At a Dec. 1 Boston City Council hearing on utility safety, utility representatives described the technical procedures, inspection cycles and cost factors that affect any effort to move overhead electric and communications lines underground in Charlestown.

John Sal, construction management at Eversource, said poles are inspected every five years (performed by a third party), switches are inspected annually and yearly infrared rides cover the distribution system to spot overheated equipment. Joe Carroll of National Grid described a three‑year survey cycle for gas distribution and routine meter replacements every seven years. Ellen Cummings of Verizon said Verizon uses proactive safety managers and third‑party municipal pole inspections and that, for communications, conduit and fiber design and municipal coordination are critical.

On the July 29 Charlestown incident, Eversource representatives said the initial emergency call was classified as FPS‑3 (partial road blockage), which limited response priority; an FPS‑2 or FPS‑1 classification, they said, would have allowed remote de‑energization sooner. Eversource said crews later upgraded equipment in the area and that the company has trained Boston Fire Dispatch to reduce future misclassifications.

Panelists emphasized the many site‑specific factors that drive cost: subsurface conflicts with water, sewer and gas mains; the need for manholes and different underground switchgear; coring through building basements to connect customer services; and traffic‑management and police‑detail costs during excavation. Verizon gave an up‑front conduit figure of about $300 per linear foot for conduit only; Eversource referenced a 2023 per‑mile range of roughly $2 million to $6 million and cautioned that inflation and dense urban constraints in Charlestown could push actual costs higher.

Utilities also described long‑term technological improvements that can reduce incident risk or improve detection. Eversource cited deployment of an AMI (automated metering infrastructure) and a DPU‑mandated distribution management system intended to give greater visibility down to lower‑voltage lines, which the company said would help detect overloaded segments before failures occur.

Councilors repeatedly asked about the role of the state Department of Public Utilities (DPU) in inspections and incident response; committee members noted that DPU had been invited to the hearing but did not attend or submit written testimony. Utilities said their regulatory affairs teams are in regular contact with DPU and that dispatch centers notify the regulator of reportable incidents.

The council asked utilities to supply written, site‑specific cost estimates for proposed Charlestown segments and a historical explanation for why downtown Boston and parts of Cambridge have underground distribution networks. No regulatory changes or funding decisions were made at the hearing; utilities and city staff agreed to follow up with the committee.

This account is based on direct testimony and technical descriptions made at the hearing; where participants gave ranges or approximations, the committee requested written backup.