MTS Working Group
October 8, 2015
Introduction
• More Than Smart
• Mission – Enabling state integrated distribution grid efforts
1. Continue the work of CA MTS Working Group - today
2. Push to help other state distribution grid efforts around country
3. Communications & Outreach push for other states to utilize MTS work
• Areas of Focus
• Operationalizing distribution grid planning work
• Funding to be a mix of foundation, membership and state/federal grants
• Two main MTS forums –MTS Working Group & Regular open webinars
• Subgroups for quick turn-around as required
• Subteams
1) Alignment
2) DPP and Data
3) Portfolio Design
2
MTS Working Group Purpose
Provide an open, voluntary stakeholder forum
to educate and discuss core issues toward
identifying potential common ground regarding
the evolution of California’s distribution system
and the seamless integration of DER to meet
customers’ needs and public policy. The
discussions will be for the benefit of the
participants and may be made public without
specific participant attribution
3
More Than Smart
•
•
•
•
Tony Brunello, More Than Smart tbrunello@morethansmart.org
Paul De Martini, MTS/ICF International paul.demartini@icfi.com
Laura Manz, MTS/ICF International laura.manz@icfi.com
Michael Murray, MTS/Mission:Data mmurray@morethansmart.org
• Deborah Shields, MTS dshields@morethansmart.org
• Annie Howley, MTS ahowley@morethansmart.org
MTS meetings, webinars and information exchange are designed solely to provide a forum or means for
the expression of various points of view in compliance with antitrust laws. Under no circumstances shall
MTS activities be used as a means for competing companies to reach any understanding, expressed or
implied, which tends to restrict competition, or in any way, to impair the ability of participating members
to exercise independent business judgment regarding matters affecting competition or regulatory
positions.
Proprietary information shall not be disclosed by any participant during any MTS meeting or its subgroups.
In addition, no information of a secret or proprietary nature shall be made available to MTS or its
membership. All proprietary information which may nonetheless be publicly disclosed by any participant
during any MTS meeting or its subgroups shall be deemed to have been disclosed on a non-confidential
basis, without any restrictions on use by anyone, except that no valid copyright or patent right shall be
deemed to have been waived by such disclosure
4
Agenda
9:00-9:15 am
Introductions
9:15–10:15am
Presentations (5-15 minutes each) and group
discussion on Subteam Progress to date
1) Lorenzo
2) Ryan
3) Heather
10:15-10:30 am
Break
10:30-11:30 am
Facilitated discussion to refine scope and definition
to assure full coverage and no overlap
11:30 - noon
Noon – 2:00 pm
High level review of CAISO TPP - Lorenzo
Working lunch in subteam breakouts
2:00-3:00 pm
Report out and next steps
5
Context: Evolution of DRP
No. of Benefit Categories &
Sophistication of Analysis
Discussion framework from Phase 1
Run
Jog
Walk
2015-1H 2016
System-wide DRPs incl.
Locational Societal Benefits
System-wide DRP including LTPP
& TPP locational benefits
Visibility & Initial DPA Locational Benefits
2H 2016-2019
2020+
6
Subteam Presentations by:
• Lorezno Kristov, CAISO
• Ryan Hanley, SolarCity
• Heather Sanders, SCE
7
Facilitated Discussion of Scope Boundaries
8
Overview of Transmission Planning Process
L. Kristov, CAISO
9
There are two aspects to the DRP process alignment
1.
Optimally align new DRP cycle with the existing structure of IEPRLTPP-TPP
• State agencies & legislature are concerned that all procurement &
planning processes utilize consistent & up-to-date assumptions
• IEPR-LTPP-TPP alignment created in 2013-14 achieves this for those
processes
• DRPs & DER adoption projections & impacts will be key elements of
assumptions & scenarios for procurement & planning
•
Many DER types reflected in DRPs are load modifiers that need to go
into the IEPR demand forecast
• A needed next step is to map the content & timing of important
inputs & outputs between DRPs & the other processes
Page10
10
Second aspect –
2.
Distribution investment proposed in DRPs must be input to utility GRCs
• Required by PU Code Sec 769
• Three IOU GRC cycles are three years long & staggered
• IOUs perform annual internal distribution planning processes to plan
each year’s infrastructure build-out, based on their own latest GRC
approved funding
• What is relationship between existing annual planning process and
new DRP cycle?
• How to define the future DRP cycle to address both aspects of the
problem?
Page11
11
Process suggestions
Inter-agency group to address first aspect
• Existing inter-agency process alignment group (CPUC-CEC-ISO)
describes & maps most important inputs & outputs
•
Engage broad group of CPUC staff working on various CPUC procurement
proceedings (LTPP, RPS, EE, DR, Storage, RA)
• Present inter-agency work to IOUs for comment & revisions
MTS Subgroup to address second aspect
• Develop initial framework
Full MTS working group
• Reviews draft framework presented by subgroups for feedback
Page12
12
Breakout Session
Subteam 1
Subteam 2
Subteam 3
13
Report Out
• Subteam 1
Page14
14
Report Out
• Subteam 2
Page15
15
Report Out
• Subteam 3
Page16
16
WG Deliverables – Process Check
• Recommendations on an integrated Distribution Planning
Process for system-wide implementation by _______.
• Recommendations to enhance planning scenarios regarding
granularity and DER forecasting
• Recommendations on data sharing and related mechanisms
• Recommendations on IDPP to CA state-wide planning
processes alignment
• Development of a framework for the intersection of planning
and DSR/DER sourcing
• Development of a framework for “DER alternatives”
evaluation and related “merit order ”
Page17
17
Integrated Distribution Planning Process (DPP)
Process check
Page18
18
MTS Working Group
http://morethansmart.org/