DOCSLIB.ORG

Cross-Tie 500 Kv Transmission Line

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cross-Tie 500 Kv Transmission Line Welcome to NTTG’s Quarter 1 Stakeholder Meeting To access Wi-Fi: Select “Meetings at Sheraton” from the networks Launch your internet browser Username: pdxi04 Password: pdxi04 NTTG Quarter 1 Stakeholder Meeting Portland, Oregon April 26, 2018 NTTG 2018-2019 Planning Cycle 3 NTTG Q1 Stakeholder Meeting Agenda 10:00 – 10:15 WELCOME and AGENDA REVIEW 10:15 – 11:30 QUARTER 1: TRANSMISSION PLANNING DATA SUBMISSION • NTTG Footprint Needs: Load and Resource Data • NTTG Public Policy Requirements REGIONAL TRANSMISSION PROJECTS • Energy Gateway and Antelope Project • Boardman to Hemingway 11:30 – 12:15 LUNCH BREAK 12:15 – 1:15 INTERREGIONAL TRANSMISSION PROJECTS • Cross-Tie Project • SWIP-N Project • TransWest Express Project (Invited but declined) 1:15 – 1:30 QUARTER 1: COST ALLOCATION UPDATE • Cost Allocation Requests and Status Update 4 NTTG Q1 Stakeholder Meeting Agenda (Cont’d.) QUARTER 1: OTHER DATA SUBMISSIONS 1:30 – 1:50 • Economic Congestion Studies • Public Policy Consideration Studies 1:50 – 2:00 BREAK ANCHOR DATA SET UPDATE 2:00 – 2:15 • NTTG’s use of ADS and Coordination Approach REGIONAL UPDATES • ColumbiaGrid 2:15 – 2:45 • CAISO • WestConnect 2:45 – 3:00 STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS/NEXT STEPS 3:00 ADJOURN 5 Quarter 1: Transmission Planning Data Submissions NTTG Quarter 1 Stakeholder Meeting Portland, OR April 26, 2018 Presented by: Chelsea Loomis, NTTG Planning Committee Chair Load Submissions 2026 2028 2017 Actual Summer Summer Difference Peak Load Data Load Data (MW) 2026- SUBMITTED BY: Demand Submitted in Submitted 2028 (MW) Q1 2016 in Q1 2018 (MW) (MW) Deseret G&T Included in PacifiCorp East Idaho Power 3,806 4,346 4,412 66 NorthWestern 1,803 1,992 2,027 35 PacifiCorp East Confidential 9,442 9,697 255 PacifiCorp West Confidential 3,602 3,689 87 Portland General 3,572 3,885 3,928 43 UAMPS Included in PacifiCorp East TOTAL 23,637 23,753 116 7 Resource Submissions * Preliminary Data – Subject to Change 8 Transmission Submissions Sponsor Type Projects Voltage Circuits LTP Gateway West Project 500 kV 2 Idaho Power LTP B2H Project 500 kV – 230 kV 2 MATL LTP AC-DC-AC Back to Back Conversion 600 MW 1 Northwestern None Submitted LTP Gateway Central 345 kV 2 LTP Gateway South Project 500 kV 1 PacifiCorp East LTP Gateway West Project 500 kV – 230 kV LTP Antelope Projects 345 kV 2 LTP Shirley Basin - Standpipe 230 kV 1 PacifiCorp West LTP Wallula – McNary 230 kV 1 LTP Blue Lake Project 230 kV 2 Portland General LTP Harborton Project 230 kV 5 LTP Various Local Service Projects 115 kV 16 9 New Transmission Service Submitted by MW (1) Start Date POR POD 500/200 2026 Northwest IPCo Idaho Power 250/550 2026 LaGrande BPASEID Notes: (1) - Summer/Winter 10 Interregional Transmission Projects Submitted to NTTG Termination In Service Seeking Cost Project Name Company Termination To Status Project Type From Date Allocation? Cross-Tie Transmission Robinson Sponsored TransCanyon, LLC Clover, UT Conceptual 2024 Yes Project Summit, NV Project Great Basin Robinson Sponsored SWIP-North Midpoint, ID Permitted 2021 Yes Transmission LLC Summit, NV Project TransWest Express TransWest Sponsored Rawlins, WY Boulder City, NV Conceptual 2022 No Transmission Project Express, LLC Project 11 Public Policy Requirements • Idaho Power – No RPS Requirement • NorthWestern – 15% RPS Requirement – Met • PacifiCorp – Met – California – 45% - by 1/1/2028 – Oregon - 27% by 12/31/2025 and 35% - by 12/31/2030 – Washington - 15% by 1/1/2020 – Utah – 20% by 2025 • Portland General – Oregon - 27% by 12/31/2025 and 35% - by 12/31/2030 12 Questions? 13 Regional Transmission Projects NTTG Quarter 1 Stakeholder Meeting Portland, OR April 26, 2018 Northern Tier Transmission Group Gateway and Antelope Project Updates April 26, 2018 Gateway Transmission Project 16 New Transmission Transmission Projects 1) New 140-mile, 500 kilovolt Aeolus-to-Bridger/Anticline line; including new Aeolus and Anticline substations 2) New 5-mile, 345 kilovolt Anticline-to-Jim Bridger line; including modifications at Jim Bridger substation 3) New voltage control device at Latham substation 4) New 16-mile, 230 kilovolt line from Shirley Basin to proposed Aeolus substation, with substation modifications (TB Flats I & II) 5) Reconstruction of 16-mile, 230 kilovolt Shirley Basin-Freezeout-Aeolus line, with substation modifications (Cedar Springs) 6) Reconstruction of 15-mile, 230 kilovolt Freezeout-Standpipe-Aeolus line, with substation modifications (Cedar Springs) Aeolus-to-Bridger/Anticline Line; approximately 230 kV Network Upgrades; approximately The Transmission Projects 18 Wyoming Permitting Overview • NEPA − Element of Gateway West segment D, Record of Decision November 2013 − Plan of Development and Mitigations, currently in final development • Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity − Filed June 30, 2017, Bench Order approval issued April 12, 2018 • Conditional Use Permit (Carbon County) − Planned application Spring 2018 • Wyoming Industrial Siting Permit − Planned application Summer 2018; decision expected October 2018 • Anticipated Construction award December 2018 • Construction start April 1, 2019 19 Other Gateway Segments • Segment D1 – Windstar to Aeolus − Federal record of decision issued November 2013 − In Service date 2024 at the earliest • Segments D3 – Bridger/Anticline to Populus. − Federal record of decision issued November 2013 − In service date 2024 at the earliest • Segment E – Populus to Hemingway. Two routes Populus – Cedar Hill – Hemingway and Populus – Midpoint - Hemingway − Federal record of decision issued November 2013 and supplemental record issued January 2018. − In service date 2024 at the earliest • Gateway South – Aeolus to Mona − Federal record of decision issued May 2017 − In service date 2023 at the earliest 20 Antelope • Have not received the generation interconnection request that will drive the project • Initial planning review identified the need with the proposed new generator • Design and permitting activities not started, will be driven by a signed interconnection agreement • Since 2015 UAMPS has identified this resource in the annual L&R submission to PacifiCorp • PacifiCorp has submitted this project, and anticipated transmission additions, to the Northern Tier Transmission Group (NTTG) as part of both the 2016-17 and 2018-19 biennial Regional Transmission Assessment 21 Boardman to Hemingway Project Jared Ellsworth Transmission Policy & Development, Idaho Power April 2017 Boardman to Hemingway (B2H) Project B2H Project Overview • 290 mile, 500 kV transmission line • ~1,000 MW of bi-directional capacity • ~30% on federal land • Permitting partners – PacifiCorp and Bonneville Power Administration • $1.0-$1.2 billion Background • Transmission upgrades to Pacific NW identified in 2002 IRP. • Originated in 2006 IRP • Will utilize existing resources from Northwest markets. • Presidential Priority Project B2H route alternatives considered in Community Advisory Process, 2009 Project Partners: PAC and BPA *Seasonally shaped capacity Objectives and Benefits • Customers – Serve IPC, PAC, and BPA customers (cost effectively) • Reliability - Increase reliability of bulk transmission system • Congestion - Relieve existing regional transmission constraints and increase opportunities to exchange energy between regions • Flexibility – Future system operations (i.e. EIM, coal plant retirements) • Environment – integrate and move regional renewable resources. Alternative to constructing carbon emitting resources Existing Transmission Constraints Idaho-Northwest Transmission Path Available Capacity (Import) = 0 MW Looking Ahead • BLM led NEPA process – ROD in 2017 • Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council (EFSC) process – Site Certificate expected in 2020 timeframe • Preliminary Construction Activities including right-of-way acquisition (3-4 years) • Construction (3-4 years) • In-service: 2024 or later Questions? LUNCH BREAK Interregional Transmission Projects NTTG Quarter 1 Stakeholder Meeting Portland, OR April 26, 2018 Cross-Tie 500 kV Transmission Line NTTG Stakeholder Meeting Portland April 26, 2018 Presentation Topics • TransCanyon Overview • Cross-Tie 500kV Transmission Line Overview • Project Benefits • Project Timeline • Permitting Activities • WECC Rating Process • Inter-regional Transmission Project Analysis by Regional Planning Groups • Cross-Tie Next Steps 34 Who We Are TransCanyon is an independent developer of electric transmission infrastructure for the western United States • Independent well-positioned to drive creative solutions • Leverage the combined energy expertise and financial strength of Berkshire Hathaway Energy and Pinnacle West • Focused on all phases – development through ongoing operation • Long-term stewards of the environment • Value collaboration to achieve success • Strategic alliance with PG&E on CAISO competitive projects 35 Deep Experience in the West Our team builds on the skills, resources and experience of its parent companies and utility affiliates across the western United States 1.2 million 1.8 million customers in 1.3 million customers in AZ CA, OR, UT, WA and WY customers in NV 27 Professionals Led by 4 Board Members and 3 Key Officers Board Members Key Officers Mark Schiavoni Bright Canyon Energy Jason Smith Bright Canyon Energy John Cupparo BHE U.S. Transmission JASON SMITH BOB SMITH TODD JENSEN President Vice President, Vice President, Doug Kusyk Transmission Project Delivery BHE U.S. Transmission Planning & Development 36 Cross-Tie Project Overview • 213-mile, 500kV AC transmission line from central UT to east-central
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2006 Annual Report on Market Issues and Performance
    Annual Report Market Issues and Performance 2006 Department of Market Monitoring California Independent System Operator Department of Market Monitoring – California ISO April 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 1 Overview................................................................................................................................................... 1 Total Wholesale Energy and Ancillary Service Costs ..............................................................................3 Market Rule Changes ............................................................................................................................... 4 Increase in Bid Cap for Energy and Ancillary Services........................................................................ 4 Enforcement of Amendment 72 – Load Scheduling Requirement....................................................... 5 System Resource Adequacy Requirements ........................................................................................ 6 Reliability Capacity Service Tariff (RCST) ........................................................................................... 7 Long-term Procurement Plans ............................................................................................................. 9 General Market Conditions..................................................................................................................... 10 Demand
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Planning Study Central California Clean Energy Transmission Project
    Preliminary Planning Study Central California Clean Energy Transmission Project Study Plan Version 1.2 February 29, 2008 Stakeholder Group Study 1 Table of Contents Study Objective...................................................................................................................3 Potential Alternatives ..........................................................................................................3 Alt-1: Status Quo.............................................................................................................3 Alt-2: Central California Clean Transmission Project (C3ETP).....................................3 Alt-3: Same as Alt-2, except building a Midway – E2 Single Circuit Tower Line (SCTL) ............................................................................................................................5 Alt-4: Build a Whirlwind – San Joaquin - E2 500 kV DCTL.........................................5 Alt-5: Build a Midway – E2 230 kV DCTL...................................................................5 Alt-6: Build a new PG&E and SCE Big Creek 230 kV Tie............................................6 Alt-7: Build a Midway – McCall – E2 230 kV DCTL....................................................6 Alt-8: Build a Gates – Gregg 230 kV DCTL ..................................................................6 Alt-9: Raisin City Switching Station...............................................................................7 Alt-10: New Generation..................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of High-Temperature Superconducting Power Technologies on Reliability, Power Transfer Capacity, and Energy Use
    STRENGTHENING THE GRID Effect of High-Temperature Superconducting Power Technologies on Reliability, Power Transfer Capacity, and Energy Use Richard Silberglitt Emile Ettedgui Anders Hove Science and Technology Policy Institute R Prepared for the Department of Energy The research described in this report was conducted by RAND’s Science and Technology Policy Institute for the Department of Energy under contract ENG- 9812731. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Silberglitt, R. S. (Richard S.) Strengthening the grid : effect of high temperature superconducting (HTS) power technologies on reliability, power transfer capacity, and energy use / Richard Silberglitt, Emile Ettedgui, and Anders Hove. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. “MR-1531.” ISBN 0-8330-3173-2 1. Electric power systems—Materials. 2. Electric power systems—Reliability. 3. High temperature superconductors. I. Ettedgui, Emile. II. Hove, Anders. III.Title. TK1005 .S496 2002 621.31—dc21 2002021398 RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND® is a registered trademark. RAND’s pub- lications do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of its research sponsors. Cover illustration by Stephen Bloodsworth © Copyright 2002 RAND All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from RAND. Published 2002 by RAND 1700 Main Street,
    [Show full text]
  • FIGURE 4.2.4 Midway-Tehachapi 500 Kv Transmission Line
    Development Plan for the Phased Expansion of Electric Power Transmission Facilities in the Tehachapi Wind Resource Area Second Report of the Tehachapi Collaborative Study Group California Public Utilities Commission OII 05-09-005 OII 00-11-001 April 19, 2006 The report was re-printed in 2 volumes or electronic files on May 17, 2006: Volume 1 contains the Second Report; Volume 2 contains all Appendices Second Report of the Tehachapi Collaborative Study Group TABLE OF CONTENTS GLOSSARY........................................................................................................................7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................8 CHAPTER 1 ‐ INTRODUCTION .................................................................................16 1.1 Background.......................................................................................................... 16 1.2 The Tehachapi Collaborative Study Group (TCSG) ...................................... 16 1.3 The March 16, 2005 Report ................................................................................ 16 1.4 Start of Second TCSG Study.............................................................................. 17 1.5 Study Plan # 2 ..................................................................................................... 18 CHAPTER 2 ‐ PROCESS TO EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES...................................19 2.1 Introduction........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 ENDTF Reliability Assessment Report
    System Resilience Under Extreme Natural Disaster January 8, 2020 System Resilience Under Extreme Natural Disaster Executive Summary The purpose of this assessment is to evaluate the impact of an extreme natural disaster on the reliability of the Bulk Electric System (BES) in the Western Interconnection (WI). Given that the WI experiences extreme disasters somewhat regularly, such as yearly wild fires and occasional extreme earthquakes, this assessment is designed to identify challenges to the resilience of the WI and to help transmission providers plan accordingly. The scope of this assessment includes studying the impact on WI system adequacy and system stability within a Year 10 future in an Extreme Event caused by California wild fires. This case study was inspired by California’s Tucker Wild Fire in July 2019. The assessment used WECC’s 2028 Anchor Data Set (ADS) planning cases to model a Production Cost Model (PCM) analysis using ABB’s GridView software and a Power Flow (PF) Model analysis using GE’s PSLF software. To identify a highly stressed system condition, the assessment started with the ADS 2028 PCM Phase 1 V2.2, and identified August 7, 2028, Hour 20 (08/07/2018 Hr. 20) as the hour when Path 66 (COI) and Path 65 (PDCI) were most heavily loaded, and the danger of fire was highest. The generation dispatch and load for the 08/07/2028 Hr. 20 were extracted from the 2028 ADS PCM Phase 1 V2.2 and used as input for the 2028 Heavy Summer 1 base case to create a PF case for the assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • Expected Path 26 Power Flows Under High Load Conditions
    DOCKET 11-IEP-1D DATE DRAFT STAFF PAPER RECD. APR 06 2011 EXPECTED PATH 26 POWER FLOWS UNDER HIGH LOAD CONDITIONS Lynn Marshall, Marc Pryor, David Vidaver Electricity Analysis Office Electricity Supply Assessment Division California Energy Commission DISCLAIMER This paper was prepared by a member of the staff of the California Energy Commission. As such, it does not necessarily represent the MARCH 2011 views of the Energy Commission or the State of California. The Energy CEC‐200‐2011‐003‐SD Commission, the State of California, its employees, contractors, and subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this paper; nor does any party represent that the uses of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This paper has not been approved or disapproved by the California Energy Commission nor has the Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this paper. This paper has not been approved or disapproved by the full Commission. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This paper incorporates demand forecasts and related analysis prepared by Tom Gorin and Chris Kavalec of the California Energy Commission Demand Analysis Office. i ii ABSTRACT This paper updates a 2008 staff assessment of electricity flows over Path 26 during heat spells in the summers of 2006 – 2008. Path 26 is a major transmission artery connecting the Northern California portion of the California Independent System Operator (California ISO) Balancing Authority with Southern California. With an accepted north‐to‐south rating of 4,000 megawatts (MW) and a south‐to‐north rating of 3,000 MW, the path allows significant amounts of generation in one zone to be exported to serve load in the other.
    [Show full text]
  • Transmission Projects: at a Glance
    Transmission Projects: At A Glance Prepared by: Edison Electric Institute MARCH 2014 © 2014 by the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). All rights reserved. Published 2014. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system or method, now known or hereinafter invented or adopted, without the express prior written permission of the Edison Electric Institute. Attribution Notice and Disclaimer This work was prepared by the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). When used as a reference, attribution to EEI is requested. EEI, any member of EEI, and any person acting on their behalf (a) does not make any warranty, express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of the information, advice or recommendations contained in this work, and (b) does not assume and expressly disclaims any liability with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the use of any information, advice or recommendations contained in this work. The views and opinions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect those of EEI or any member of EEI. This material and its production, reproduction and distribution by EEI does not imply endorsement of the material. Note: The status of the projects listed in this report was current when submitted to EEI but may have since changed between the time information was initially submitted and date this report was published. Note: Further, information about projects, including their estimated in-service dates, are provided by the respective EEI member developing the project.
    [Show full text]
  • CAISO 2020/21 Transmission Plan: Stakeholder Comments
    CAISO 2020/21 Transmission Plan: Stakeholder Comments Submitted by Company Date Submitted Sandeep Arora ([email protected]) LS Power Development, 10/08/20 LLC (916) 850 5817 LS Power appreciates the opportunity to submit comments on CAISO’s 2020/21 Transmission Planning process. (1) PG&E Bulk System Reliability issues: CAISO staff presented several reliability issues for the Bulk system in the Northern California area. These issues include thermal overloads due to several P1, P2, P3, P6, P7 contingencies in the Northern CA Bulk system. For these thermal overloads, CAISO’s current recommendation is to operate within the California Oregon Intertie (COI) nomogram, which typically involves reduction in COI flow. In addition, CAISO’s study shows thermal overloads under contingency conditions in the Path 26 corridor and the current recommendation to address these overloads is adding additional generation to the existing Path 26 RAS, which will be tripped offline post contingency. While these may be effective short term operating solutions, these are not long term, robust planning solutions and are counter to the going forward demands on the grid which include the need for spare capacity, durability and flexibility. Implementing operating solutions may resolve the reliability need but the implications and effectiveness of these should be carefully assessed. For instance, reducing COI flows and/or Path 26 flows, or tripping additional generation post contingency could result in significant issues and may even be impractical to implement on capacity shortage days such as the recent load shedding events of Aug 14 & 15. COI is a major intertie path that connects CAISO to the Pacific Northwest.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Area Power Administration Sierra Nevada Region
    2011 WAPA - SNR Transmission Grid Assessment - Study Plan Western Area Power Administration Sierra Nevada Region 2011 Annual Transmission System Assessment Study Plan April 2011 For information or questions regarding this Study Plan, please contact Larry Tobias via (916) 353-4766 or email at [email protected] 2011 WAPA - SNR Transmission Grid Assessment - Study Plan CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 RESPONSIBILITIES AND OBJECTIVES .............................................................................................................. 4 RELIABILITY STANDARDS .................................................................................................................................... 5 STUDY ASSUMPTIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 8 A. BASE CASES DEVELOPED FOR TRANSMISSION SYSTEM ASSESSMENT ...................................................... 8 B. ELECTRIC DEMAND AND POWER FACTOR ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGY .......................................... 9 C. MAJOR PATH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................................ 10 D. GENERATION ASSUMPTIONS ....................................................................................................................... 11 SYSTEM ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CAISO South Regional Transmission Plan for 2006 (CSRTP-2006)
    CAISO South Regional Transmission Plan for 2006 (CSRTP-2006) PART II: Findings and Recommendation on the Tehachapi Transmission Project Prepared by: Regional Transmission – South Planning and Infrastructure Development California ISO December 29, 2006 CAISO South Regional transmission Plan for 2006 (CSRTP-2006) Report --- The Tehachapi Study --- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS The California ISO (CAISO) was asked to review and approve three proposals by the project proponents for new transmission projects in the Southern California region. The three projects are: Sunrise Powerlink / Green Path (Sun Path) Project: The project combines Sunrise Powerlink Project sponsored by San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) and Phase 2 of Green Path Project sponsored by Citizens Energy and Imperial Irrigation District (IID) connecting Imperial Valley to the San Diego area and is intended to help meet the reliability and economic needs of the ISO Controlled Grid as well as to integrate renewable resources in the Salton Sea and southern Imperial Valley areas. Tehachapi Transmission Project: This project presents the transmission network infrastructure necessary to reliably interconnect generation resources (mainly wind generation) in the Tehachapi Wind Resource Area (TWRA) and, at the same time, to provide reliability and economic value for the ISO Controlled Grid. Southern California Edison Company (SCE) has voluntarily sponsored this project pursuant to the terms of the CAISO’s Large Generator Interconnection Procedures (LGIP). The TWRA lies at the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley in the mountainous region between Bakersfield and Mohave and is California’s largest wind resource area. Lake Elsinore Advanced Pumped Storage (LEAPS) Project: This project includes a 500 kV transmission line project (LEAPS Transmission Line) that connects SCE’s transmission system with that of SDG&E and is accompanied by a 500 MW pumped storage power plant built next to Lake Elsinore itself (LEAPS Power Plant) and interconnected to the middle of the line.
    [Show full text]
  • EEI's 'Transmission Projects
    Transmission Projects: At A Glance Prepared by: Edison Electric Institute MARCH 2012 © 2012 by the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). All rights reserved. Published 2012. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system or method, now known or hereinafter invented or adopted, without the express prior written permission of the Edison Electric Institute. Attribution Notice and Disclaimer This work was prepared by the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). When used as a reference, attribution to EEI is requested. EEI, any member of EEI, and any person acting on their behalf (a) does not make any warranty, express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of the information, advice or recommendations contained in this work, and (b) does not assume and expressly disclaims any liability with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the use of any information, advice or recommendations contained in this work. The views and opinions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect those of EEI or any member of EEI. This material and its production, reproduction and distribution by EEI does not imply endorsement of the material. Note: The status of the projects listed in this report was current when submitted to EEI but may have since changed between the time information was initially submitted and date this report was published. Published by: Edison Electric Institute 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft 2018-2019 Study Plan
    2018-2019 Transmission Planning Process Unified Planning Assumptions and Study Plan February 22, 2018 DRAFT ISO Market and Infrastructure Development Division February 22, 2018 Intentionally left blank Study Plan 2018-2019 Transmission Planning Process Table of Contents 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 2 Overview of 2018-2019 Stakeholder Process Activities and Communications .. 2 2.1 Stakeholder Meetings and Market Notices ...................................... 2 2.2 Interregional Coordination ............................................................... 5 2.3 Stakeholder Comments ................................................................... 5 2.4 Availability of Information ................................................................ 5 3 Reliability Assessments .................................................................................... 7 3.1 Reliability Standards and Criteria .................................................... 7 3.1.1 NERC Reliability Standards ....................................................... 7 3.1.2 WECC Regional Criteria ............................................................ 8 3.1.3 California ISO Planning Standards ............................................ 8 3.2 Frequency of the study .................................................................... 8 3.3 Study Horizon and Years ................................................................ 8 3.4 Study Areas ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]