DOCSLIB.ORG

Asmat Pages October 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Asmat Pages October 2020 Case Summary Sheet 2020-21 Heavy Winter 2 Operating Base Case Purpose: OPERATING CASE – TO REPRESENT ANTICIPATED OPERATING CONDITIONS WITH HEAVY FLOWS FROM NORTHWEST TO CALIFORNIA. Loads: Expected peak load for the months of December - February Time: 1800 – 2000 hours MST. Generation Hydro Thermal Renewables Canada High/Median -- -- Northwest High/Median High -- Idaho/Montana Median High -- Colorado/Wyoming Low High -- Northern California Hydro Median -- -- Northern California Low High -- Southern California Low High -- Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada Low High -- Interchange (MW): Condition Target % Rating Northwest to British Columbia (Path 3) Moderate 15001 50% Northwest to California/Nevada COI (Path 66) Moderate 2000 42% PDCI (Path 65) Heavy 2400 75% Midway – Los Banos S-N (Path 15) -- -- -- Idaho to Northwest (Path 14) -- -- -- Montana to Northwest (Path 8) Moderate 1400 64% Utah/Colorado to Southwest (Path 31, 35, 78) -- -- -- Southwest to Calif. (EOR Path 49/WOR Path 46) Moderate 4000/5000 43%/47% Intermountain to Adelanto DC (Path 27) Heavy 2100 88% San Diego to CFE (Path 45) -- 60 15% Northern to Southern California (Path 26) Heavy 2800 70% Interchange: Desired Scheduled Actual Northwest to British Columbia (NWBCH) 15001 1500 1500 Northwest to California/Nevada (COI)(SPPNWPG&E) 2000 1885 1253 (PDCI)(NWLADWP) 2400 2334 2334 Path 15 S-N -- (a) -19.0 Path 14 (IDNW) -- 41 521 Path 8 (MontanaNW) 1400 422 281 Utah/Colorado to Southwest -- (a) 54.5 Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR) 4000/5000 (a) 2234.2/2432.5 Intermountain to Adelanto DC 2100 (a) 1409.5 Path 45 (San DiegoCFE) 60 0 0 Path 26 (PG&ESCE) 2800 2800 2102 (a) A total interchange schedule for this path cannot be determined because some transmission lines included in this total are internal to an area and schedules for these lines are not available. 1 . Minimum flows are required to represent the Canadian Entitlement. 17 Case Summary Sheet 2021 Heavy Summer 3 Operations Base Case Purpose: OPERATING CASE – TO REPRESENT ANTICIATED OPERATING CONDITIONS DURING LIGHT LOAD PERIODS. MODERATE FLOWS FROM THE NORTHWEST TO CALIFORNIA AND MODERATE TO HEAVY FLOWS FROM IDAHO/MONTANA TO THE NORTHWEST. Loads: Expected peak load for the months of June - August Time: 1500 – 1700 hours MDT Generation Hydro Thermal Renewables Canada High -- -- Northwest Median/High High -- Idaho/Montana Median High -- Colorado/Wyoming Low High -- Northern California Hydro High -- -- Northern California High High -- Southern California Low High -- Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada Low High -- Interchange (MW): Condition Target % Rating Northwest to British Columbia (Path 3) Heavy -2300 73% Northwest to California/Nevada COI (Path 66) Maximum 4800 100% PDCI (Path 65) Heavy 2800 88% Midway – Los Banos S-N (Path 15) -- -- -- Idaho to Northwest (Path 14) Light -- -- Montana to Northwest (Path 8) Moderate 1200 55% Utah/Colorado to Southwest (Path 31, 35, 78) -- -- -- Southwest to Calif. (EOR Path 49/WOR Path 46) Low/Moderate 3000/5800 32%/57% Intermountain to Adelanto DC (Path 27) Heavy 2200 92% San Diego to CFE (Path 45) Low 150 37% Northern to Southern California (Path 26) Heavy 4000 100% Interchange: Desired Scheduled Actual Northwest to British Columbia (NW→BCH) -2300 -2300 -2302 Northwest to California/Nevada (COI)(SPP→NW→PG&E) 4800 4544 3558 (PDCI)(NW→LADWP) 2800 2711 2711 Path 15 S-N -- (a) -485.9 Path 14 (ID→NW) -- -76 -624 Path 8 (Montana→NW) 1200 435 -1 Utah/Colorado to Southwest -- (a) 833.8 Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR) 3000/5800 (a) 1625.7/4732.5 Intermountain to Adelanto DC 2200 (a) 1523.8 Path 45 (San Diego→CFE) 150 128 127 Path 26 (PG&E→SCE) 4000 4000 2984 18 Case Summary Sheet 2024 Light Spring 1 Specialized Base Case Purpose: SPECIALIZED CASE – To represent the lowest inertia forecasted in 2024. The expectation is that you will work with your operations and planning departments to determine the system conditions for the date and time specified. Loads: Loads consistent with the 2024 forecast for the date and time specified. Time: Conditions like May 27, 2019 at 04:00 MT, the lowest inertia day in 2019 Generation Hydro Thermal Renewables Consistent with date and time specified above. -- -- -- Interchange (MW): Condition Target % Rating Consistent with date and time specified above. -- -- -- Interchange: Desired Scheduled Actual Northwest to British Columbia (NWBCH) -- 1400 1401 Northwest to California/Nevada (COI)(SPPNWPG&E) -- -415 -436 (PDCI)(NWLADWP) -- -298 -298 Path 15 S-N -- (a) 777.3 Path 14 (IDNW) -- -119 29 Path 8 (MontanaNW) -- 1249 1156 Utah/Colorado to Southwest -- (a) -161.4 Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR) --/-- (a) 341.9/843.6 Intermountain to Adelanto DC -- (a) 1117.0 Path 45 (San DiegoCFE) -- 0 0 Path 26 (PG&ESCE) -- 1500 1421 NOTE: Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each area’s load and generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be kept in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal. (a) A total interchange schedule for this path cannot be determined because some transmission lines included in this total are internal to an area and schedules for these lines are not available. 1 . Minimum flows are required to represent the Canadian Entitlement. 19 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Strategic Transmission Discussion
    Section 1:4: ExecutiveStrategic SummaryTransmission Discussion Strategic Discussion Section 4 SECTION 4: NEAC STRATEGIC TRANSMISSION DISCUSSION 4.1 SECTION PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to describe and discuss the methodology, rationale, and technical assessments utilized to determine the transmission export projects presented in this report. In order to provide an overall view of the process, this section summarizes the chronological process that was completed to reach the conclusion of the three proposed export transmission routes. 4.2 BACKGROUND 4.2.1 Transmission Historical Development The existing transmission grid in the state of Nevada has generally been planned, designed, constructed, and operated to transport energy from generators located in neighboring states and generators located in rural locations to serve electric loads principally in urban centers within the state. Historically generators were sized to serve the electric loads for single concentrated urban areas and/or industrial electric customers. It was recognized over time that economies could be obtained by constructing large generation facilities. This required constructing transmission lines for interconnecting the generators with multiple concentrated electric loads (“load centers”). Further development of the transmission grid resulted from interconnecting multiple generation facilities to enhance reliability in the event of outages on the generators. The state of Nevada does not have indigenous coal, oil, or natural gas to fuel conventional generators. As a result, Nevada must rely on the import of fuels and electrical energy to supply the electric load centers throughout the State. To support this, the existing transmission grid has been constructed to a large extent to import electric energy resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Amended and Restated Victorville-Lugo Interconnection Agreement
    DWP No. 10343 AMENDED AND RESTATED VICTORVILLE-LUGO INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY -l- Table of Contents SECTION TITLE PAGE 1. Parties 4 2. Recitals ,4 3. Agreement, .5 4. Effective Date Filing and Term 5 5. Definitions .6 6. Ownership of the Victorville-Lugo Transmission Lines .9 I 7. Victorville-Lugo Transmission Line .9 i 8. LADWP Facilities ,9 9. SCE Facilities 9 10. Operation and Maintenance of Transmission System 10 11. Transmission System, 11 12. Balancing Authority 12 13. Metering and Line Losses ,12 14. Scheduling of Power Deliveries 12 15. Adverse Determination or Expansion of Obligations 12 16. Successors and Assigns 13 17. Dispute Resolution ...14 18. Liability 14 29. Willful Action 15 20. No Dedication of Facilities 16 21. No Obligation to Offer Same Service to others 16 22. No Precedent. 16 -2- 23. Notices 16 24. Severability 17 25. Right of the Parties upon Termination 17 26. Force Majeure 17 27. Waivers and Remedies 18 28. Authorizations and Approvals 18 29. Relationship of Parties 18 30. No Third Party Rights or Obligation 18 31. Warranty of Authority 18 s \ 32. Assignment of Agreement 19 33. Conflicting Provisions 19 34. Governing Law 19 35. Signature Clause .20 Exhibit A Transmission Lines & Transmission System. ,21 Exhibit B Diagram. .26 “3- AMENDED AND RESTATED VICTORVILLE-LUGO INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT 1. Parties: The parties to this Victorville-Lugo Interconnection Agreement are the DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES (“LADWP”), a department organized and existing under the Charter of the City of Los Angeles, a municipal corporation of the State of California, and SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (“SCE”), a California corporation, hereinafter referred to individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties".
    [Show full text]
  • Geothermal Power and Interconnection: the Economics of Getting to Market David Hurlbut
    Geothermal Power and Interconnection: The Economics of Getting to Market David Hurlbut NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-54192 April 2012 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Geothermal Power and Interconnection: The Economics of Getting to Market David Hurlbut Prepared under Task No. WE11.0815 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report 15013 Denver West Parkway NREL/TP-6A20-54192 Golden, Colorado 80401 April 2012 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge Available for a processing fee to U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Transmission for Uncertainty
    WESTERN ELECTRICITY COORDINATING COUNCIL Planning Transmission for Uncertainty: Applications and Lessons for the Western Interconnection FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2016 Jonathan L. Ho, Benjamin F. Hobbs, Pearl Donohoo‐Vallett, Qingyu Xu, Saamrat Kasina, Sang Woo Park, and Yueying Ouyang Department of Geography & Environmental Engineering Environment, Energy, Sustainability & Health Institute The Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD Report Prepared for The Western Electricity Coordinating Council Acknowledgement This material is based upon work supported by the Western Electricity Coordinating Council and by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability through a contract man‐ aged by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The project team would like to thank Vijay Satyal, Gary Simonson, Michael Bailey, and Keenan Moyer of WECC and Joseph Eto of LBNL for their support and advice during this project. We also gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the members of the Technical Advisory Committee whose advice was invaluable in development of the study cases. We also thank Yujia Zhu and Prof. Daniel Tylavsky of the Department of Electrical Engineering at Arizona State University for access to their software for power network reduction and the advice they provided on its use. Jim McCalley contributed to an earlier ver‐ sion of the literature survey in Section 2. However, the authors are solely responsible for any opinions or errors in this document. All authors performed this work when associated with Johns Hopkins University. Jonathan Ho is now with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Pearl Donohoo‐Vallett is with Brattle Consultants, and Yueying Ouyang is with Energy & Environmental Economics (E3) Consultants.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Transmission Technologies
    Advanced Transmission Technologies December 2020 United States Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 Executive Summary The high-voltage transmission electric grid is a complex, interconnected, and interdependent system that is responsible for providing safe, reliable, and cost-effective electricity to customers. In the United States, the transmission system is comprised of three distinct power grids, or “interconnections”: the Eastern Interconnection, the Western Interconnection, and a smaller grid containing most of Texas. The three systems have weak ties between them to act as power transfers, but they largely rely on independent systems to remain stable and reliable. Along with aged assets, primarily from the 1960s and 1970s, the electric power system is evolving, from consisting of predominantly reliable, dependable, and variable-output generation sources (e.g., coal, natural gas, and hydroelectric) to increasing percentages of climate- and weather- dependent intermittent power generation sources (e.g., wind and solar). All of these generation sources rely heavily on high-voltage transmission lines, substations, and the distribution grid to bring electric power to the customers. The original vertically-integrated system design was simple, following the path of generation to transmission to distribution to customer. The centralized control paradigm in which generation is dispatched to serve variable customer demands is being challenged with greater deployment of distributed energy resources (at both the transmission and distribution level), which may not follow the traditional path mentioned above. This means an electricity customer today could be a generation source tomorrow if wind or solar assets were on their privately-owned property. The fact that customers can now be power sources means that they do not have to wholly rely on their utility to serve their needs and they could sell power back to the utility.
    [Show full text]
  • Import/Export Paths: Summary of Transmission Issues and Implications
    DOCKETED Docket Number: 15-RETI-02 Project Title: Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative 2.0 TN #: 214834 Document Title: Appendix A. Transmission Assessment Focus Area Information Description: N/A Filer: Misa Milliron Organization: California Energy Commission Submitter Role: Commission Staff Submission Date: 12/16/2016 10:49:38 AM Docketed Date: 12/16/2016 Public Review Draft 12/16/2016 Appendix A. Transmission Assessment Focus Area Information Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative 2.0 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT December 16, 2016 Public Review Draft 12/16/2016 Contents of Appendix A Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 In-State TAFAs: Transmission and Environmental/Land-Use Implications ............................... 3 In-State TAFA Data Maps........................................................................................................................ 3 Imperial Valley TAFA ............................................................................................................................... 9 Riverside East TAFA .............................................................................................................................. 16 Victorville/Barstow TAFA ...................................................................................................................... 20 Tehachapi TAFA ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tenth Biennial Electric Transmission Final Assessment Report
    FINAL DRAFT Tenth Biennial Transmission Assessment 2018-2027 Staff Report Docket No. E-00000D-17-0001 December 31, 2018 Prepared by Arizona Corporation Commission Staff And ESTA International, LLC 2214 Rock Hill Road, Suite 180 Herndon, Virginia, 20170-4234 Decision No. 76975 [This page intentionally blank for formatting purposes] Biennial Transmission Assessment for 2018-2027 Docket No. E-00000D-17-0001 December 31, 2018 Decision No. 76975 Foreword The Arizona Corporation Commission (“ACC” or “Commission”) performs a biennial review of the ten-year transmission plans filed by parties who are responsible for transmission facilities in Arizona and issues a written decision regarding the adequacy of the existing and planned transmission facilities to reliably meet the present and future transmission system needs of Arizona.1 This report by the Staff of the Commission’s Utilities Division (“ACC Staff” or “Staff”) is the Tenth Biennial Transmission Assessment (“BTA” or “Tenth BTA”) and has been prepared in accordance with a contract agreement between ESTA International, LLC (“ESTA”) and the Commission. It is considered a public document. Use of the report by other parties shall be at their own risk. Neither ESTA nor the Commission accept any duty of care to such third parties. Arizona’s Tenth BTA is based upon the Ten-Year Plans filed with the Commission by parties in January 2018. It also incorporates information and comments provided by participants and attendees in the BTA workshops and report review process. ACC Staff and ESTA appreciate the contributions, cooperation, and support of industry participants throughout the Tenth BTA process. 1 Arizona Revised Statute §40-360.02 Biennial Transmission Assessment for 2018-2027 Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Senate Committee on Commerce, Labor and Energy-May
    MINUTES OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, LABOR AND ENERGY Seventy-ninth Session May 26, 2017 The Senate Committee on Commerce, Labor and Energy was called to order by Chair Kelvin Atkinson at 8:34 a.m. on Friday, May 26, 2017, in Room 2135 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. The meeting was videoconferenced to Room 4412E of the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, 555 East Washington Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file in the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Senator Kelvin Atkinson, Chair Senator Pat Spearman, Vice Chair Senator Nicole J. Cannizzaro Senator Yvanna D. Cancela Senator Joseph P. Hardy Senator James A. Settelmeyer Senator Heidi S. Gansert GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT: Assemblyman Chris Brooks, Assembly District No. 10 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Marji Paslov Thomas, Policy Analyst Bryan Fernley, Counsel Lynn Hendricks, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Robert G. Johnston, Western Resource Advocates Dylan Sullivan, Natural Resources Defense Council Ernie Adler, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245 Tom Polikalas Joe Greco, Senior Vice President, Terra-Gen Operating Company, LLC Senate Committee on Commerce, Labor and Energy May 26, 2017 Page 2 Leonard B. Jackson, Director, Faith Organizing Alliance; Associate Minister, First African Methodist Episcopal Church Jennifer Taylor, Clean Energy Project Adam Green, Director of Development, SolarReserve Linda Bullen, Eolus North America, Inc. Rhonda Mills, Geothermal Energy Association Judy Treichel, Executive Director, Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force Louise Helton, 1 Sun Solar Electric, LLC Linda Nerstad Rose McKinney-James, Bombard Electric, LLC; Valley Electric Association, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • ISO 2013-2014 Transmission Planning Process Supplemental Assessment: Harry Allen-Eldorado 500 Kv Transmission Project Economic
    2013-2014 ISO Transmission Plan December 15, 2014 ISO 2013-2014 Transmission Planning Process Supplemental Assessment: Harry Allen-Eldorado 500 kV Transmission Project Economic Need California ISO/MID 1 2013-2014 ISO Transmission Plan December 15, 2014 Introduction On March 20, 2014, the ISO Board of Governors approved the ISO’s 2013-2014 Transmission Plan. The economic benefit analysis of the Harry Allen-Eldorado 500 kV transmission project documented in that transmission plan indicated that the line would result in net benefits for ISO ratepayers.1 However, the ISO acknowledged that NV Energy’s recent announcement of its intention to join the ISO’s energy imbalance market could affect the results of that analysis and that further study was required. Further, responding to a stakeholder comment in the transmission planning process, the ISO investigated the WECC production simulation model of a transmission facility outside of the ISO footprint with the owners of that facility. This investigation led to a modeling correction of the Westwing-Mead 500 kV transmission line parameters by the owners of the transmission line. This correction was not reflected in the previous analysis. Therefore, the previous economic assessment was considered preliminary. This supplemental study evaluated the project using an updated production simulation model that included the NVE energy imbalance market modeling and the correct Westwing-Mead 500 kV transmission line parameters. The ISO’s original analysis was documented in the ISO’s 2013-2014 Transmission Plan. The updated analysis in this supplemental report will be considered as a supplement to the ISO’s 2013-2014 Transmission Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative V2.0
    Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative v2.0 Brian Turner RETI 2.0 Project Director California Natural Resources Agency Western Regional Partnership June 9, 2016 California Public California Energy Utilities Commission Commission 1 Agenda 1. RETI 2.0 Background 2. Planning Goals summary 3. Resource Values summary 4. Focus Areas summary 5. Current Activities California Public California Energy Utilities Commission Commission 2 RETI 2.0 Background California Public California Energy Utilities Commission Commission 3 Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative v2.0 • Cooperative project of four state and one federal agency • Statewide, non-regulatory planning effort to help meet statewide GHG and renewable energy goals. • Explore combinations of renewable generation resources in California and throughout the West that can best meet goals • Build understanding of transmission implications of renewable scenarios, and identify common transmission elements • Identify land use and environmental opportunities and constraints to accessing these resources • Accelerated, agency-driven, high-level assessment to inform future planning and regulatory proceedings California Public California Energy Utilities Commission Commission 4 RETI 2.0 Policy Context Executive Order B-30-15 • Established 40% GHG reduction goal by 2030 • Mandates state agencies to pursue with all statutory authority • New California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan SB 350 • CPUC and CEC increase Renewable Requirements from 33% by 2020 to 50% by 2030 • Require resource optimization
    [Show full text]
  • 6 Analysis of Blm's Solar Energy Development
    1 6 ANALYSIS OF BLM’S SOLAR ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES 2 3 4 Through this programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS), the U.S. Department 5 of the Interior (DOI) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is evaluating three alternatives for 6 managing utility-scale solar energy development on BLM-administered lands in the six-state 7 study area. These alternatives, which are described in Section 2.2, include two action 8 alternatives—a solar energy development program alternative and a solar energy zone (SEZ) 9 program alternative—and a no action alternative. 10 11 Under the action alternatives, the BLM would establish a new Solar Energy Program 12 to replace certain elements of its existing Solar Energy Policies (BLM 2007, 2010a,b; 13 see Appendix A, Section A.1).1 The action alternatives identify lands that would be excluded 14 from utility-scale solar energy development and, on the basis of those exclusions, the lands that 15 would be available for solar right-of-way (ROW) application.2 Both action alternatives also 16 identify SEZs where the agency would prioritize solar energy and associated transmission 17 infrastructure development. Final SEZs would be identified in the Record of Decision (ROD) for 18 the Solar Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). Under the solar energy 19 development program alternative, the SEZs would constitute a subset of the total lands available 20 (i.e., applications would be accepted within the SEZs and on specific lands outside the SEZs). 21 Under the SEZ program alternative, applications would only be accepted within the SEZs, and 22 no additional lands would be available outside the SEZs.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Ten-Year Transmission Assessment
    Los Angeles Department of Water & Power 2010 Ten-Year Transmission Assessment November 2010 Transmission Planning & Studies Power System Planning & Development Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................5 METHODOLOGY ...............................................................................................7 WECC REFERENCE CASE. .......................................................................................................... 7 Table 2. POWER FLOWS ALONG MAJOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TRANSMISSION CORRIDORS IN THE REFERENCE CASE .......................................................................... 7 ANALYSIS. ................................................................................................................................... 8 CRITERIA..................................................................................................................................... 8 ASSUMPTIONS ...............................................................................................10 LADWP LOADS. ........................................................................................................................ 10 Table 3. COMPARISON OF 1-IN-10 SYSTEM LOADS (MW) ........................................... 10 Table 4. RECEIVING STATION (RS) PEAK LOADS (MW) ............................................... 11 INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
    [Show full text]