1 local area planning update to transac – march 11, 2015
TRANSCRIPT
1
Local Area Planning Update to TRANSAC – March 11, 2015
2
Decision Rule - Matrix
Decision Rule Matrix - Example
Problem:Mitigation:
Raw RankUnits Data Factor Comment
Consequences of Event
MW Affected
Load Note 1 Describe load lost, voltage or thermal problems, etc
Risk of Event NoneDescribe problem
conditionsNote 2
Describe under what conditions the problem occurs: normal, outage, load level, seasons affected, etc
Overall Risk None Conseq X Risk = Result
CostTPV Rev
Req$ Cost -- List major cost components
Solution Duration Years Years -- Cost/Duration = $/year
Discussion
Note 1: Calculate and enter consequences factor per details on priority matrix
Note 2: Calculate and enter risk factor per details on priority matrix
Idenify the Problem or eventBriefly describe the mitigation proposed
Any other notes or comments on problem or proposed mitigation.
3
Decision Rule - Example
Decision Rule Matrix
Problem:Mitigation:
Raw RankUnits Data Factor Comment
Consequence of event
MW Affected
53 105No risk of lost load, but voltages below FERC 715 minimums under normal system conditions, peak load.
RiskProb, Freq of event
Occurs now under normal and outage
conditions at peak loads0.25
Because problem occurs now under normal system conditions, but only at peak load, risk factor is 25%.
Con. X Risk None 105 X .25 26.3
CostTPV Rev
Req$2.1M --
50 MVAR E Helena, 25 MVAR Three Rivers, 10 MVAR at Broadwater @ $25K/MVAR
Solution Duration Years 15+ -- Cost/Duration = 2.1/15 = $0.14M/year
Discussion
Low Voltage Helena - Three Rivers Area 100 kV SystemOption A: Cap Banks at E Helena, Three Rivers, Broadwater
Installation of these cap banks provide a valid solution through 2023. E Helena and Three Rivers subs well developed and should accommodate cap banks, but new sub may be required at Broadwater or close vicinity. Solution could be staged in over time.
Prioritizing Critical Problems
4
Consequences Factor = (Stability + Thermal + Voltage Problems Factors) X Peak Load Affected
Consequences Rating Factors
Stability and Thermal Problems Voltage Problems
Extreme – Interconnection wide Impacts, Widespread Outages 10 Outage 10
Severe – Division Wide Impacts, multiple outages 5 Very Low < 80% 5
Moderate – Localized Impacts, single outages 2 Low < FERC 715 2
Minor – Small Impacts, no outages 1 High 2
None – No problems observed 0 None 0
Consequence Factors
Risk & Likelihood Factors
Prioritizing Critical Problems
5
Risk Factor = System Cond. Factor X Seasonal Cond. Factor X Other Cond. Factor
Likelihood Factors
System ConditionSeasonal Condition Other Conditions
Normal .09995 S Peak 0.125 Normal – Occurs at N-0 Cond. 1.0
Outage 1 0.0005 W Peak 0.125 Major – Long line > 30 miles 1.0
Outage 2 0.00005 SW Peak 0.25 Moderate – Medium Line 0.5
Light 0.25 Minor – Short Line < 3 miles 0.1
Average 0.75 Sub – Substation Equipment 0.033
All 1
Expected Consequences
6
Expected Consequences
Expected Consequences = Consequences Factor X Risk Factor
Expected Consequences are used to rank and prioritize problems found. Additional factors may be used to weight the expected consequences, taking into account:
• Timing of a problem (far into the future could be ranked lower)• Different Contingencies that create the same problem (a
problem that could occur due to two different outages can be ranked higher).
• Additional Seasonal variations or other factors.
Suggestions:
• High Wind System Wide– Existing Projects dispatched to capacity
• Loss of Thermal Plants– Heavy Imports, Heavy Summer
• Loss of Hydros– Extreme Winter Conditions
• Extreme Localized Growth• Other?
Uncertainty Scenarios
7
Uncertainty Scenarios
Quarters 6 & 7• Finalize Mitigation Plans under review or in progress• Run Uncertainty Scenarios• Perform Reactive Resource Assessment
Quarter 8• Send out Draft of “The Book” for stakeholder review• Conduct Public Meetings• Finalize “The Book” and close out the 2014/2015 Local Area
Planning Cycle
Next Steps
8
Questions?
9
10