DOCSLIB.ORG

Transmission Path

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transmission Path Energy Gateway GtGateway W est tP Proj ect Gateway South Project Technical Study Leads: Idaho Power (Gateway West) and PacifiCorp (Gateway South) WECC Phase 2 Study Group Technical Review Meeting September 29, 2010 SltLkSalt Lake CitUthCity, Utah Standards of Conduct Non-Disclosure Statement The following procedures have been implemented to provide Standards of Conduct Safeguards: Ten dayypg advance notice of public meeting All eligible customers invited Telephone participation provided Han dou ts pos te d on OASIS pr ior to mee ting Meeting notes will be taken and posted One eligible customer must be in attendance Meetings no more than twice per month Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 2 Our agenda for today… 1. Welcome & Introductions 2. Purpose of Meeting 3. Energy Gateway Stage 1 – Overview 4. Gateway South Study Group Reports a. Aeolus South b. Mona/Clover South 5. Gateway West Study Group Reports a. Windstar b. Bridger c. Southern Idaho 6. Feedback From Study Group Participants 7. Next Steps 8. Adjourn Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 3 Energy Gateway - Phase 2 Study Group Technical Review Meeting 1. Welcome & Introductions Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 4 Energy Gateway - Phase 2 Study Group Technical Review Meeting 2. Meeting Purpose We want to assure that all participants are up-to- date concerning study efforts by: Providing a short overview of progress on the Energy Gateway Phase 2 rating studies. Current focus: Gatewayyg Stage 1 facilities Present most recent study findings, and Receive feedback from study participants Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 5 Energy Gateway - Phase 2 Study Group Technical Review Meeting 3. Gateway Stage 1 - Overview Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 6 Energy Gateway – Stage 1, Facilities Stage 1 Gateway Changes ¾The DJ-Difficulty- Aeolus 230 kV line will be rebuilt (1-1272 ACSR/phase to 2/1272 ACSR/phase). ¾Due to delays in load growth in southern Wyoming, the Anticline – Creston – Aeolus 230 kV line will be eliminated. ¾Bridger 500 kV substation was renamed Anticline 500 kV (located ~5 miles from Bridger 345 kV) ¾Mona 500 kV substation was renamed Clover 500 kV (located ~3 miles from Mona 345 kV) Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 7 Energy Gateway – Stage 1, In-Service Dates Gateway West ¾Populus to Windstar 500 kV and 230 kV Facilities (2014-16) ¾Populus – Cedar Hill – Hemingway 500 kV (2016) ¾Populus – Borah – Midpoint 500 kV (2016) Gateway South ¾Pinto - Huntington 345 kV Series Comp (2010) ¾Red Butte 345 kV SVS (2011) ¾Clover 345/138 kV Substation (2012) ¾Sigur d – Re d Bu tte 345 kV #2 (2014) ¾Aeolus – Clover 500 kV #1 (2017-19) Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 8 Energy Gateway Project Overview Energy Gateway – Stage 1 Simultaneous Path Analysis Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 9 Gateway Phase 2 Rating Studies Paths and Path Simultaneous Interactions Projects: Gateway West Gateway South Aeolus Study Area: So. Idaho Bridger Windstar So. Mona South Bridger West Path Rating Paths Ratings Under (Path 37) 37) (Path est (Path 19) a South South a Path 20) SB est (Path 17) Path 20) NB West (Path (Path West us South South us oint West West oint Consideration: MWUpgrade lus West AA 35) C (Path (( (( rr ll nn WW 00 pp WW •As part of the Bridger Mo Aeo Aeo Mid TOT 4 TOT 2 Bridge Path CPath Path C Path Borah Borah 19), 240 19), Simultaneous Interaction Bridger West path rating studies, Path # Path Transfer Limits COI (Path 66) 66 4800 N-S 3675 S-N ● ● ● the pre-Gateway rating for PDCI (Path 65) 65 3100 N-S 3100 S-N ● ● ● Idaho - Northwest (Path 14) 14 2400 E-W 1200 W-E ● Boardman - Hemingway New 1400 E-W 1300 W-E ● the path will be increased Midpoint - Summer Lake (Path 75) 75 1500 E-W 550 W-E ● Path C (Path 20) *NEW* 20 2250 N-S 2250 S-N ● ● ● from 2200 MW to 2400 Idaho - Sierra (Path 16) 16 500 N-S 360 S-N ● ● ● SWIP (Great Basin - North, EnTP) New 2000/3100 N-S 2000/2000 S-N ● ● ● ● ● MISTI Group MW, and documented in MISTI Project New 1500 N-S TBD ● ● ● ● ● Montana - Idaho (Path 18) 18 337 N-S 256 S-N ● ● ● ● ● the Study Group Technical Montana - Northwest (Path 8) 8 2200 E-W 1350 W-E ● Montana Southeast (Path 80) 80 600 N-S 600 S-N ● Report. Yellowtail South Non Rated 625 N-S Not Defined ● TOT 4B (Path 38) 38 829 E-W Not Defined ● TOT 3 (Path 36) 36 1830 N-S Not Defined ● •The Gateway West TOT 3 + 900 N- Wyygoming - Colorado Intertie New S Not Defined ● Project will use this level of PAC RS/FH West (PAC Internal) Internal 640 E-W Not Defined ● ● ● PAC transfers as the benchmark Monument – Naughton (PAC Internal) Internal 475* E-W Not Defined ● ● ● Bridger West (Path 19) 19 4096 E-W Not Defined ● ● ● for the Bridger/Anticline Aeolus West New 2672 E-W Not Defined ● TOT 1A (Path 30) 30 650 E-W Not Defined ● ● ● Aeolus South New 1700 N-S Not Defined ● ● ● West path rating. Bonanza West (Path 33) 33 785 E-W Not Defined ● ● ● ● ● IPP DC Line, 2400 MW (Path 27) 27 2400 NE-SW 1400 SW-NE ● ● ● Intermountain-Gonder (()Path 29) 29 200 E-W Not Defined ● ● ● Intermountain-Mona (Path 28) 28 1200 E-W 1400 W-E ● ● ● Pvnt-Gndr, Intrmtn - Gndr (Path 32) 32 400 E-W 235 W-E ● ● ● TOT 2A (Path 31) 31 690 N-S Not Defined ● TOT 2B1 (Path 78) 78 560 N-S 600 S-N ● TOT 2B2 (Path 79) 79 265 N-S 300 S-N ● TOT 2C (Path 35) 35 300 N-S 300 S-N ● Centennial Project (Path 81) 81 3000 HA export Not Defined ● East of Colorado River (Path 49) 49 9255 E-W Not Defined STG2 Crystal PST Interaction STG2 Eldorado Valley breaker duty interaction STG2 Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 10 Energy Gateway - Phase 2 Study Group Technical Review Meeting 4. GtGateway Sou thStdth Study G roup R eport s Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 11 Gateway South Study Group Reports a. Aeolus South Study Group [PAC] Aeolus South b. Mona/Clover South Study Group [PAC] M/ClSthMona/Clover South TOT 2C Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 12 Gateway South Study Group a. Aeolus South Transmission Path Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 13 Aeolus South Transmission Path Base case - 2019 Heavy Summer Base case comments finalized March 30, 2010. Study Configuration – Stage 1 All Gateway South Facilities modeled in Base Case; however, key facilities are: Aeolus – Windstar 230 kV #1 & #2 lines in separate corridors Rebuild of the Dave Johnston – Difficulty – Shirley Basin – Aeolus 230 kV (2-1272 ACSR) Aeolus – Clover 500 kV line with series compensation Aeolus 500/230 kV #1, #2 and #3 autotransformers (1500 MVA) Clover 500/345 kV #1 and #2 autotransformers (1500 MVA) Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 14 Aeolus South Transmission Path Summary of Case Flows erm tn tt In ‐ Gonder Mo na ‐ ‐ West Go nd er/ Gon der West Line ‐ South DC Basin TOT1A Pavant Intermountain Intermountain IPP Bridger Bonanza PDCI COI Idaho ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ West South Great 30 32 29 28 27 19 33 65 66 16 ‐ Case Path Path Path Path Path Aeolus Aeolus Path Path Path Path SWIP Path 500‐n2s 2400 NE‐SW, 1200‐e2 w 440‐e2 w 1‐2000, Maximum Rati n gs (MW) 360‐s2n 4096 1400 SW‐NE 1400‐w2e 200 650 235‐w2e 785 3100 4800 2‐3100 TBD 1700 Path 16 ‐Idaho South (n2s) ‐500 3759 1272 ‐60 182 545 286 627 2996 2714 NA 2276 1700 Path 16 ‐Idaho South (s2n) 360 3719 1704 ‐272 ‐100 644 ‐201 693 2996 736 NA 2380 1700 Path 19 ‐Bridger West, 15 00‐4100 ‐100 4096 1022 290 91 356 129 485 2996 3196 NA 2672 1500 Path 19 ‐Bridger West, 17 00‐4055 ‐158 4055 1321 18 66 561 70 663 2996 2536 NA 2628 1700 Path 27 ‐IPP DC Line, (NE‐SW) ‐172 3722 2400 ‐382 47 595 56 668 2996 2599 NA 2216 1700 Path 27 ‐IPP DC Line, (SW‐NE), 14 15‐1400 115 3060 ‐1400 1399 152 431 164 590 ‐2000 ‐2314 NA 2103 1415 Path 27 ‐IPP DC Line, (SW‐NE), 17 00‐600 ‐178 2956 ‐600 419 169 632 239 777 ‐2000 ‐2696 NA 2140 1700 Path 28 ‐Intermountain‐Mo na (e2w) ‐497 3391 1842 ‐1200 152 598 327 651 2996 3073 NA 2291 1700 Path 28 ‐Intermountain‐Mo na (w2e) ‐122 3902 387 1400 125 630 107 676 2996 2712 NA 2387 1700 Path 29 ‐Intermountain‐Gonder ‐492 3774 1272 189 200 600 338 649 2996 3032 NA 2447 1700 Path 30 ‐TOT1A ‐161 3589 1272 66 66 650 67 546 2996 2705 NA 2348 1700 Path 32 ‐Pavant‐Gonder/Gonder‐Intermtn (e2w) ‐474 3706 1200 ‐364 234 492 440 547 2996 3154 NA 2218 1700 Path 32 ‐Pavant‐Gonder/Gonder‐Intermtn (w2e) 275 3671 1438 ‐439 ‐118 650 ‐235 713 2996 2500 NA 2344 1700 Path 33 ‐Bonanza West ‐205 3345 1825 ‐250 30 628 22 785 2996 2959 NA 2280 1700 Path 65 ‐PDCI (n2s) ‐164 3707 1694 ‐342 51 621 63 679 3100 2311 NA 2194 1700 Path 65 ‐PDCI (s2n) 6 2994 2210 ‐362 57 746 67 580 ‐3100 ‐1181 NA 2107 1700 Path 66 ‐COI (n2s) ‐341 3268 1620 ‐292 76 410 97 539 2996 4800 NA 1801 1700 Path 66 ‐COI (s2n) 26 2891 2200 ‐355 60 649 86 777 ‐2000 ‐3675 NA 2017 1700 Aeolus West, 15 00‐2 672 ‐100 4096 1022 290 91 356 129 485 2996 3196 NA 2672 1500 Aeolus West, 17 00‐2 628 ‐158 4055 1321 18 66 561 70 663 2996 2536 NA 2628 1700 Sensitivity Cases SWIP (Great Basin ‐ North, South) (2000 N‐S) ‐497 3878 1178 11 202 457 345 563 2996 4797 2000 2428 1700 SWIP (Great Basin ‐ North, 2South) (3 100 N‐S) ‐378 3873 1120 67 202 440 343 550 2996 4786 3100 2430 1700 SWIP (Great Basin ‐ North, South) (2000 S‐N) 354 2887 2200 ‐129 ‐172 601 ‐345 733 ‐2000 ‐3673 ‐2000 1969 1700 SWIP (Great Basin ‐ North, 2South) (2 000 S‐N) Energy Gateway Project - Phase 2 Technical Studies 15 Aeolus South Transmission Path Loss of the Anticline-Populus 500 kV line results in the Bridger – Three Mile Knoll 345 kV line to exceed its thermal limit for several of the simultaneous cases.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • 2019 Transmission Plan
    BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION OPEN ACCESS TRANSMISSION TARIFF – ATTACHMENT K TRANSMISSION PLAN Prepared by Transmission Planning December 2019 2019 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................................. 6 2. Transmission Services ........................................................................................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Transmission Business Model .................................................................................................................................................. 8 2.2 Planning & Asset Management Organization ................................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Attachment K Planning Process ........................................................................................................................................... 9 2.4 FERC Order 845 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 9 3. Transmission Planning Activities ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 3.1 Area Planning and System Assessment ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • FOIA #BPA-2019-00411-F Nathan Sandvig 205 SE Spokane Street
    Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration P.O. Box 3621 Portland, Oregon 97208-3621 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT PROGRAM October 21, 2019 In reply refer to: FOIA #BPA-2019-00411-F Nathan Sandvig 205 SE Spokane Street, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97202 Email: [email protected] Dear Mr. Sandvig, This communication is the Bonneville Power Administration’s (BPA) final response to your request for agency records made under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (FOIA). Your request was received on January 31, 2019, with a formal acknowledgement letter sent to you on February 12, 2019. Request “1. Contracts between the Bonneville Power Administration and PacifiCorp regarding construction and commercial use of PacifiCorp's Midpoint to Meridian transmission line. 2. Contracts between the Bonneville Power Administration and PacifiCorp and any other entity regarding operation and use of the Malin Substation.” Response BPA conducted a search of the electronic records in the Transmission Account Services office. That office located 95 pages of records responsive to your request. BPA is herein releasing all pages, with no redactions. Fees There are no fees associated with the response to your FOIA request. Certification Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 1004.7(b)(2), I am the individual responsible for the search, determination, and records release described above. Your FOIA request BPA-2019-00411-F is now closed with all available agency records provided. Appeal The adequacy of the search may be appealed within 90 calendar days from your receipt of this letter pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 1004.8.
    [Show full text]
  • Presentation by Steve Metague, PGE.Pdf
    Steve Metague Sr. Director, Project Development Pacific Gas & Electric Co. 2012 National Electric Transmission Congestion Study Western Regional Workshop December 13, 2011 – Portland, Oregon California Transmission Planning Group (CTPG) • CTPG is a voluntary organization comprised of all the entities within California responsible for transmission planning: - California Independent System Operator (ISO) - Imperial Irrigation District (IID) - Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) - Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) - Southern California Edison (SCE) - Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA) - San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) - Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) - Transmission Agency of Northern California (TANC) - Turlock Irrigation District (TID) - Western Area Power Administration (Western) • CTPG’s role is to coordinate transmission planning studies and produce a statewide transmission plan in support of 33% RPS - CTPG does not have project approval authority • CTPG study process is open and transparent: - Assumptions, methods, and results are documented and publicly available (http://www.ctpg.us/public/index.php) 2010 CTPG Statewide Transmission Plan High and Medium Potential Transmission Upgrades and Corridors California Oregon Intertie – Path 66 Update • In 2010 and 2011 Pacific Intertie owners undertook a joint study to explore opportunities to: - Increase utilization of the existing AC Pacific Intertie - Expand the intertie by up to 2,000 MW using existing corridors. • Key Findings: - There is not space on the existing intertie to support firm delivery of new renewable PPA energy to California - The cost of a brown field expansion of the Intertie from Mid C to the greater S.F. Bay Area (approx. 700 miles) is $4 billion + - There does not appear to be sufficient commercial interest at this time to justify significant expansion of the Intertie • The California Oregon Intertie Utilization Report and the PNW-CA feasibility report can be found in the General Information folder at: http://www.oatioasis.com/wasn/index.html.
    [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]
  • Visio-CA EHV Transmision System W Congestion Points 06 09 06.Vsd
    Meridian (Path 25) Captain Jack Malin (Path 66) Celilo Weed Junction Crag View (Path 65) Shasta (Path 76) Round Cascade Hilltop Keswick Mountain +500 kV DC PIT River 500 kV 345 kV Cottonwood (Hydro) Olinda 230 kV & lower (1 of more lines) Hyatt (CDWR) Table Nuclear Generation Cottonwood 230/60 kV Mountain Generation Transformer Substation Feather River (WAPA) (Hydro) WECC Transfer Path Maxwell Table Mtn to Bordertown High Congestion Vaca-Dixon Tesla 500/230 kV Medium Congestion Geysers Drum Valley Road Transformer Vaca (Path 24) Dixon Summit Pittsburgh Tracy Drum-Rio Oso Contra 115 kV Line Costa Bellota Ravenswood Newark Tesla Potrero San Luis Big Creek (Hydro) Tesla-Ravenswood & Los Newark-Ravenswood Metcalf LDWP Gorge 230 kV Lines Banos Helms SPP Silver Peak Moss Gregg (Path 52) Landing Kings River Inyo Control (Path 27) Panoche Intermountain (Path 60) Haiwee McCall Colorado Hoover (Path 15) Inyokern River USF Path 21 (Path 49) Kramer (Path 64) (Path 63)Mead East of River Morro Bay Gates Midway Market Place Perkins Victorville (Path 58) Magunden Liberty Diablo Adelanto McCullough Crystal (Path 26) Canyon Antelope (Path 61) Pisgah Cima Navajo Vincent Moenkopi Mandalay Eldorado Sylmar Lugo Palo Verde Ormond Beach Pardee (Path 41) Mohave Toluca Chino Mira Loma Castaic Rinaldi West of Hassayampa Aqueduct Devers Devers Eagle Mtn (Path 59) North Gila Huntington Santiago (Path 42) Blythe Beach (Path 43) Note: Also part Serrano Valley Mirage of Path 46 Coachella West of River SONGS IID (Path 46) Talega El Centro (Path 44) El Centro Escondido 230/161 kV Imperial Valley Encina Mission Transformer 500/230 kV Southbay Imperial Transformer Colorado Miguel River Valley Miguel USA Imports (Path 45) MEXICO Termoelectrica De Mexicali CFE CFE CFE ISO CA EHV Transmission Map 500/230 kV with Congestion Points Central Original Author- Mike Starr Tijuana La Rosita Ciclo Updated: M.Lien 6/09/06 La Rosita II Combinado Mexicali.
    [Show full text]
  • Transmission Capability and Requirements Report
    DOCKETED Docket Number: 15-RETI-02 Project Title: Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative 2.0 TN #: 214168 Document Title: Transmission Capability and Requirements Report Description: Final Report, RETI 2.0 Transmission Technical Input Group Filer: Misa Milliron Organization: California Energy Commission Submitter Role: Commission Staff Submission Date: 10/25/2016 9:16:46 AM Docketed Date: 10/25/2016 Transmission Capability and Requirements Report Transmission Technical Input Group Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative 2.0 October 24, 2016 FINAL REPORT Final Transmission Capability and Requirements Report Acknowledgements The RETI 2.0 Plenary Committee would like to thank the Transmission Technical Input Group members and supporters for providing their expertise to develop this report. Special thanks to: California Natural Resource Agency California ISO Imperial Irrigation District Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Modesto Irrigation District Pacific Gas & Electric Sempra Energy Southern California Edison Transmission Agency of Northern California Turlock Irrigation District Western Area Power Administration Transmission Technical Input Group ii October 24, 2016 Final Transmission Capability and Requirements Report Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary 1 1.1. Transmission Assessment Focus Areas 1 1.2. TAFA Existing and New Transmission Requirements 2 1.3. Shared Transmission Constraints 4 1.4. Intertie Capability 4 2. Introduction 6 2.1. Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative Overview 6 2.2. TTIG Goals and Organization 7 2.3. Transmission Assessment Focus Areas 7 2.4. Methodology on Data and Cost Information 9 2.5. Issues Impacting Transmission Assessment 10 2.5.1. Deliverable and Energy-Only Resources 10 2.5.2. Out of State Transmission Capacity and Energy Delivery 11 2.5.3.
    [Show full text]
  • (D0260614).Docx
    ECONOMIC PLANNING STUDY REQUEST OF THE OWNER’S COORDINATED OPERATION AGREEMENT PARTIES The Owner’s Coordinated Operation Agreement (OCOA) Parties (Parties) appreciate the opportunity to submit this Economic Planning Study Request. The OCOA is an agreement among the Western Area Power Administration (Western), the Transmission Agency of Northern California (TANC), Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), and PacifiCorp (collectively, the Parties). The OCOA governs the coordinated operation of the California- Oregon Transmission Project (COTP) and the Pacific AC Intertie (PACI). The OCOA Parties have previously selected the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) to serve as the Path Operator for the California-Oregon Intertie (COI)/Path 66. The enabling agreement between the CAISO and the OCOA Parties is the Path Operator Agreement. Requested Study for Path 66 The Parties are submitting this Economic Study Request for the COI/Path 66 to be performed as part of the 2016-17 Transmission Planning Process, pursuant to the CAISO Tariff Section 24.3.3.d and Section 3.2.2.1 of the CAISO Business Planning Manual for the Transmission Planning Process. Path 66 consists of the combined COTP and PACI facilities, which provide 4,800 MW of import capability from the Pacific Northwest into California (north-south) and 3,750 MW of export capability from California to the Pacific Northwest (south-north). There are several facilities (both north and south of the border) that impact the operating characteristics and import/export capability on COI. Recent economic studies performed by the CAISO indicate limited congestion on COI but these findings may be due to normative assumptions in the studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Major WECC Remedial Action Schemes (RAS) Used in Standard PRC-004-WECC-1 (Revised September 19, 2007)
    Table Major WECC Remedial Action Schemes (RAS) Used in Standard PRC-004-WECC-1 (Revised September 19, 2007) Path Name* Path RAS 1. Alberta – British PathNumber 1 Remedial actions are required to achieve the rated Columbia transfer capability. Most involve tripping tie lines for outages in the BCTC system. East to West: For high transfers, generation tripping is required north of the SOK cutplane in Alberta. 2. Northwest – British Path 3 Generator and reactive tripping in the BCTC Columbia system to protect against the impact caused by various contingencies during transfers between British Columbia and the Northwest. 3. West of Hatwai Path 6 Generator dropping (Libby, Noxon, Lancaster, Dworshak); Reactor tripping (Garrison); Tripping of Miles City DC link. 4. Montana to Northwest Path 8 Tripping Colstrip by ATR (NWMT); Switching shunt reactors at Garrison 500 kV; Tripping the back-to-back DC tie at Miles City; Tripping Libby, and Noxon generation by WM-RAS (BPA). 5. Idaho to Northwest Path 14 Generator Runback at Hells Canyon; Jim Bridger tripping for loss of Midpoint – Summer Lake 500 kV line. 6. Midway-Los Banos Path 15 CDWR and PG&E pump load dropping north of Path 15. PG&E service area load dropping north of Path 15. PG&E service area generation dropping south of Path 15. 7. Idaho Sierra Path 16 Automatic load shedding is required when the Alturas line is open for loss of the Midpoint-Humbolt 345 kV line during high Sierra system imports. 8. Bridger West Path 19 Jim Bridger tripping for delayed clearing and multi-line faults; Addition of shunt capacitors at Jim Bridger, Kinport and Goshen and series capacitor bypassing at Burns.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Impact of Wildfires on the California Electricity Grid
    ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF WILDFIRES ON THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICITY GRID A Report for: California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment Prepared By: 1 2 Larry Dale, Michael Carnall, and Max Wei , Gary Fitts , Sarah 3 Lewis McDonald 1Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 2Greenware Technologies 3Envision Geo DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, its employees, or the State of California. The Energy 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 report; nor does any party represent that the uses of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not been approved or disapproved by the California Energy Commission; nor has the California Energy Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this report. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Governor August 2018 CCCA4-CEC-2018-002 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We appreciate this opportunity to thank the many people who assisted us on this project. These include the administrative staff at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. They helped us write our proposal, manage our budget, and deal with day-to-day frustrations with tireless grace. Research staff at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory gave us much unpaid advice about the California electricity system. We would particularly like to thank Nikit Abhyankar, Guilia Gallo, Xinguang Cui, and Jeffrey Greenblatt for their help in modeling the California grid. Special mention must be given to several university and state or federal agency people on the project.
    [Show full text]