Load Submissions 2024 2021 2024 Summer 2013 Actual Summer Summer Difference Load Data Peak Load Data Load Data (MW) (MW) Demand Submitted Submitted SUBMITTED BY: 2021-2024 submitted (MW) in Q1 2012 in Q1 2014 in Q5 (MW) (MW) (2015) No Data No Data Basin Electric 476 Submitted Submitted No Data No Data Black Hills 465 Submitted Submitted Idaho Power 3,407 4,383 4,193 -190 NorthWestern 1,707 1,680 1,774 94 No Data PacifiCorp East 9,842 10,358 506 Submitted No Data PacifiCorp West 3,795 3,644 -151 Submitted Portland 3,900 4,119 3,933 -186 General 23 TOTAL* 23,819 23,892 73
Resource Submissions 12000 11098 Comparison of Projected Generation 10000 8000 6605 6551 6000 4581 4000 2024 2641 2678 2021 2000 1431 500 135 117 60 82 36 37 47 20 0 0 0 -91 -1122 -2000 24
Transmission Submissions Sponsor Type Projects Voltage Circuits LTP Gateway West Project 500 kV 2 Idaho Power LTP B2H Project 500 kV – 230 kV 2 Southwest Intertie Project Great Basin Transmission Sponsored (1) 500 kV 1 North LTP Broadview – Garrison Upgrade 500 kV 1 NorthWestern Energy LTP Millcreek – Amps Upgrade 230 kV 1 LTP Gateway South Project 500 kV 1 PacifiCorp East LTP Gateway West Project 500 kV – 230 kV 5 Portland General LTP Blue Lake - Gresham 230 kV 1 Merchant TransWest Express Transmission TransWest Express +600 kV DC 1 Developer (2) (1) Sponsored Projects and Unsponsored will be evaluated (2) Per customer request, the TransWest Express (Merchant) project will not be evaluated this planning cycle as an Alternative Project for 25 selection in the Regional Transmission Plan
New or Existing Transmission Service Submitted by MW Start Date End Date POR POD 500 2020 - Northwest IPCo 67 01/01/15 01/01/24 LGBP BPASID 2 04/01/15 04/01/28 LaGrande BPASID 5 07/01/16 07/01/28 LaGrande BPASID Idaho Power 85 10/01/11 10/01/28 LGBP RR 100 10/01/11 10/01/28 LGBP OTEC 188 10/01/11 10/01/28 LGBP BPASID 60 2020 - Northwest BPASID 39 7/1/2013 71/2018 YTP BRDY NorthWestern Energy 7 7/1/2013 71/2018 NWMT.SYS BRDY 26
Draft Regional Transmission Plan Evaluation • Analysis performed on Initial Regional Transmission Plan, only committed projects, and alternative projects – Initial Regional Transmission Plan is the NTTG Transmission Providers’ local plan – Selected stressed hours through production cost model (PCM) simulation – Performed reliability analysis with power flow simulation – Determined plan benefits from changes in losses, reserves and capital expense 27
PCM of 2024 TEPPC Case 28
Draft Transmission Plan • The most efficient and cost effective plan is the existing system plus a new Aeolus - Anticline - Populus 500 kV line • However, the transmission service obligations are not met 29
Draft Revised Study Plan • Add a second threshold requirement to the Attachment K identified reliability requirement – Plan must meet the footprint transmission needs • Loads • Resources • Public Policy Requirements • Transmission service obligation and • Other identified transmission requirements • Stakeholder comment period • Requires Steering Committee approval 30
NTTG Path 2015 ATC E-W 724 8 W-E 706 E-W 0 17 E-W 0 75 W-E 0 20 N-S 0 S-N 0 31
Public Policy Considerations Study • Planning Committee approved study plan • Power flow assessment that includes actions from the existing remedial action scheme • Retire Colstrip units 1 and 2 • Add 610 MW of wind generation at Broadview 32
Regional Cost Allocation • Challenge – No projects selected into the Regional Transmission Plan – No requirement to perform cost allocation • Opportunity – Dry run 33
Cost Allocation Scenarios • Load – Add/Subtract 1,000 MW in the NTTG footprint • Resources – Replace 50 % of the of new wind with solar – Replace 1000 MW of coal with wind & solar 34
Questions?
WestConnect Regional Planning Planning Regions Coordination Meeting February 26, 2015 Portland, OR
Outline WestConnect Overview Membership & Footprint Structure Where we stand in our process Order 890 Update (2014) Order 1000 Update (2015 and 2016/17) 37
Approximate WestConnect Planning Region • All entities are required to sign the Planning Participation Agreement WAPA BH (PPA) to become a voting TSGT Basin member WAPA • SMUD Planning footprint may WAPA BH TANC CSU PSCo (Xcel) WAPA change due to changes in PRPA Basin NVE TSGT membership WAPA Entities in grey text are transmission WAPA TSGT SRP LADWP PNM providers that participate in the TEP APS WAPA WestConnect Order 890 planning SWTC IID process but have not yet signed the EPE Order 1000 PPA 38 38
WestConnect Subregional Planning Groups CCPG, SSPG and SWAT are the WestConnect technical subregional planning groups for the WestConnect planning region • Coordinate subregional data input for regional base cases CCPG SSPG • Define subregional study plans, provide study resources, and perform subregional planning studies SWAT • Provide forum for coordination and peer review of TO 10-year plans and regional planning studies 39 39
Regulatory Update - Regional Regional Compliance Status 2 nd Regional order issued September 18, 2014 Required WestConnect to file the Planning Participation Agreement (PPA) with FERC Directed abbreviated cycle to start January 1, 2015 3 rd Regional compliance filings submitted November 17, 2014 Waiting on response from FERC 40 40
Participant Enrollment by Sector Transmission Owners Independent Transmission Developers • APS • • Southwestern Power Group Basin Electric • • TransCanyon Black Hills • • Xcel Energy Western Transmission El Paso Electric Company • NV Energy State Regulatory Commission • Public Service New Mexico Members • Platte River Power Authority • None • Tucson Electric Power Key Interest Groups • Tri-State • • Xcel None Transmission Customers • None 41 41
PMC Organization Planning Consultants Planning Management Committee Charlie Reinhold, Energy Strategies Chair: Ron Belval, TEP Planning Cost Allocation 3 rd Party Finance Legal Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Agent Chair: TBD Chair: Tom Green, Xcel Chair: Jeff Hein, Xcel Power Flow Work Group Chair: TBD Expansion Planning Work Group Chair: TBD 42 42
WestConnect Order 890 Ten-Year Transmission Plan Guide Documents the results of the subregional planning processes within the WestConnect planning area – Provides a summary of all studies conducted and reported by the SPGs and workgroups within the WestConnect footprint. – Provides a proposed study plan for the SPG’s next planning cycle. Provides a summary of the WestConnect and SPGs Stakeholder activities Plan includes ten-year transmission projects of: – Entities that have signed WestConnect Project Agreement for Subregional Transmission Planning, OR – Other entities whose projects meet the following prerequisites 43
WestConnect Order 890 Ten-Year Transmission Plan Guide (2) Prerequisites for inclusion: – New transmission projects with nominal system voltage ≥ 100 kV – Located within WestConnect Planning Area or interconnecting WestConnect to adjacent Subregional planning areas – Studied in accordance with federal and state regulatory requirements – Demonstrated performance compliant with NERC and WECC reliability planning criteria – Final study report or summary must have been through a documented open and transparent stakeholder or industry peer review process and available for posting on WestConnect website – Results of study must have been presented at one or more WestConnect subregional planning meetings 44
2015 WC Plan (Order 890) Project Organization WC Plan is organized by Planned and Conceptual projects as defined by the following: – Planned : Project has a sponsor, incorporated in entity’s regulatory filing, has participation / construction agreement, or permitting has been obtained or will be sought. – Conceptual : Project lacks formal sponsor, or requires more study and refinement prior to committing to construct. Such projects may be viewed as viable alternatives still seeking sponsorship. Sorted by Voltage Class Sorted by In-Service Date Sorted by State Sorted by SPG 45
2015 WC Plan Summary Total Status of No. Estimated Cost Projects Projects (B$) Miles Planned 183 5,334 $ 13.294 Conceptual 75 6,920 $ 12.055 46
2015 WC Plan – Planned and Conceptual Projects 47
Transmission Projects Comparison 2015 WC Plan vs. previous WC Plans 2015 2014 2013 Planned 183 199 205 Conceptual 75 66 68 Total No. Projects 258 265 273 Planned 5,334 6,418 6,028 Conceptual 6,920 6,453 7,305 Total Miles 12,254 12,871 13,333 Planned $13,294 $14,494 $11,099 Conceptual $12,055 $12,085 $18,342 Total Estimated $M $ 25,349 $ 26,579 $ 29,441 48
2015 WC Plan Summary Project Status In- Under Year Planned Conceptual Withdrawn Total Service Construction 43 37 183 75 24 362 2015 2014 23 39 199 66 36 363 2013 27 19 205 68 19 338 2012 35 19 215 71 38 378 49
2 015 WC Plan – In-Service and Under Construction Projects Transmission Planned Transmission Conceptual Number of Number of Type of Project Line Project Investment Line Project Investment Projects Projects Miles ($ x 1,000) Miles ($ x 1,000) IN-SERVICE UNDER CONSTRUCTION Substation 17 N/A $ 138,000 7 N/A $ 56,000 Transmission Line 14 212 $ 303,000 18 700 $ 596,000 Transmission Line and Substation 4 231 $ 564,000 8 133 $ 353,000 Transformer 6 N/A $ 42,000 4 N/A $ 21,000 Other 2 N/A $ 4,000 0 N/A $ - Total Projects 43 443 $ 1,051,000 37 833 $ 1,026,000 50
2015 WC Plan Capital Investment by Voltage Class 51
2015 WC Plan Project Investments by Year and Status 52
2015 WC Plan Number of Projects by Year and Status 53
Planned and Conceptual Projects by State 54
Interstate and Merchant Transmission Projects in the WestConnect 2015 Plan Name of Project Line Voltage From To Miles Centennial West Clean Line 900 500 kV DC New Mexico California Chinook Project 1000 500 kV DC Montana Nevada Harcuvar Transmission Project 90 230 kV Arizona Arizona High Plains Express Initiative 2500 500 kV Wyoming Arizona Long View Energy Exchange 90 500 kV Arizona Arizona Lucky Corridor Project 130 345 kV New Mexico New Mexico North Gila – Imperial Valley #2 Project 85 500 kV Arizona California Southline Transmission Project 240/120 345 kV/230 kV New Mexico Arizona Southwest Intertie Project 339 500 kV Idaho Nevada SunZia Southwest Transmission Project 515 500 kV New Mexico Arizona TransWest Express 725 600 kV DC Wyoming Nevada Tres Amigas Project 22 345 kV New Mexico New Mexico Western Spirit Clean Line 125 345 kV New Mexico New Mexico Wyoming-Colorado Intertie 180 345 kV Wyoming Colorado Zephyr Project 850 500 kV DC Wyoming Nevada 55
Order 1000 Planning Process 2015 Abbreviated Cycle
Order 1000 Process Overview • Biennial study cycle • Information flows from TOs and SPGs up to WC • Enhancements as compared to current 890 planning efforts: • WestConnect will perform a regional reliability assessment • Production cost modeling will be used to identify economic needs • Cost allocation will be performed on eligible projects and cost allocation is binding • WC Business Practice Manual (BPM) 57
Process Status • Initial regional planning effort for WestConnect – Technical differences between Order 890 versus Order 1000 • 2015 Abbreviated Cycle – Shake-down cruise for full cycle – Approved Study Plan on January 7, 2015 • Posted to westconnect.com here – Entering model development phase • 2016-2017 Biennial Cycle – Study plan development in Q4 2015 – Expect robust powerflow and production cost modeling efforts in full cycle 58
2015 Study Plan: Major Components • Regional Model Development – Reliability: 2024 Heavy Summer Regional power flow case – Economic: 2024 WestConnect Regional Production Cost Model (PCM) – Public Policy: Verify RPS in powerflow model • Identification of Regional Needs – Reliability assessment: Steady state N-1 TPL evaluation – Economic assessment: limited, focused on model development – Policy: RPS driven needs apparent in powerflow model • Collection of Alternatives • Evaluation and Identification of Regional Alternatives • Regional Cost Allocation • Issuance of Regional Study Plan 59
2015 Abbreviated Planning Cycle Schedule 60
Abbreviated versus Full-Cycle: Process Elements 2015 Abbreviated 2016-2017 Process Element Process Biennial Process Yes (Complete ) Yes Develop study plan Yes (one case) Yes Model Development: Powerflow Model Development: Production Cost Model TBD Yes Model Development: Public Policy Check Yes (RPS only) Yes Yes (Reliability and Policy only) Yes Identify Regional Needs Open Season for Alternatives to Meet Needs Yes Yes Evaluate and Select Alternatives Yes Yes Yes Yes Identify Beneficiaries and Allocate Costs Issue Regional Transmission Plan Yes Yes 61
2016-2017 Biennial Process • Full process • Starts in Q4 2015… 62
Next Meetings PMC Meetings: March 3- 9:00 a.m. to Noon (PPT), webinar/conference call March 17- 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., Phoenix, AZ (SRP) April 7, 9:00 a.m. to Noon (PPT), webinar/conference call April 21, 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., Las Vegas, NV 63 63
Transmission Planning at the California ISO Neil Millar Executive Director, Infrastructure Development Western Planning Region Coordination Stakeholder Meeting Portland, Oregon February 26, 2015
The California ISO service area: • 58,698 MW of power plant capacity • 50,270 MW record peak demand (July 24, 2006) • 26,500 market transactions per day • 25,627 circuit-miles of transmission lines • 30 million people served Page 65
Planning and procurement overview Create demand forecast CEC & 1 & assess resource needs CPUC feed into With input from Creates ISO, IOUs & other 2 ISO feed into transmission plan stakeholders With input from CEC, CPUC, IOUs & other Creates procurement CPUC 3 stakeholders plan Final plan authorizes 4 With input from procurement CEC, ISO, IOUs & other stakeholders IOUs Results of 2-3-4 feed into next biennial cycle Page 66
What are the… Demand forecast Transmission Procurement & resource needs plan plan The demand forecast The transmission plan The procurement plan (CEC) projects peak-hour (ISO) specifies the set of (CPUC) tells each IOU & annual energy demand new transmission lines, what it is authorized to 20 years forward, upgrades to existing procure to meet the adjusted for energy lines or non-transmission demand forecast and efficiency, rooftop solar alternatives needed to resource needs , given and demand response support the resource the projects approved in Resource needs (CPUC) needs and demand the transmission plan reflect RPS mandates, forecast The procurement plan plus system adequacy, includes renewable & local area reliability and conventional resources, flexible capacity needs plus demand response, energy efficiency and distributed resources Page 67
The ISO “regional” annual transmission planning process results in approval of necessary projects each March. January 2014 April 2014 March 2015 Previous transmission Sequential technical plan approved projects Stakeholders studies Assumptions Procurement State and federal policy • Reliability analysis • Renewable (policy- CEC - Demand forecasts driven) analysis • Economic analysis CPUC - Resource portfolios, Publish comprehensive additions and retirements transmission plan with Other issues or concerns recommended projects ISO Board approves transmission plan Iterative process repeats annually Page 68
The ISO planning process considers all aspects of transmission system needs: Reliability Analysis (NERC Compliance, Local Capacity Needs) 33% RPS Portfolio Analysis - Incorporate GIP network upgrades Results - Identify policy transmission needs Economic Analysis - Congestion studies - Identify economic transmission needs Page 69
Less than half of the gas-fired generation retiring in the LA Basin / San Diego area is being replaced with new gas generation – despite 3,000 MW of projected net load growth* and SONGS retirement. 10000 New Gas Generation 9000 Maximum residual Walnut Creek 500 need El Segundo Energy Center 550 8000 Track 1 SCE - LA Basin Request 1200 Incremental Track 4 SCE - LA Basin (gas) 200 7000 Transmission Benefits Track 1 SDG&E (Pio Pico/Escondido) 308 Track 4 SDG&E Request 550 6000 Additional Achievable Total 3308 Energy Efficiency Gas Retirements (2011-2022) 5000 Encina 946 Other Preferred Resources and El Segundo #3 335 4000 Storage El Segundo #4 335 Alamitos 2011 Nuclear (SONGS) 3000 Huntington Beach 904 Redondo 1342 2000 Etiwanda 640 New Gas Resources Long Beach 260 1000 Cabrillo Power II 188 Total 6961 0 2011 2022 * The 2012 net load forecast growth in the LA Basin and San Diego already relies on approximately 2400 MW of incremental energy efficiency from approved programs and standards. Page 70
Transmission underway to meet 33% RPS in 2020 Approval status Transmission upgrade Online ISO CPUC 1 Carrizo-Midway LGIA NOC effective energized Sunrise Powerlink Approved Approved energized 2 Suncrest dynamic Approved Approval not required 2017 reactive 3 Eldorado-Ivanpah LGIA Approved energized $7.0 B 4 Valley-Colorado River Approved Approved energized 5 West of Devers LGIA Pending 2019 8 Tehachapi (segments 1, 6 Approved Approved 2015 2 & 3a of 11 completed) 14 15 7 Cool Water-Lugo LGIA Pending 2018 9 8 South Contra Costa LGIA Not yet filed 2015 9 Borden-Gregg LGIA Not yet filed 2015 Path 42 reconductoring Approved Approval not required 2014 3 10 1 12 13 Imperial Valley C Station Approved Approval not required 2015 6 7 11 Sycamore-Penasquitos Approved Not yet filed 2017 Lugo-Eldorado line 12 Approved Not yet filed 2015 reroute 5 4 Lugo-Eldorado and Lugo- 11 13 Approved Approval not required 2016 Mohave series caps 2 10 Warnerville-Bellota 14 Approved Not yet filed 2017 recond. 15 Wilson-Le Grand recond Approved Not yet filed 2020 Page 71 Based on 2013/14 Transmission Plan RS Dec 2014
Future Challenge – impact of 33% Renewable Portfolio Standard build-out through 2020 33% RPS --- Variable Resources Expected Build-out Through 2020 IOU Data through 2017 20,000 and RPS Calculator 18,000 beyond 2017 16,000 14,000 12,000 MW 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Existing Solar Thermal 419 792 1,167 1,167 1,717 1,917 1,917 1,917 1,917 Solar PV 1,345 3,022 4,693 5,445 5,756 6,628 7,881 7,881 8,872 Wind 5,800 6,922 7,058 7,396 7,406 7,406 7,877 7,877 7,934 Page 72
New tools and new approaches will be need to address potential over generation and ramping challenges CAISO Net Load --- 2012 through 2020 28,000 26,000 Ramping needs increase 24,000 22,000 20,000 MW 18,000 16,000 14,000 Potential 12,000 Over-generation 10,000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2012 (Actual) 2013 (Actual) 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Page 73
The 2014-2015 planning cycle has been challenging: • Further enhancements to the coordination with state energy agencies • Continued emphasis on preferred resources, and increased maturity of study processes • Continued analysis and contingency planning in the LA Basin and San Diego area • Restoration of deliverability in Imperial area to pre-SONGS retirement levels • Sensitivity analysis of Imperial area deliverability and the interaction with LA Basin/San Diego reliability needs. • San Francisco Peninsula extreme event analysis • “Over Generation” frequency response assessment • Finalizing projects in the 2013-2014 cycle requiring further study : – Delany-Colorado River – Harry Allen – Eldorado (2013-2014 further study) Page 74
Phase 2 of the 2014-2015 transmission planning cycle is nearing completion April 2014 March 2015 October 2015 ISO Board Approval Coordination of Conceptual of Transmission Plan Statewide Plan Phase 1 Development of ISO unified planning assumptions and Phase 3 study plan Phase 2 Receive proposals to build • Incorporates State and identified reliability, policy Technical Studies and Board Approval Federal policy and economic transmission requirements and projects. • Reliability analysis directives • Renewable delivery analysis • Demand forecasts, energy efficiency, demand • Economic analysis response • Publish comprehensive transmission plan • Renewable and conventional generation • ISO Board approval additions and retirements • Input from stakeholders • Ongoing stakeholder meetings Continued regional and sub-regional coordination Page 75
Summary of Needed Reliability Driven Transmission Projects Service Territory Number of Projects Cost (in millions) Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) 2 $254 Southern California Edison Co. 1 $5 (SCE) San Diego Gas & Electric Co. 4 $93 (SDG&E) Valley Electric Association 0 0 (VEA) Total 7 $352 Page 76
Policy and Economic driven solutions: • There were no policy-driven solutions identified • One economically driven element has been identified: – Lodi-Eight Mile 230 kV Line • Note that the Harry Allen-Eldorado and Delaney- Colorado River Projects were approved during 2014 based on further study in the 2013-2014 planning process Page 77
The CAISO’s 2015 -2016 transmission planning process is currently underway • 2015-2016 Transmission Planning Process Unified Planning Assumptions and Study Plan is currently posted for stakeholder review – Comment period is February 23 – March 9 • Study plan will be finalized on March 31 • Study plan can be found at: http://www.caiso.com/Documents/StakeholderInputfor2015- 2016UnifiedPlanningAssumptions.htm Page 78
Governor Brown’s announcement of a 50 % renewable energy goal for California: • The 50% renewable energy goal target date is 2030 • Considerable detail about the goal and how it will be assessed remains to be resolved • It is not yet a formal state approved policy requirement, so in accordance with the ISO tariff, the ISO cannot use it as a basis for approving policy-driven transmission • The ISO and the state energy agencies want to explore informational analysis to understand potential transmission implications of increased grid connected renewable generation – to the extent the goal ultimately calls for such generation Page 79
The ISO is therefore coordinating with the CPUC to perform a special study in the 2015-2016 TPP: • The special study will: – be for information purposes only - will not be used to support a need for policy-driven transmission in the 2015-2016 planning cycle; – provide information regarding the potential need for public policy- driven transmission additions or upgrades to support a state 50% renewable energy goal; and – will help inform the state’s procurement processes about the cost impacts of achieving 50% renewable energy goal • The CPUC raised this study and discussed underlying issues in the recent February 10 th and 11 th RPS Calculator workshop Page 80
The Special Study will build on the 33% RPS work, but explore different approaches: • Purely as a “boundary” study assumption, the ISO anticipates receiving a sensitivity portfolio based on a 50% RPS • Transmission needs for 33% RPS have been based on providing full capacity deliverability status, which reduced but did not preclude possible curtailment • In going beyond 33%, the special study will explore a new approach and assume the incremental renewable generation to be energy-only. – The study will estimate the expected amount of congestion- related curtailment of renewables that would likely result. – The study will also consider what transmission could then be rationalized based on cost effectively reducing renewables curtailment (from a customer perspective) Page 81
Thank you Neil Millar Executive Director California ISO February 26, 2015
ColumbiaGrid Planning Updates Western Planning Region Meeting February 26, 2015
Topics 2014 Planning Cycle Completion of 2015 Biennial Plan 2015 Planning Cycle Starting of a new planning cycle under PEFA/Order 1000 compliance 84
2014 Planning Cycle: Status Main product: ColumbiaGrid 2015 Biennial Plan Results from activities in 2014 Include more than 50 new projects with the total costs more than $2.5B Developed through open, coordinated process The plan was adopted by the board on Feb 18, 2015 The final 2015 Biennial Plan is available at: http://www.columbiagrid.org/planning-expansion- overview.cfm 85
2014 Planning Cycle: Timeline 2015 Biennial Plan Development timeline Jul 3, 2014: 2014 System Assessment (SA) finalized Aug – Oct 2014: Staff conducted Sensitivity Studies Sep 16, 2014: Planning meeting Oct 16, 2014: Planning meeting Staff issued 1 st draft 2015 Biennial Plan Nov 2014: Dec 4, 2014: Planning meeting Dec 23, 2014: Draft 2015 Biennial Plan posted Feb 5, 2015: Discussion/Updates in Planning Meeting Feb 18, 2015: Biennial Plan finalized 86
2014 Planning Cycle: 2015 Biennial Plan 87
2014 Planning cycle: Biennial Plan components System Assessment Studies Power flow, voltage excursion, and stability analyses Evaluate impacts on the grid 115 kV and above 10 years planning horizon, 8 scenarios Scenario Descriptions 1 2015 Heavy Summer 2 2015-2016 Heavy Winter 3 2015 Light Summer 4 2019 Heavy Summer 5 2019-2020 Heavy Winter 6 2022 Light Autumn 7 2024 Heavy Summer 8 2023-2024 Heavy Winter 88
2014 Planning cycle: Biennial Plan components System Assessment Studies (Cont) 17 areas of concerns (non-single system) were identified (14 recurring and 3 new) Thermal overloads and voltage issues Mitigation plans were also evaluated Will be reevaluated again as part of 2015 System Assessment 89
2014 Planning cycle: Biennial Plan components Sensitivity Studies Transient and Voltage Stability Comprehensive N-1-1 Outages: Use new feature (linear analysis) as screening tool NW Washington Load Area Interconnection Reliability Operating Limit (IROL): Review the identified limits Post Contingency Voltage Angle Difference: Evaluate potential reclosing problems Maximum Generation During Light Load Conditions: Follow-up issued identified in 2014 SA 90
2014 Planning cycle: Biennial Plan components Study Team Reports/Updates Puget Sound: Identified 8 projects to effectively accommodate South to North and North to South transfers Mid Columbia: Determine plan of service, perform cost allocation to resolve issues in Mid C area Othello Areas: New and ongoing 91
2014 Planning cycle: Biennial Plan components Study Team Reports/Updates (Cont) Economic Planning Studies (EPS): Two rounds of studies EPS Round 1 study: Example of Backcast results 92
2014 Planning cycle: Biennial Plan components EPS Round 2 study: Summary of Study Scenarios Base Case Centralia No of SEA Stanfield Centralia Opt 1 1,320 0 0 Centralia Opt 2 990 330 0 Centralia Opt 3 660 0 660 Sensitivity Centralia No of SEA Stanfield Colstrip Opt 1 1,650 0 330 Colstrip Opt 2 990 660 330 Colstrip Opt 3 660 0 1,320 MT Wind Opt 2 990 660 330 MT Wind Opt 3 660 0 1,320 For more details of EPS: http://www.columbiagrid.org/CGEPS-documents.cfm 93
2014 Planning cycle: Biennial Plan components Other Updates Regional Activities, etc. Variable Transfer Limits (VTL) Currently focus on California Oregon Intertie (COI) Evaluate system capability to handle fluctuation Studies performed using hourly State Estimator cases Determined by the lowest of 3 major factors Customer impacts: Voltage change Equipment impacts: RAS operation capability Reliability impacts: Reliability limits 94
2015 Planning Cycle ColumbiaGrid has started a new Planning Cycle Compliance with Order 1000 requirements Single process, combined PEFA/Order 1000 (O1K) Currently, we’re in the first stage of the process • Collect input and ideas • Develop the study plan First meeting was held on Feb 5, 2015 “Planning/Order 1000 Needs” - Public Meeting Planning-related discussion & information session 95
2015 Planning Cycle: Process Overview The purpose of this diagram is for illustration purposes showing high-level activities only. It does not represent complete details of ColumbiaGrid planning process We are Here 96
2015 Planning Cycle: Key Activities 2015 System Assessment • Reliability Assessment (power flow, stability) Economic Planning Study Study Teams Activities Sensitivity Studies • Scope being discussed, in brainstorm sessions • Normally start in August Order 1000-related activities 97
2015 Planning Cycle: System Assessment Annual studies • Focus on reliability • Normally conducted between March - June Draft Study Plan is available on CG’s website (http://www.columbiagrid.org/event- details.cfm?EventID=995&fromcalendar=1) • Lots of discussion during the Feb 5 meeting Final Study Plan will be finalized in March 98
2015 Planning Cycle: Study Team Works Ongoing Study Teams Puget Sound Northern Mid Columbia Economic Planning Study Othello (recently formed) New Study Team Mid C VAR Loop Flow 99
2015 Planning Cycle: Sensitivity Studies To be conducted after the completion of SA Approximately between July - October Continue brainstorm the study scope Regular discussion in planning meeting Transient Stability, different study scenarios, uses of PCM etc. More discussion will continue 100
Recommend
More recommend
