NTTG Quarter 2 Public
Stakeholder Meeting
Boise, ID
June 11, 2014
Agenda
Welcome, Introductions & Agenda Review
2014-2015 NTTG Draft Study Plan Review & Stakeholder
Comments
Order 1000 Update
Round Table/Stakeholder Comment Period
2
NTTG Biennial Study Plan
for 2014-2015 Regional
Planning Cycle
Q2 NTTG Public Stakeholder Meeting
Boise, ID
June 11, 2014
2014-2015 Study Plan
This presentation is intended to:
1. Provide an overview of the NTTG Biennial Study
Plan for the 2014-15 Regional Planning Cycle to
Stakeholders
2. Review comments to the study plan that were
submitted by Stakeholders during the review period
4
2014-2015 Study Plan - Outline
I.
II.
III.
IV.
Introduction
Study Objectives
General Schedule and Deliverables
Study Assumptions and Representation
A. Major Study Assumptions and System Representation
1.
2.
3.
4.
Study Assumptions
Analysis Tools
Regional Plan Evaluation
Transmission Needs Driven by Public Policy Requirements
B. Transmission Planning Study Methodology
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Request and Evaluate Data
System Conditions to Study
Power Flow Databases
Steady-State (N-0), and Contingency (N-1, N-2) Analysis
System Performance (Reliability) Criteria
5
2014-2015 Study Plan - Outline
IV. Study Assumptions and Representation (cont.)
C. Methodology for Comparison of Results
1.
2.
Alternative Projects
Cost Allocation Analysis
V. Robustness of Initial Regional Plan
VI. Allocation Scenarios
VII. Impacts on Other Regions
VIII.Requests for Public Policy Considerations
IX. [Draft / Final] Regional Transmission Plan
6
2014-2015 Study Plan
I. Introduction
● The study plan outlines the study process that the NTTG will follow to develop
the ten-year Regional Transmission Plan (RTP) for the biennial planning cycle
covering years 2014-2015
● This study plan will rely on the loads, resources, point-to-point transmission
requests, desired flows, constraints and other technical data that were submitted
in Quarter 1 of the Regional Planning Cycle, and will be considered in the
development of the Regional Transmission Plan
II. Study Objective
● The objective of the transmission planning study is to produce the NTTG
Regional Transmission Plan, through the selection of projects that yields a
transmission plan that is more efficient or cost effective than other options, in
compliance with Attachment K– Regional Planning Process
7
2014-2015 Study Plan
III.General Schedule and Deliverables
● Quarter 1: Gather data; including L&R data, new transmission projects
(sponsored, unsponsored and merchant), PTP transmission requests, and
transmission needs driven by public policy requirements and considerations from
stakeholders
● Quarter 2: Evaluate data received from stakeholders and resolve concerns.
Develop the Biennial Study Plan for Steering Committee approval
● Quarters 3 and 4: Utilizing the submitted data, perform technical screening
studies to evaluate the Initial Regional Plan and Alternative Projects
● Quarter 5: Stakeholder review and comment on the Draft Regional Transmission
Plan. Changes submitted will be evaluated in preparation of the Draft Final
Regional Transmission Plan
● Quarter 6: Perform Cost Allocations Studies and analysis
● Quarter 7: Stakeholder review, and Draft Final Regional Transmission Plan
produced
● Quarter 8: NTTG Steering Committee approval and Regional Transmission Plan
posted
8
2014-2015 Study Plan
IV.Study Assumptions
A. Major Study Assumptions and System Representation
1. Study Assumptions
The following data was submitted in response to the Q1 data request:
● Loads – forecasted for BAs internal to the NTTG footprint
● Resources – projected for each BA within NTTG footprint
● Transmission Projects – Full Funder Local Transmission Plan, Sponsored
Project, Unsponsored Project, or Merchant Transmission Developer
2. Analysis Tools
Two types of analysis tools will be utilized in the development of the power flow
base cases:
● Power Flow – PowerWorld software will be used to evaluate transmission
reliability under steady-state and facility outage conditions
● Production Cost – GridView software will be used to evaluate the range of
production scenarios that may occur in the Western Interconnection
9
2014-2015 Study Plan
3. Regional Plan Evaluation
This study process will evaluate the Initial Regional Plan and Alternative
Projects through the creation of Change Cases:
●
Initial Regional Plan and Alternative Projects costs will be compiled for
the tenth-year of the study period to be used in the Interconnectionwide power flow and production cost modeling
●
A base case will be developed using the production cost model to
determine those hours in the study year when load and resource
conditions are likely to stress the transmission system within the
NTTG footprint
●
Using the base case, the Initial Regional Plan will be evaluated using
power flow analysis to determine if it meets the system performance
requirements and transmission needs associated with Public Policy
Requirements
10
2014-2015 Study Plan
3. Regional Plan Evaluation (cont.)
●
Change Cases will be developed by the addition of an Alternative Project to the
Initial Regional Plan. Each Change Case will also exclude one or more
uncommitted projects in the Initial Regional Plan whose impacts are likely met
by the Alternative Project incorporated in the Change Case
●
As part of the development of Change Cases, the TWG will also determine if
there are additional Alternative Projects that should be evaluated through
inclusion in a Change Case
●
Each Change Case will be evaluated to determine whether or not it meets the
System Performance requirements and the transmission needs associated with
Public Policy Requirements
●
The TWG will then review each Change Case to determine if a modification of
any Change Case should be developed and evaluated that would be more
efficient or cost effective in meeting regional transmission needs
11
2014-2015 Study Plan
3. Regional Plan Evaluation (cont.)
●
Those Change Cases will then be further evaluated using three metrics for
the study year: capital-related costs, energy losses, and reserves
●
Those Alternative Projects in Change Cases which are more efficient or
cost effective than the Initial Regional Plan based on the three metrics will
be selected and combined into one or more additional Change Cases
●
When necessary, these combined Change Cases will be re-evaluated to
ensure each continues to meet the system performance requirements and
transmission needs associated with Public Policy Requirements
●
Using the three metrics, the Alternative Projects, if any, from the combined
Change Cases that are determined to likely be more efficient or cost
effective will be selected into the Draft Regional Transmission Plan
12
2014-2015 Study Plan
4. Transmission Needs Driven by Public Policy Requirements
●
Public Policy Requirements are those requirements that are
established by local, state, or federal laws or regulations
●
Local transmission needs driven by Public Policy Requirements are
included in the NTTG Initial Regional Plan through the Local
Transmission Plans of the NTTG Transmission Providers
●
During this study cycle, no additional transmission needs, beyond
those submitted by the transmission providers, were submitted to
satisfy Public Policy Requirements
●
A full listing of applicable Public Policy Requirements for the NTTG
footprint is included in Study Plan - Attachment 1
13
2014-2015 Study Plan
B. Transmission Planning Study Methodology
1. Request and Evaluate Data
Analysis of the NTTG transmission system requires a full model of the
Western Interconnection due the number of regional transmission ties and
span of energy trading markets. Consequently, NTTG study efforts will
rely on the data collection and validation work of WECC and its
committees
Once the WECC TEPPC database is received, it will be reviewed and
modified to assure conformance with the Initial Regional Plan
2. System Conditions to Study
The NTTG analysis will extend beyond the traditional focus of
snapshotting winter and summer peaks by examining all hours of the year
for situations where available resources and forecasted loads across the
Western Interconnection result in the highest stress in the NTTG footprint
(e.g. peak loads, high transfers with other regions)
14
2014-2015 Study Plan
2. System Conditions to Study (cont.)
The WECC TEPPC 2024 common case production cost model will be
analyzed to identify specific hours for power flow analysis. This TEPPC
base case includes 22 new transmission projects called the Common
Case Transmission Assumptions (see next slide)
Using the TEPPC 2024 common case production cost model with the
GridView production cost software, the TWG will identify the hourly data
for several system conditions, such as:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
peak coincident NTTG summer load condition;
peak coincident NTTG winter load condition;
conditions with maximum coincident NTTG net export;
conditions with minimum coincident NTTG export; and
additional system conditions as needed to meet the needs of
specific areas of the NTTG footprint
15
2014-2015 Study Plan
16
2014-2015 Study Plan
3. Power Flow Databases
a. Base Cases
The base cases representation for the various system conditions to be
simulated will be derived from the TEPPC 2024 case. The TWG will
import the data for each system condition into the power flow program
and create base cases for each of the study conditions
b. Change Cases
The TWG will add any Alternative Projects and remove any noncommitted transmission facilities from the base cases, as appropriate,
in order to create Change Cases for the respective base cases.
These Change Cases will be used for comparison purposes in
evaluating the more efficient or cost effective Regional Transmission
Plan
17
2014-2015 Study Plan
4. Steady State (N-0), and Contingency (N-1, N-2) Analysis
Power flow steady-state (N-0) and contingency (N-1, credible N-2)
analysis will be performed using the procedures outlined in the WECC
System Review Work Group – Data Preparation Manual, including using a
governor power flow for loss of generation contingencies
5. System Performance (Reliability) Criteria
The viability of specific transmission projects will be evaluated using
power flow software to demonstrate compliance with NERC and WECC
system performance criteria. Additionally, system specific performance
criteria for NorthWestern Energy and PacifiCorp will also apply
18
2014-2015 Study Plan
C. Methodology for Comparison of Results
1. Alternative Projects
Each of the Change Cases will be evaluated for the study year using the
same system performance criteria as is used for the cases which model
the Initial Regional Plan. The study results of these Change Cases will be
compared against results from studies that model the Initial Regional Plan
The following analysis criterion will be used to determine if a Change
Case is more efficient or cost effective solution for the NTTG footprint
than the Initial Regional Plan:
a. System Performance Analysis
The Change Case must meet all system performance criteria defined
above. If not, modifications may be made to transmission facilities
until the case meets the system performance criteria
19
2014-2015 Study Plan
1. Alternative Projects (cont.)
b. Capital Related Costs
The TWG will validate all project submitted costs with the TEPPC
Transmission Capital Cost Calculator (MS Excel spreadsheet)
If the submitted costs vary from the Calculator output by 20%, the
Project Sponsor will be contacted to resolved differences. However, if
the difference cannot be resolved, the TWG will determine the
appropriate cost to apply in the study process
A reduction in the annual capital related costs from the Initial Regional
Plan to a Change Case captures the extent that uncommitted
project(s) in the Initial Regional Plan can be displaced (either deferred
or replaced) while still meeting all regional transmission needs and
system performance requirements
20
2014-2015 Study Plan
1. Alternative Projects (cont.)
c. Energy Losses
Power flow software will be used to compare losses before and after a
project is added to the system. A reduction in losses after a project is
added represents the benefit. The energy loss valuation will be based
on average energy price for the study year
d. Reserves
The reserves analysis will evaluate a number of capacity sharing
opportunities among the various combinations of Balancing Areas.
The reserve metric will be accessed on a Balancing Area basis and is
based on the incremental load and generation submitted by the TPs
The calculation will be performed using a spreadsheet which will
consider the savings between each Balancing Area providing its own
incremental reserve requirement and a combination of balancing
areas sharing a reserve resource facilitated by uncommitted
transmission capacity
21
2014-2015 Study Plan
2. Cost Allocation Analysis
The projects eligible for cost allocation that are incorporated with the Draft
Regional Transmission Plan will be evaluated for cost allocation by the
Cost Allocation Committee. Those entities affected by a change in
Capital-Related Costs, Energy Losses and Reserves, as defined above,
shall be identified for use in the cost allocation process
There may be winners and losers when reviewing loss analysis, system
performance, capital costs and reserves. NTTG will allocate the net
benefits to TP’s
22
2014-2015 Study Plan
V. Robustness of Initial Regional Plan
●
The robustness analysis will provide information regarding the Draft Regional
Transmission Plan’s ability to reliably serve the transmission needs of an
uncertain future
●
The robustness analysis will use power flow analysis and input from production
cost analysis as needed to test whether or not the 2024 Draft Regional
Transmission Plan transmission system performance will remain acceptable
assuming deviations from the base case assumptions
●
The TWG will use its discretion to define the deviations from base case
assumptions to test and may draw on assumptions used in change cases or
allocation scenarios and will seek input from stakeholders through the Planning
Committee
23
2014-2015 Study Plan
VI.Allocation Scenarios
●
Following evaluation of projects by the Planning Committee, the Cost Allocation
Committee, with stakeholder inputs, will evaluate allocation scenarios for those
parameters that will likely affect the amount of total benefits and their distribution
among Beneficiaries
●
When developing the Draft Biennial Study Plan, the Planning Committee and
Cost Allocation Committee will identify projects selected in the prior Regional
Transmission Plan that will be reevaluated and potentially replaced or deferred
●
NTTG cost allocation analysis will incorporate alternative scenarios (relative to
the Initial Regional Plan), with regard to those assumptions and parameters that
likely affect the estimated distribution of project benefits in determining the cost
allocation of a transmission project
24
2014-2015 Study Plan
VI.Allocation Scenarios (cont.)
●
To the extent feasible, the Cost Allocation Committee will look to the data
underlying local transmission plans, integrated resource planning studies of
LSEs within the NTTG footprint, the assumptions and the forecasts used to
develop the alternative scenarios for each allocation metric
●
The selected alternative scenarios may vary among the benefit metrics and will
focus on those assumptions and parameters for a benefit metric that affect the
distribution of benefits for that metric among Transmission Providers, LSEs,
and/or IPPs
25
2014-2015 Study Plan
VII.Impacts on Neighboring Regions
●
All Initial Regional Plan and Change Case Plan(s) power flow studies will
monitor the BES voltage and thermal loading in NTTG’s neighboring planning
regions (i.e., ColumbiaGrid, WestConnect and CAISO) to identify potential
violations of NERC, WECC or neighboring planning regions system performance
criteria
●
Should a BES system performance criteria violation be observed in the
neighboring region, in either the Initial Regional Plan or the Change Case
Plan(s), the TWG will coordinate with the affected planning region to verify
results and, if necessary, identify potential mitigation
●
Assuming this is a new violation, the study will endeavor to alleviate the violation
using acceptable mitigation options within the NTTG footprint
26
2014-2015 Study Plan
VII.Impacts on Neighboring Regions (cont.)
●
If the violation in the neighboring planning region cannot be eliminated then the
TWG will coordinate with the impacted planning region to determine if that
region will resolve the violation through mitigation measures within the affected
planning region at its expense
●
Should the violations remain after all options for alleviation, both within the
NTTG footprint and within the affected region, have been exhausted, then the
Change Case or Initial Regional Plan will not be selected for the Draft Regional
Plan
●
NTTG foot print mitigation costs necessary to resolve criteria violations observed
in neighboring planning region(s) will be quantified and added to the cost of the
plan under study when selecting a project for the Draft Regional Transmission
Plan
27
2014-2015 Study Plan
VIII.Requests for Public Policy Considerations
Public Policy Considerations are those considerations that are not
established by local, state, or federal laws or regulations.
●
Public Policy Considerations will be separate scenarios analysis or sensitivity
cases. The results of the analysis may inform the Regional Transmission Plan,
but will not result in the inclusion of additional projects in the Regional
Transmission Plan
●
In Quarter 1 of the 2014-2015 Regional Planning Cycle, three requests for
Public Policy Considerations were submitted to NTTG:
1.
2.
3.
The Renewable Northwest Project (RNP) submitted a request to study the effects of
retiring Colstrip units 1 and 2 and replace with Montana wind resources in the year
2020;
The RNP requested a study to consider the effects of retiring Colstrip units 1, 2, 3
and 4 and replace with Montana wind in 2027, and
The Northwest Energy Coalition requested a study to reduce the output at various
coal plans in Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado and replace with various renewable
resources. No year was specified.
28
2014-2015 Study Plan
● After deliberation, the TWG is recommending the following:
The Planning Committee should proceed only with the proposal from RNP to
retire Colstrip units 1 and 2 and replace with Montana wind resources in 2020
The reasoning for this recommendation is:
1. The RNP proposal to study the effects of retiring Colstrip Units 1, 2, 3
and 4 in 2027 are beyond the NTTG 10 year planning horizon and
outside the scope of the Regional Planning Cycle
2. The Northwest Energy Coalition request has already been studied by
the WECC Transmission Expansion Planning Policy Committee
(TEPPC)
● Since NTTG would use the same base case (as proposed by the submitter)
and the same modeling techniques, different results would not be expected
● Additionally, by re-doing the study and no additional information would be
gained to inform the Regional Transmission Plan
29
2014-2015 Study Plan
● Following the public stakeholder comment period and
discussion during the Quarter 2 Public Stakeholder meeting, a
final determination concerning Public Policy Considerations will
be voted on by the Planning Committee at the June 13, 2014
Planning Committee meeting
30
2014-2015 Study Plan
IX. [Draft/Final] Regional Transmission Plan
[Report]
● The Planning Committee shall produce a Draft Regional
Transmission Plan by the end of Quarter 4
● The projects selected into the Draft Regional Transmission Plan
are determined according to the study methodology outlined in
the study plan, and
● The projects selected into the Draft Regional Transmission Plan
for cost allocation will be determined according to the Cost
Allocation process previously described
31
Study Plan Comments Submitted by
Stakeholders
● Once the NTTG Biennial Study Plan for the 2014-15 study cycle was
submitted to stakeholders for review, the only comments received
were from NorthWestern Energy and PacifiCorp
● As these comments identified only formatting and readability
improvements, all of the recommended changes were made to the
study plan
32
Order No. 1000
2nd Regional Compliance
Update
Q2 NTTG Public Stakeholder Meeting
Boise, ID
June 11, 2014
NTTG FERC Order 1000
Regional Filing Status
9.16.13
• NTTG TO’s filed revised Attachment K’s to
comply with FERC’s Regional Order 1000
• FERC Issued Order on NTTG Filing
4.17.14
• NTTG 2nd Compliance Filing Deadline
6.16.14
34
Enrollment Process
• Removed obligation of a non-public utility to file a
reciprocity OATT with FERC, and replaced it with
– the obligation to adopt and post an OATT, or in the
case of a NJ, its unfiled OATT or other agreement,
with the same provisions as other full funders.
• Requiring a non-public utility not
– take any action within the NTTG Steering Committee
or other committees that prevents a public utility from
complying with its OATT, and
– include a provision in its OATT or other agreement(s)
that conflicts with a provision in the Attachment K of
the respective NTTG public utilities.
35
General Requirements
• The date, time and location of all public
committee meetings will be posted on the
NTTG website not less than seven (7)
days prior to the meeting. Meeting
materials will be posted prior to the
meeting.
36
Identification of
Unsponsored Projects: Q1
• Attachment K already provides stakeholders with
the opportunity to submit an unsponsored
project during Quarter 1.
• During Q1 Planning Committee may also
identify an unsponsored project for consideration
in the Regional Transmission Plan (RTP), which
may be based upon a stakeholder project
submitted with incomplete data.
37
Identification of
Unsponsored Projects: Q2
• Biennial Study Plan includes Unsponsored
Projects
– Included in the prior RTP,
– submitted by stakeholders, and
– identified by the Planning Committee using their best
judgment data available at the time
38
Identification of
Unsponsored Projects: Q3-Q4
• PC utilizes each Alternative Project in one or more
Change Cases and, using the criteria . . . , determine if a
Change Case is a more efficient or cost-effective
solution for the NTTG Footprint than the Initial Regional
Plan based upon the methodology set forth in
Attachment K
• “Alternative Projects” includes unsponsored projects
identified by the Planning Committee and projects
submitted by stakeholders
39
Identification of
Unsponsored Projects: Q5
• Stakeholders may submit comments during the Quarter
5 review of the Draft RTP that include identification of a
new unsponsored project.
• The Planning Committee will consider the new
unsponsored project, to the extent feasible, so long as
consideration of the new unsponsored project will not
delay the development of the RTP.
• If the Planning Committee determines that it is infeasible
to consider the new unsponsored project without
delaying the plan, then the project will be noted in the
RTP and carried forward for consideration in the
following Regional Planning Cycle.
40
Identification of
Unsponsored Projects
• Clarify that any unsponsored project in the
Final RTP may be resubmitted as a
Sponsored Project by a pre-qualified
Project Sponsor for consideration in the
following Regional Planning Cycle for
purposes of cost allocation.
41
Public Policy Consideration
• NTTG will post
1. transmission needs driven by Public Policy
Requirements (PPRs) and Public Policy
Considerations (PPCs) that were or were not
considered,
2. along with an explanation of why particular
transmission needs driven by PPR's and
PPC's were or were not considered
42
Qualification Criteria
• Project sponsor qualification requirements
now require parties planning to use a 3rd
party contractor to
– identify who it intends to use, and when it
plans to enter into an agreement with the 3rdparty contractor, and
– provide any changes to 3rd party contractor
information during Q5
43
Qualification Criteria
• Removed financial qualification criterion
requiring a transmission developer to
– Demonstrate in lieu of an investment grade
credit rating, that it or its parent company has
been in existence for five years and has had
positive working capital for the past three years
44
Information Requirements
• Clarify that the K's already allow the PC to
consider whether to include, at its
discretion, a project that resembles an
unsponsored project that has been
submitted with insufficient data.
– Revisions not required: PC will attempt to
remedy insufficient data, but if not remedied,
may use the incomplete data from a
sponsored project to propose an unsponsored
project
45
Evaluation Process
• Clarify definition of “monetized nonfinancial incremental costs”
– Incremental costs associated with an
Alternative Project that are not directly
evaluated and measured in dollars of
changed revenues, expenses or capital
investments; Since non-financial in nature,
will be monetized by applying an appropriate
index or conversion factor to convert the units
into a dollar value
46
Cost Allocation for
Unsponsored Projects
• An unsponsored project may be resubmitted in
the next cycle as a sponsored project for
purposes of cost allocation, if the pre-qualified
sponsor elects to resubmit the project;
• Unless the sponsored project qualifies as a
‘committed’ it will be subject to re-evaluation –
same as other projects
47
Ownership Rights
• Those arrangements where an entity has rights in
transmission facilities or a transmission path, owned by
another entity, which are based upon a % of the facility
or path's rated capacity and the rights remain thru the inservice life of the facility or path
48
NTTG FERC Order 1000
Filing Status
Regional
Order 1000
Interregional
Order 1000
• 2nd Compliance
Filing due June 16,
2014
• Filed on May 10,
2013 – FERC
Rule pending
49
Round Table
• Round Table
– Stakeholder Comment Period
• Q3 Stakeholder Meeting (Tentative)
– September 16, 2014 in Bozeman,
Montana
– Q3 analysis update
50