electric serJice to your home to accommodate new appliances and electronic devices Pepco IS continuing to upgrade power lines and is adding circuits to accommodate new customers and support increased energy use by existing customers

4 Installing Advanced Technologies Pepco is installing advanced control systems that allow the eiectric system to identify problems and switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers wit lin minutes of the falure

5 Replacing Aging Infrastructure Pepco has a long-standing project to replace underground cable in residential developments tnat for the most part was installed during the 19705 This program replaces cable to prevent future faiiures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system

Montgomery County Progress Results

(May 2011 Update)

J~PEq -tJi-gmea tieealong 887mil~~iii~~e~flreg tn t~ -~~ ~c9tl1tY In (VlayJ[ipgitlg the arnua t01aI td257~~J~Pep~t remains 0(1 target ro trim 850 miles inthe county by ffte erlj

~~~)le~ ~- ) ~ - ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~f~~

3 Ih May epeo compfeted a project in (~~therib0rg and continued work an projects If Bethes~at Potomacand Norbeck three prpjeru are slated for completion in June

- ~ ~ I bull

i it(I Visit our Web site at pepcocom (continued on next page) 147-06-11 PEPCOfrv](lY

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 17: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

Six-Point Reliability Mongtomery County Enhancement Plan Progress Results

(May 2011 Updote)

6 Selective Undergrounding and Supply Line Enhancements In areas where traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced the desired results Pepco will selectively replace the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures will be taken to further protect the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of outages increasing the reliability of the supply lines Pepco increases the reliability of the substation which in turn improves the performance of the 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

Visit our vVeb site at pepcocom 147-06-11 PEPCOM0

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 18: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Duration Range (SAIDI) Excluding Major Events

(in Minutes) U Ouartile 0-81 Second Quartile 82 - 115 Third Quartile 116 - 167 Fourth Quartile I 168 and above

Pepco s Performance 184 There were no Major Events in 2009

IEEE 2009 Average Outage Frequency Range (SAlFI) Excludin~ Major Events

First Quartile 0-089 Second Quartile 090 - 112 Third Quartile 113 - 149 Fourth Quartile 150 and above Pepcos Performance I 174 There were no Major Events in 2009

i

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 19: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

cop A PHI Company

PEP CO R ELI A B I LIT Y ENHANCEMENT PLAN SUMMARY

Pepco has announced the development of a six-point reliability plan that advances work on existing programs as well as initiates new activities These programs are intended to increase substantially the reliability of the distribution system across Maryland by reducing both the frequency and duration of outages for our customers The total cost of this work over the next five years is estimated to be in excess of a quarter billion dollars and increases our expenditures by $100 million over the next five years Improving the reliability of the electric system is critically important to everyone at Pepco We will continue to improve our performance and work with our customers to address their concerns

Summary - Pepco Maryland Data is in millions

Current Annual

Current Five-Year

Planned Annual

Planned Five-Year

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management $43 $215 $73 $365

2 Priority Feeders $45 $225 $65 $325

3 Load Growth $120 $600 $120 $600

4 Distribution Automation $12 $60 $30 $150

5 URD Cable Replacement $63 $315 $75 $375

6 Selective Undergrounding Substation Improvements

$0 $0 $150 $750

TOTAL $283 $1415 $513 $2565

Plan Description

1 Enhanced Vegetation Management Enhanced vegetation management includes tree trimming along public rights of way to obtain increased clearance between the overhead electric wires and existing trees In addition to tree trimming Pepco also will work with counties communities and homeowners to remove trees that are dead in poor health or would damage the distribution system if they were to fall

2 Priority Feeders Each year Pepco selects feeders across Maryland that we determine are the least performing feeders We perform detailed investigations to determine the cause of outages and necessary corrective actions to reduce the number of outages A feeder is one electric distribution line that supplies electric power to up to 1100 customers within a specific geographic area We are expanding this program by 45 percent

August 20 10

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 20: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

pco A PHI Company

3 Load Growth Each year Pepco evaluates the need to add or upgrade feeders in order to reliably supply new customers and support increased usage required by existing customers This program is part of our long-established system planning process that ensures the continued availability of safe and rel iable power for our customers

4 Distribution Automation Distribution automation involves installing advanced control systems across the distribution system to allow the electric system to identify faults and perform switching automatically These technologies will automatically isolate the failed pieces of equipment and restore most of the affected customers within minutes of the failure Pepco was awarded $1025 million in Department of Energy Smart Grid Investment Grants to help fund the advancement of this technology in Maryland

5 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Cable Replacement Pepco has a long-standing project to replace cable that generally was installed during the 1970s This program replaces cable to prevent future failures and increases the reliability of the distribution system for customers supplied from the underground system Since 2007 Pepco has upgraded more than 12 million feet (230 miles) of underground cable across Maryland at a cost of $27 million We are planning to expand this program by 20 percent

6 Selective UndergroundingSubstation Improvements As Pepco evaluates the performance of individual feeders the need to perform more aggressive modification to the system is identified This approach to improving reliability has obtained significant benefits but in some cases still has not achieved the needed level of reliability In these limited areas that traditional modifications on the overhead system have not produced desired results we will evaluate the possibility of selectively replacing the overhead system with an underground system In addition measures already are being taken to harden the high-voltage substation supply lines to reduce the number of tree-related outages By increasing the reliability of the supply lines we increase the reliability of the substation which also increases the reliability of 12 to 15 individual distribution feeders supplied by each substation

WHY IS PEPCO IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS bull Despite the generally positive results that we have had reducing outage dUration times

(CAIDI) we have not had the same result reducing the frequency of outages These programs will further reduce both the frequency and duration of outages

bull While there are state regulations specifically governing tree trimming and removal along public rights of way we are confident that by working with state county and community leaders we will obtain the required permission to perform more aggressive trimming and selective removal

bull Pepco applies best-practice engineering and economic principles to siting and line design according to the characteristics of each project situation

bull This plan will result in substantial improvements over the next five years and we will continue to make adjustments as necessary as we implement the plan

2 of 2 August 20 l 0

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 21: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

cc

EP9420Ipepco 701 Ninth Street NW

A PHI Company Washington DC 20068

063445 Thombullbull H Gnlham (202) 872-3251 President Pepco Region (202) 872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

June 7 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I am writing to follow up on my May 13 response to your April 29 letter In that letter I reiterated my request for your support of an essential component of Pepcos comprehensive plan to improve service quality in Montgomery County and throughout our service territory As you know last fall Pepco began to implement its Reliability Enhancement Plan - which includes replacing aging equipment targeting poorly performing feeders selectively undergrounding power lines hardening transmission lines and substations and aggressively trimming trees Since September 2010 the Company has made significant progress against the plan Pepco has completed 26 priority feeder projects replaced 518393 feet of underground cable and is nearing completion on advanced switching schemes on 21 feeders In addition Pepco has identified two Montgomery County locations to selectively underground distribution lines and initiated the regulatory process by discussing these projects with Maryland Public Service Commission staff

Pepcos crews are working every day to complete the important work described above This is our commitment and responsibility to our customers Still one of the key components of our Reliability Enhancement Plan - trimming trees in the public right-ofshyway and on private property - remains a shared responsibility between the County Pepco and the residents of Montgomery County

In my March 23 April 22 and May 13 letters I asked that you convene a hearing to discuss a utilitys authority to trim trees consistent with the public interest Since September of last year Pepco has trimmed 1762 miles of tree line As our crews have executed their work plan Pepco has documented 627 incidences in Montgomery County where needed tree trimming on private property to improve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner These incidences include 293 private outright refusals 250 locations that delayed the work and required additional

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 22: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

June 7 2011 Page 2

coordination 48 locations where Pepco was forced to modify the scope of work 24 County Department of Transportation outright refusals 4 municipal government outright refusals and 5 State agency and National Park Service outright refusals

In addition to the hundreds of private homeowners that have refused to allow Pepco to perform essential vegetation management elected officials continually forward concerns that ask the Company to delay or reconsider its work This concern is not isolated to your community Pepco has encountered similar issues in parts of Washington DC and Prince Georges County The Company has also noted comparable concerns with utilities in neighboring jurisdictions While we appreciate that legislators sometimes fmd themselves in the difficult position of attempting to balance the communitys aesthetic concerns with the utilitys goal to improve service reliability we believe one benefit of a public discussion would be to gather additional input to find the right balance between these competing priorities

To begin the conversation Pepco proposes a concept to address trees on private property that threaten public utility facilities Private trees that are dead or dying or that are a danger to the health safety or welfare of the general public should be viewed as a public nuisance Montgomery County could pass a law that defmes a public nuisance to include trees limbs or branches that endanger utility infrastructure If such a law were enacted utilities would notify homeowners when their private trees pose a threat to power lines and would offer to prune those trees to provide adequate clearance as they currently do If the property owner refuses the utility could refer the concern to the Tree Maintenance Division of the Montgomery County Department of Transportation (DOT) DOT would then evaluate the tree in question with the utility to determine whether it is a public nuisance insofar as it threatens the public safety comfort or convenience by endangering electric infrastructure If the tree were found to be a public nuisance the homeowner would have the option of hiring a private contractor to prune the tree to the required specification (including removal of the tree where indicated) at the homeowners cost or allowing the utility to perfonn the work

The Montgomery County Code has existing laws that define public nuisance violations concerning animal control certain recreation facilities and building maintenance standards New public nuisance language relating to tree maintenance on private property would provide additional clarity to the shared responsibility of the County Pepco and residents to maintain private trees consistent with the public interest In addition a public discussion that includes a conversation about this concept would be an important step towards refining the appropriate balance between service reliability and aesthetic concerns

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 23: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

June 7 2011 Page 3

A successful public nuisance law related to trees on private property in Montgomery County could be a model for other jurisdictions navigating similar concerns We look forward to your leadership on this matter

Sincerely

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pep co Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

(2 ~

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 24: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

E9420~pepco 701 Ninth Street NW

Washington DC 20068

A PHI Company

Thomas H Graham (202) 872-3251

Presideflt Pepco Region (2021872-2032 Fax

thgrahampepcocom

April 22 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Chair Transportation amp Environment Committee Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland A venue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Council member Berliner

This is a to follow-up to my enclosed letter of March 23 2011 asking you as Chainnan of the Transportation amp Environment Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest To assist in developing the most effective legislation possible 1 asked that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipal tree trimming policies

The impoltance of such a heming was recently underscored by Montgomery County Assistant Chief Administmtive Oftlcer Thomas Street During Pepeos April 14 quarterly conference call with governmentofticials after listening to dialogue from participants on the caB Mr Street commented that Pepeo the COlmty municipalities and other stakeholders should meet to get on the same page about tree trimming We understand that residents have concerns about the enhanced vegetation mmagemcnt program approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) the company has implemented In fact the company has documented over 400 incidences where tree trimming critical to reliability improvement was refused delayed or modified at a property OW11CrS request

Whik not ahvays popUlar we know that an aggressive and coordinated vegetation management program is essential to delivering safe and reliable electric service to our customers your constituents Reports filed with the PSC reveal that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of power outages in Pepeos Maryland service territory Even still the independent consultant retained by the PSC to investigate Pepco s reliability said that the impact of trees on service reliability has been understated

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 25: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

April 22 2011 Page 2

It is clear to me that there must be a balance between aggressive vegetation management to meet high reliability standards and stnsitivity to our neighbors concerns about the aesthetic impacts of our vork It is also clear that finding the right balance is a shared responsibility A public and fact-based discussion lead by you along with the participation of your colleagues on County Council would be a welcomed irst step towards a community consensus on this matter I urgt you to schedule a hearing to discuss potential changes to the Countys tree trimming policies to facilitate reliability improvements [ look forward to a dialogue on this matter and thank you in advance for your support

Sincerely

~L~ Thomas H Graham

Enclosure

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Comminee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Cowlcil Montgomery County Pepeo Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 26: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

701 Ninth Street NW Washington DC 20068

A PH Company

1hOmaa H Gtaham 2C2middot872middot3251 President 202-872-2032 Fax Pepco Region

March 23 2011

The Honorable Roger Berliner Councilmember District 1 Montgomery County Council 100 Maryland Avenue Rockville MD 20850-2322

Dear Councilmember Berliner

I would like to follow-up on your offer for assistance to improve electric service reliability for the residents of Montgomery County As you heard me testify before the Economic Matters Committee in Annapolis on February 242011 Pepco has documented over 400 incidences where needed tree trimming on private property to preserve and approve electric service reliability has been refused delayed or modified in some manner by the homeowner Indeed your office has fielded many of these very complaints Our ability to achieve the aggressive goals for electric service standards as proposed in HB 391 by Delegate Feldman with your support cannot be achieved if our efforts are not supported by the community and elected leadership of the County

I am asking you as Chairman of Transportation amp Energy Committee to consider legislation that would provide electric utilities greater authority to perform tree trimming measures consistent with the public interest without delay I recall your response that you were not aware of any policies that would preclude tree trimming in Montgomery County Althougb Pepco is also not aware of any policies that prohibit tree trimming several municipalities have restrictive tree trimming and removal procedures In addition County policies like the Rural and Rustic Road program have caused delays in recent weeks With this in mind I respectfully ask that you convene a hearing to discuss County and municipality tree trimming policies The purpose of this hearing would be to determine wbether current policy is consistent vith the intent of HE 391 that you enthusiastically support

During my last appearance before your committee I was asked if there was anything the Council could do to support our efforts to improve electric service reliability You have personally asked this question of me as well I am now identifying critical action that is necessary to maintain Pepcos electric system in Montgomery County Your leadership with respect to investigating the Countys tree trimming policies is critically important to Pepcos ability to minimize the frequency and duration of service interruptions

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 27: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

March 232011 Page 2

In addition it would be helpful for the County to resume its efforts to remove trees that it has marked as hazards In December 2010 Montgomery County had a 13-month 1050 tree backlog for emergency and hazard tree removaL At that time the TampE Committee voted to further reduce the budget for tree removals which deferred the removal of an additional 323 trees It is imperative that the County restores funding to its tree removal program These are trees that have already been identified as dead or dying and they pose serious safety and reliability risks

It is well documented that during major events tree and weather related damage accounts for 90 of outages This fact is consistent with each report Pepco filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission after major storms in February 2010 July 2010 August 2010 and January 2011 Furthermore the impact of trees on service reliability was described by the Maryland Public Service Commissions consultant First Quartile as understated Pepco recognizes our service responsibility on a day to day basis We now ask you to recognize electric infrastructure damage as a result of downed trees and branches as a major factor in service interruptions during major events and use your legislative authority to provide a remedy

As you have repeatedly stated the five year timetable for implementingPepcos $256 million Reliability Enhancement Plan is not fast enough Your leadership in this area to change tree trimming policy will allow the residents of Montgomery County to experience improved service reliability at a faster rate

Thank you in advance for your support

Best regards

~l~ Thomas H Graham

cc Montgomery County State Delegation Senate Finance Committee House Economic Matters Committee Maryland Public Service Commission County Executive Isiah Leggett Montgomery County Council Montgomery County Pepco Reliability Work Group Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 28: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

-- --- -- ---

Pick the Right Tree for Utility Corridors Plant the right tree in the right place

bullbull

IImall trees I Plant trns that will grow taller than 25 ft (TE m) at ~-----i-- RESTRICTED PLANTING ZONE ----I

I- 20 ft (fll mmiddotl-+l

-- m~ture trltH height or more -igt distance away from utility lines that is equal to or bull I Cunlad ~OUl 10Clt11 Eledlic Uli1ity befo plllling more than the expected mature height of the tree m~ture tree height or more i neill eledlic lraomission 1lt1111amp$

Trees are one of the leading causes of power outages for Maryland electric customers Trees can cause power outages by either growing into or falling onto the electric lines To prevent trees from growing into the lines Maryland electric utilities spend millions of dollars annually on pruning which can leave the tree disfigured Trees falling onto electric lines or facilities can cause extensive damage and long power outages To avoid unsightly pruning and to prevent property damage and electric outages due to trees it Is essential to select the right tree for your planting project

Distribution electric lines transport the electricity from local electric distribution substations to your home or business and are typically constructed with wooden poles For planting within 20 feet of distribution lines the mature height of the tree chosen for your planting project should not exceed 25 teet If your planting location is more than 20 feet from the distribution lines then the mature height of the tree you choose should be less than or equal to the distance from your planting location to the distribution line For assistance with selecting the right tree for planting beneath or near distribution lines please contact your local nursery professional or your local electric utility

~--

For more information oontaot your looal MERIT Council Member Allegheny Power 800-255-3443 BGE 800-685-0123

Transmission electric lines transport the electricity from the generating station to local distribution substations Transmission lines may be constructed on either steel towers or poles or on wooden poles Power outages on transmission lines can result in the loss of power to thousands of electric customers and access to these facilities is critical to your local electric utility for maintenance and repair If your planting project involves planting beneath or adjacent to a transmission line please contact your local electric utility for assistance with selecting the right tree The electric utility in conjunction with your local nursery professional can recommend shrubs or trees appropriate for your planting project

Delmarva Power 800-375-7117 Before you dig Every dig Its the law 48 hours prior to work call 1-800-257-7777 DNR Forest Service 877-620-8367 Choptank Electric 877-892-0001 Papco 202-833-7500 PSC 800-492-0474 SMECO 888-440-3311

Produced by the Maryland Electric Reliability Tree Trimming Council (MERIT) rev 3-2-07f1J~~I

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 29: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

-----Origi nal Message----shyFrom Lonnie Luther [mailtolonnieluthergmailcom] Sent Wednesday July 13 2011 734 AM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Criss Jeremy ecspatesyahoocom Subject FW Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

From Sent Friday July 08 2011 252 PM To thgrahampepcocom cwashingtonjrpepcocom pgbyrnepepcocom dplandrypepcocom Cc Lonnie Luther E Spates David Weitzer Ike Leggett Ervin Valerie Berliner Roger Floreen Nancy Riemer Hans Levchenko Keith Subject Pepco Trimming of Trees on Rustic Roads

Dear Thomas Graham Charles Washington Pat Byrne and Dan Landry As the President and Vice President of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau (MCFB) we are writing to express our support for Pepco to resume the trimming of trees along Rustic Roads in Montgomery County To better understand the position of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau surrounding tree trimming please see the attached letter dated March 102011 addressed to the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett We understand that on June 9 2011 Pepco suspended the trimming of trees on Rustic roads for 30 days to provide an opportunity for Pepco representatives to meet with the residents that issued complaints surrounding some trees trimmed and removed along Rustic Roads near the Poolesville area The meeting to discuss the complaints and inspect the areas was held on Thursday June 30 2011 Representatives from the Montgomery Countryside Alliance which issued the complaints organized this meeting Representatives from the Rustic Road Advisory Committee (RRAC) -Eric Spates the DPS staff representative for RRAC Laura Bradshaw the Montgomery County Agricultural Advisory Committee (MC)shyDavid Weitzer the MNCPPC staff representative-Leslie Saville and Council staff member Dale Tibbitts also attended the meeting During our July 5 2011 MCFB Board of Directors meeting Eric Spates reported that the conclusion of the June 302011 meeting revealed that all trees that were trimmed or removed were done in accordance with the policies and procedures of the County and State Road-Side Tree Laws and those of Pepco With this conclusion in mind the MCFB encourages the Pepco to resume trimming trees along Rustic Roads in the County We are aware of the July 18 2011 meeting with the Transportation Infrastructure Energy amp Environment (TampE) committee with the County Council and we will be attending this discussion surrounding Pepcos tree trimming program It is our understanding that Council member Marc Eirich is considering drafting legislation requiring the utility companies to consult with the Countys arborists before trimming or removing trees The MCFB believes the existing legislation surrounding the Rustic Roads program as outlined in Article VIII of Chapter 49 of the County Code already provides adequate measures for the tree maintenance that preserves the roads significant features the County Council intended The MCFB does not support additional oversight or impediments that will delay the trimming or removal of trees as this outcome will jeopardize the safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment along the Rustic Roads which the agricultural community uses daily There are several Rustic and Exceptional Rustic Roads that do not promote or allow safe travel or movement of motorized vehicles and agricultural-farm equipment The MCFB is interested in making sure the County Council is aware of the views of the agricultural community on this matter Please let us know if you have any questions

Sincerely

Lonnie Luther President MCFB Eric Spates Vice President MCFB

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 30: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARNI BUREAU 24110 Laytonsville Road

Gaithersburg Maryland 20882

Telephone 301-353-8867 - Fax 301-253-1525 March 102011

Tree Trimming Concerns of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau

The Honorable lsiah Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street 2nd tloor Rockville Maryland 20850

Dear County Executive Isiah Leggett

I am riting to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Farm Bureau to discuss the recent spate of power outages during this years winter storms which shows the status of tree trimming in this county is horrible Several roads were completely impassable due to fallen and bent over trees in the roadway We have long pressed for greater efforts to maintain our rural roads by trimming the trees that line long portions of these roads As the situation grows ever worse and more urgent some of the impediments become clearer Wl1at is particularly frustrating is that the environment we have in Montgomery County does not exist on the same scale in other jurisdictions

While we understand budget concerns that seems to be only one of several factors contributing to this problem The MNCPPC (Chapter 50-Subdivisions) and local governments are contributing to the problem by guiding the planting of trees near the roads and in many cases underneath power and phone lines This short sighted approach leads to no good as the trees ultimately grow into the roadway and lines above They are then either trimmed resulting in undesirable shapes or if neglected they cause interference with the service lines and roadway

Another significant problem is the unrealistic defense by some of the vegetation that grows beside the road We mllst not lose sight of the fact that roads are for the safe passage of vehicles For those who wish the vegetation to grow into the road to impede and slow traffic the message must be clear Trees cannot inhibit roads Farmers moving large equipment are especially aware of the danger that extremely narrow traffic lanes pose Large equipment cant get over and is forced to obstruct the oncoming lane This is an impractical and dangerous situation As further justification for maintaining these hedges some suggest that this is habitat for wild animals Anyone frequently driving these roads sees the result of allOing habitat directly adjacent to the road Hundreds if not thousands of wild animals are killed annually on our rural and suburban roads

Much of this difficulty stems from the view that any vegetation growing beside the road is desirable Many miles of these Hedges beside rural roads are in fact long

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 31: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

neglected fencermvs that did not have any grovth more than grass for years Historic photos will corroborate this fact It was mostly with the decline of dairy and animal farming that these fcncerows became hedgerows Although the fences vere not too close to the road trees allowed to groV from these fencerows do grow into the traffic lanes Additionally these wild trees often are growing into phone and power lines above In these cases the message must be clear Trees and utility lines do not go together

Simply put we are not against trees but recognize the impossibility of having trees maintained so close to the roads and suggest that in many cases the vegetation grming in the old fencerows should be removed completely We suggest that an incentive program (Property Tax Credit) be created for landowners to have authority to remove trees brush and other vegetation along roads 111is outcome will result in public service which will save the county significant money in the long run If the landmmer wishes to plant trees it should be done 30 feet or more from the travel lanes and never under or near power and phone lines An exception to this approach may be made when the road passes through a forest with a fully developed canopy

As a further impediment to prudent clearinggrubbing and trimming policy SB 581 passed in 2009 adds confusion bureaucracy and expense to proper maintenance procedures The County Government needs to evaluate this legislation to see ifit represents another reason for the current environment

There is no longer any question that the trees along our roads are in need of aggressive trimming or in many cases removal to maintain a safe situation for school buses emergency equipment farm machinery and all other users of our roads

As an elected oftlcial it is your duty to address this on going issue and demonstrate leadership to resolve it It is in the best interest of all residents that we achieve this outcome and we offer our assistance

_r I

SmcereIY (4 4 ( ~ I

1 ) ~_I 1 )- i l ( ~ - t ovA-~---- v _)]

LonnIe Luther President Montgomery County Farm Bureau

Cc Montgomery County Council Members Jack E Strausman Deputy General CmUlcil Pepco

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 32: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

V

I i-SF - Page 1 of 1 tv fLt0

Delgado Annette

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Friday June 102011116 PM

To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD 0634B4 Importance High

-----Original Message----shyFrom Barbara Hoover [mailtohooverbmsncom] Sent Friday June 10 2011 1036 AM To Barbara Hoover Subject PEPCO Tree Slaughter near Poolesville MD Importance High

Dear Montgonery County Councilmembers fellow BOD members of CM and WMCCA Woodrock neighbors and Washington Post

At what point will our elected officials put a stop to this unnecessary and illegal cutting

These photos were taken by MCA executive director Caroline Taylor who sent up the alarm amp got council staff and press out to see the outrageous tree cutting by Pepco Darnestown Civic has since done some research amp established that none of the power outages in Berryville area were due to downed trees This tree whose age (147) was determined by Audubon staff member Dolores Milmoe that stood living at stream edge of Horsepen Branch which feeds into Potomac River Property owner was unaware of the clear cutting by Pepco

They are cutting ACROSS the street from the lines on rural amp rustic roads (Budd Road and West Willard Rd) The claim is that the trees --while healthy now-- are older and in decline and may die amp fall across the roadlines before the crews return in several years Imagine what theyd do in the health care field

There are 3 photos Please open them amp be prepared to gasp

Copied to All Montgomery County MD Councilmembers Conservation Montgomery BOD West Montgomery County Civic Association Woodrock Community Residents from the MacArthur Corridor Washington Post Everyone else I know in Montgomery County

Take care Barbara Hoover 7841 Whiterim Terr Potomac MD 20854 301-299-3231

0

L =0gt0

Global warming increasing obesity rates and traffic congestion if only there was a common solution

61102011

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011

Page 33: TO: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and … or portions thereof which constitutes a health hazard) fire hazard safety or traffic hazard or public nuisance to streets, sidewalks,

Page 1 of 1 VII

Guthrie Lynn

From Ervins Office Councilmember

Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 222 PM 063537 To Montgomery County Council

Subject FW Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

-----Original Message----shyFrom RALPH STEPHENS [mailtoralphstephensverizonnet] Sent Tuesday June 14 2011 220 PM To Berliners Office Councilmember Leventhals Office Councilmember Navarros Office Councilmember Rices Office Councilmember Ervins Office Council member Eirichs Office Council member Floreens Office Coundlmember Riemers Office Councilmember Andrewss Office Councilmember Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

To The Montgomery County Council

Subject Pepcos Tree Trimming Program

Is anyone from the Montgomery County Council looking into Pepcos tree trimming activities Pepco would appear to be going overboard as a result of criticism about last winters power outages Friends living in Martins Addition of Chevy Chase suggest that Pepco is practically clear cutting the place An exaggeration I know but the standards that Pepco is applying to pruning are creating enormous holes in tree canopies plus Pepco is removing stately street trees based on what would appear to be exclusively internally generated criteria There doesnt seem to be any public input about any of this

Can not the County Council Monitor Pepcos program

RegardsRalph Stephens Chevy Chase

61412011