ITC Michigan Connecting to Our Heritage

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Welcome 2017 Partners in Business Meeting September 26, 2017 The Power of Connection 2017 Partners in Business Meeting September 26, 2017 Simon S. Whitelocke Vice President, ITC Holdings Corp., and President, ITC Michigan Connecting to Our Heritage INCEPTION Two Operating Companies TODAY • ITCTransmission - 2003 • Michigan Electric Transmission Company - 2006 Statistics • Transmission Lines: 8,700 circuit miles • Transmission Towers and Poles: 55,600 • Substations: 283 • Voltage Levels: 120kV to 345kV • Capital Investment: ~$3.5B to date • Headquarters: Novi, Michigan Improving System Reliability Modernizing and Maintaining the Transmission Grid Interconnecting Generation 2,147 MW of Connected Generation in Michigan Since 2003 Coal/Nuclear 10% Renewables Natural Gas Gas 32% Renewables Coal/Nuclear 61% ITC Today $6.5B Invested In Infrastructure Since 2003 • 4 Subsidiaries in 8 states • 15,800 Circuit miles • 90,000 Square mile service territory • 600+ Employees • Member of 4 RTOs: – MISO, SPP, PJM, NYISO • Geographically flexible business model • A Fortis company A Fortis Company • Fortis Inc. acquired ITC in 2016 • Leader in the North American regulated electric and gas utility industry • Operations in five Canadian provinces, nine U.S. states and three Caribbean countries • Established 1885 in St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador with formation of the St. John’s Electric Company Our Commitment Since Inception Deliver customer benefits: • Improve and maintain system reliability • Reduce system congestion • Expand access to competitive energy markets • Facilitate interconnection of new generation • Lower overall cost of delivered energy Michigan Economy Michigan Economy Michigan Real GDP Forecast 450 430 RGDP 50th Percentile 410 Forecast 390 Stronger Near-Term Rebound 370 Slower Near-term Recovery 350 Moderate Recession 330 310 Stagflation 290 Real GDP (Bil. Chained 2009 $, SAAR) $, 2009 Chained (Bil. GDP Real 2016 2006 2007 2008 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2017 2018 2020 2021 2022 2005 Source: BEA; BLS; Moody's Analytics ITC Strategy Build the transmission grid of the future in North America Significant need for transmission infrastructure • Interregional (tie regions together) and within regions • Robust “regulated” grid with appropriate “contracted” lines • Accommodates increase of renewable generation Canada • Most efficiently matches generation sources to load United States • Increases security, reliability, and resiliency of electric grid • Enhances affordability of electricity to consumers Mexico • Assessment of storage solutions to support transmission infrastructure Flexible, Accessible Grid Needed New Demands and Uses: Modern, interconnected grid needed to support 21st Century technology and policy developments: • Distributed generation • Demand response • Efficiency programs • Electric vehicles • Renewable energy mandates Consumer Awareness Consumers are growing more conscious of energy issues and are gaining influence over the source, cost and use of energy in their daily lives. Customer Trends Desire for higher reliability Increasing need for high-quality, uninterrupted power in homes and businesses Increasing environmental awareness Public concern for the environmental impacts of energy generation is rising * Polling results from survey conducted online by Research Now, an independent opinion research company, with a nationally representative audience of 800 U.S. adults age 18+. The precision of online polls is calculated using a credibility interval, with a poll of 800 accurate to roughly +/- 4 percentage points. *Quotation from blinded interviews with senior-level officials engaged in energy- related decisions at their organizations conducted by an independent interviewer. Underinvestment American Society Civil Engineers 2017 Infrastructure Report Card Economic Impacts of Failing to Invest in the Grid 2016-2025 2026-2040 Business Sales $1.4 trillion $2 trillion GDP $816 billion $1.1 trillion Jobs 102K fewer by 2025 242K fewer by 2040 2016-2025 2016-2040 Investment Gap $177 billion $565 billion Among all infrastructure, electricity has the second largest total funding need and the largest funding shortfall. - American Society of Civil Engineers All totals in constant 2015 value, other than jobs. Modern Grid Investment Source: EEI - Transmission Projects At a Glance, Dec. 2016 Value of Transmission • Generation production cost savings • Reliability and resource adequacy benefits • Generation capacity cost savings • Market benefits • Environmental benefits • Public policy benefits • Employment and economic development -- Brattle Group/WIRES study, 2013 INSIDE AN ELECTRIC BILL ITC Outlook Vision of the Future Grid • Changes on supply and demand sides; grid may look same, but used differently • Have older equipment, mixed with new technologies • Will incorporate newer forms of generation, more intermittent and varied; more storage • Can provide greater access to markets, price efficiencies • Should have appropriate mix of AC infrastructure, with DC where it makes sense • Should have more energy storage for capability • Should be reliable, resilient, flexible, efficient and secure Needs Drivers • Connecting consumers to renewables (unlocking renewables) • Connecting consumers to energy markets • Reducing congestion • Reliability, resiliency and security improvements Our Partners in Business ITC’s focus on transmission and grid development drives operational excellence and delivers superior value for customers, communities and other stakeholders. Next Up: • American Center for Mobility • ITC Business Updates • Networking • But first…a video! Laurel Champion Chief Operating Officer American Center for Mobility Break Grid Resiliency 2017 Partners in Business Meeting September 26, 2017 Pedro Melendez Director, Asset Protection and Performance Agenda • Risk landscape • Planning and preparedness • Responding to a risk / emergency • Industry organization and participation • Drill and assess Event Risk Categories NATURAL MAN-MADE (with intent) An event that is caused by An event caused directly and nature or natural processes of principally by one or more the earth (e.g. flooding, tornado, ice storm) identifiable deliberate human actions (e.g. bomb-threat, cyber attack, active shooter, riots) OPERATIONAL REPUTATION An event that may affect An event that could negatively business continuity and/or impact perspectives of operations including employees, stakeholders, facility/physical/technology general public, or media (e.g. infrastructure functions, supply insider trading, executive chain, logistics and workforce inappropriate activity, regulatory (e.g. electric system blackout, violations) computer failure, pandemic) National Guidelines • Allows for adoption of new approaches that will enable continuous refinement • Improves integration and connectivity among jurisdictions and disciplines • Fosters cohesion among various response organizations • A guide on how the nation conducts all-hazards response • Builds upon the National Incident Management System (NIMS) coordinating structures to align key roles and responsibilities • Links all levels of government, non-governmental organizations, and the private sector Incident Command System (ICS) • Standardized, on-scene, all-hazards incident management concept • Enables a coordinated response among various jurisdictions and agencies • Establishes common processes for planning and management of resources • Allows for integration with a common organizational structure • Can be used to manage natural, operational, human-caused or unplanned events. Public – Private Sector Coordination • ITC has implemented the use of NIMS and ICS to manage all incidents • Use of NIMS and ICS allows ITC to better coordinate with government, non-governmental organizations, and private organizations during large-scale events Emergency Plans and Facilities Emergency Action Plans • Business Continuity / Disaster Recovery • Cyber and Physical Security • Emergency Operations • Pandemic Incident Facilities • Emergency Operations Center • Security Command Center • Cyber Security Operations Center • Joint Information Center ‘Typical’ System Problems Storm Damage • Thunder and lightning • Wind • Flooding • Heavy snow and ice Physical Damage • Vehicle accidents • Tractors • Airplanes Miscellaneous • Animal interference • Flying debris ‘Typical’ System Restoration Basic system restoration steps • System reconfiguration (Reroute power through unaffected circuits) • Assess damage • Build work packages • Get parts and equipment • Isolate and repair • Return to normal service ‘New Normal’ Problems Everything ‘Typical’ plus: Cyber intrusions Remote control vehicles Terrorist attacks ??? Physical Attack (‘New Normal’ Event) Pacific Gas & Electric - Metcalf Substation • Six underground fiber optic lines cut • 17 Transformers, 6 circuit breakers, 44 radiators damaged • 52,000 gallons of oil spilled • Estimated $30M in damage • Less than one hour in the middle of the night • Attackers had knowledge of layout and locations of equipment Cyber and Physical Security Asset theft and public safety are no longer the primary issues. Now, we must prepare for forced entry, explosives, ballistic attacks, control system hacking, sabotage… The ‘new normal’ issues must be addressed through enhanced cyber and physical security: • Additional monitoring • Physical obstacles to substation access • Improved cyber security and monitoring • Exercises to test systems and responses Industry and government partnerships are critical to managing
Recommended publications
  • ITC HOLDINGS CORP. 2006 ANNUAL REPORT BUILDING on a FOUNDATION of RELIABILITY Our Business Model Is Quite Simple

    ITC HOLDINGS CORP. 2006 ANNUAL REPORT BUILDING on a FOUNDATION of RELIABILITY Our Business Model Is Quite Simple

    BUILDING ON A FOUNDATION OF RELIABILITY ITC HOLDINGS CORP. 2006 ANNUAL REPORT BUILDING ON A FOUNDATION OF RELIABILITY Our business model is quite simple. As an independent transmission company, ITC Holdings Corp. (NYSE: ITC) and its subsidiaries are singularly focused on improving the reliability of the electric transmission grid. It is the foundation on which our companies are built and our continuing motivation. STRENGTHENING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE Since beginning operations in March 2003, ITC, through our subsidiaries, has invested over $500 million toward ensuring and promoting electric reliability for our customers through capital and maintenance improvements. This ongoing investment has demonstrated results in the form of improved operations. 2006 was a shining example of our efforts. EXPANDING OUR FOOTPRINT In our fourth year of operations, we leveraged ITC’s established ability to successfully and reliably operate our transmission grid and improve electric reliability to begin exploring new opportunities to expand our footprint. 2006 was truly a year of growth for ITC. INVESTING IN THE FUTURE table of contents We have made significant progress toward improving electric reliability, but we recognize that there remains much work to be done. ITC will continue to look ahead in order to lay the 1 Financial Highlights groundwork that will allow us to continue in our mission. 2 To Our Shareholders 6 Building on a Foundation of Reliability LEADING BY EXCELLENCE 14 Management Team and ITC has led by example in our efforts to focus on and Board of Directors reinvest in transmission infrastructure. We also strive to lead 16 Corporate Information by example by being a good corporate citizen, community member, and a great place to work.
  • ER11-1844-001 System Operator, Inc

    ER11-1844-001 System Operator, Inc

    156 FERC ¶ 61,202 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Before Commissioners: Norman C. Bay, Chairman; Cheryl A. LaFleur, Tony Clark, and Colette D. Honorable. Midwest Independent Transmission Docket Nos. ER11-1844-001 System Operator, Inc. ER11-1844-002 OPINION NO. 550 ORDER ON INITIAL DECISION AND DISMISSING REHEARING AS MOOT (Issued September 22, 2016) 1. This case is before the Commission on exceptions to an Initial Decision1 issued on December 18, 2012. The Initial Decision addressed issues relating to a filing by Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (MISO)2 and International Transmission Company (ITC) (collectively, Joint Applicants) that proposed revisions to MISO’s Open Access Transmission, Energy, and Operating Reserve Markets Tariff (Tariff) to establish a methodology to recover costs of ITC’s Phase Angle Regulating Transformers (PAR) located at Bunce Creek on the Michigan-Ontario, Canada border.3 In this order, we affirm in part, and reverse in part, certain determinations of the Presiding Administrative Law Judge (Presiding Judge), and we dismiss the remaining determinations of the Presiding Judge as moot. Consistent with these conclusions, we find that Joint Applicants have not demonstrated that their proposal to allocate costs of the ITC PARs to entities outside of MISO, including to entities in the New York 1 Midwest Indep. Transmission Sys. Operator, Inc., 141 FERC ¶ 63,021 (2012) (Initial Decision). 2 Effective April 26, 2013, MISO changed its name from “Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.” to “Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.” 3 See Midwest Indep. Transmission Sys. Operator, Inc., 133 FERC ¶ 61,275 (2010) (Hearing Order).
  • Statewide Energy Assessment – Final Report ______

    Statewide Energy Assessment – Final Report ______

    Statewide Energy Assessment – Final Report ______________________________________________________________________ Michigan Statewide Energy Assessment Final Report September 11, 2019 Sally A. Talberg, Chairman Daniel C. Scripps, Commissioner Tremaine L. Phillips, Commissioner Statewide Energy Assessment – Final Report ______________________________________________________________________ Statewide Energy Assessment – Final Report ______________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. i 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Governor's Charge to MPSC ................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Scope of the Statewide Energy Assessment ................................................................................... 2 1.3 Evaluation and Recommendation ....................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Organization ............................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Michigan’s Energy System: Facing Challenges of Today and Tomorrow .......................... 4 2.1 Overview of Michigan's Energy System...........................................................................................
  • Report on Aug. '03 Blackout

    Report on Aug. '03 Blackout

    Michigan Public Service Commission Report on August 14th Blackout November 2003 Public Service Commission J. Peter Lark, Chair Robert B. Nelson, Commissioner Laura Chappelle, Commissioner TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Executive Summary ............................................................................................................1 Introduction........................................................................................................................3 Part I – Facts and Overview .............................................................................................5 1.1 Overview of the Electric Power System ......................................................5 1.2 Key Participants...........................................................................................6 1.3 Key Events from Michigan’s Perspective....................................................8 Part II – Electric Transmission ......................................................................................16 2.1 Scope of the Investigation..........................................................................16 2.2 Study Approach.........................................................................................17 2.3 Events of August 14, 2003.........................................................................18 2.4 Analysis......................................................................................................21 2.5 Conclusions and Recommendations ..........................................................32
  • 139 1 State of Michigan 2 Before the Michigan Public

    139 1 State of Michigan 2 Before the Michigan Public

    139 1 STATE OF MICHIGAN 2 BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION 3 In the matter of the application of International Transmission Company d/b/a 4 ITC Transmission, for an expedited Case No. U-16200 siting certificate for a transmission 5 line, pursuant to 2008 PA 295, Part 4, Volume 3 for Region No. 4 (Thumb Region) as 6 designated by the Michigan Wind Energy Resource Board and the Commission's 7 Order in Case No. U-15899. _____________________________________/ 8 CROSS-EXAMINATION 9 Proceedings held in the above-entitled matter 10 before Daniel E. Nickerson, Jr., J.D., Administrative 11 Law Judge with SOAHR, at the Michigan Public Service 12 Commission, 6545 Mercantile Way, Room D, Lansing, 13 Michigan, on Wednesday, December 1, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. 14 APPEARANCES : 15 ALBERT ERNST, ESQ. 16 GARY F. GORDON, ESQ. SHAUN M. JOHNSON, ESQ. 17 Dykema Gossett, PLLC Capitol View 18 201 Townsend Street, Suite 900 Lansing, Michigan 48933 19 On behalf of International Transmission Company 20 d/b/a ITC Transmission 21 ROBERT A. W. STRONG, ESQ. Clark Hill, PLC 22 151 S. Old Woodward Avenue, Suite 200 Birmingham, Michigan 48009 23 On behalf of Association of Businesses 24 Advocating Tariff Equity 25 (Continued) Metro Court Reporters, Inc. 248.426.9530 140 1 APPEARANCES Continued : 2 PETER H. ELLSWORTH, ESQ. MICHAEL J. PATTWELL, ESQ. 3 Dickinson Wright 215 S. Washington Square, Suite 200 4 Lansing, Michigan 48933 5 On behalf of Michigan Public Power Agency (MPPA) Michigan Municipal Electric Association (MMEA) 6 JON P. CHRISTINIDIS, ESQ. 7 DTE Energy One Energy Plaza, 688 WCB 8 Detroit, Michigan 48226 9 On behalf of Michigan Consolidated Gas Company and The Detroit Edison Company 10 RODGER A.
  • May 4, 2007 Mary Jo Kunkle Executive Secretary Michigan

    May 4, 2007 Mary Jo Kunkle Executive Secretary Michigan

    Dykema Gossett PLLC Capitol View 201 Townsend Street, Suite 900 Lansing, MI 48933 WWW.DYKEMA.COM Tel: (517) 374-9100 Fax: (517) 374-9191 Christine Mason Soneral Direct Dial: (517) 374-9184 Email: [email protected] May 4, 2007 Mary Jo Kunkle Executive Secretary Michigan Public Service Commission PO Box 30221 Lansing, MI 48909-7721 Re: Case No. U-15163 International Transmission Company, d/b/a ITCTransmission and Michigan Electric Transmission Company’s Report on 2007 Electric Assessment Dear Ms. Kunkle: Enclosed for paperless filing please find Report on 2007 Electric Assessment of International Transmission Company d/b/a ITCTransmission and Michigan Electric Transmission Company in the above-referenced matter. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, DYKEMA GOSSETT PLLC Christine Mason Soneral CMMA:jmb LAN01\172370.1 ID\JMBA1 CALIFORNIA | ILLINOIS | MICHIGAN | WASHINGTON D.C. STATE OF MICHIGAN BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION * * * * * In the matter, on the Commission’s own motion, ) commencing an investigation into the electric ) Case No. U-15163 supply reliability plans of Michigan’s electric ) utilities for year 2007. ) REPORT ON 2007 ELECTRIC ASSESSMENT OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSMISSION COMPANY d/b/a ITCTRANSMISSION AND MICHIGAN ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION COMPANY Introduction The Michigan Public Service Commission issued an order on January 30, 2007 in Case No. U-15163 that requires all regulated electric utilities to file 2007 electric assessment reports no later than April 13, 2007. Alternative electric suppliers and transmission- related entities also were requested to file initial and/or reply comments. As transmission-related entities, International Transmission Company, d/b/a ITCTransmission (“ITCTransmission”) and Michigan Electric Transmission Company (“METC”) (collectively, “ITC”) advised the Commission on April 13, 2007 that they intended to review the April 13, 2007 comments and file responsive comments and assessments by May 4, 2007.
  • August 21, 2019 S T a T E of M I C H I G a N BEFORE THE

    August 21, 2019 S T a T E of M I C H I G a N BEFORE THE

    S T A T E OF M I C H I G A N BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION * * * * In the matter of the Application of ) DTE ELECTRIC COMPANY for ) approval of its Integrated Resource Plan ) Case No. U-20471 pursuant to MCL 460.6t, and for other relief ) ) QUALIFICATIONS AND DIRECT TESTIMONY OF PAUL PROUDFOOT MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION August 21, 2019 QUALIFICATIONS OF PAUL PROUDFOOT CASE NUMBER U-20471 PART I 1 Q. Would you please state your name and business address for the record? 2 A. My name is Paul A. Proudfoot. My business address is 7109 West Saginaw Hwy, 3 Lansing, Michigan, 48917. 4 Q. By whom are you employed and what is your position? 5 A. I am employed by the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC or 6 Commission) as Director of the Energy Resources Division. The Energy 7 Resources Division is responsible for implementation of Michigan 2016 Public 8 Act 342 which requires electric and gas providers to meet renewable energy and 9 energy waste reduction standards and sets additional goals for providers. The 10 division is also responsible for electric reliability and planning, alternative energy 11 supplier licensing, electric generation certificate of need applications pursuant to 12 Michigan 2016 Public Act 341, and the certificate of public convenience and 13 necessity applications for transmission projects pursuant to Michigan 1995 Public 14 Act 30. 15 Q. Would you please state your educational background? 16 A. I hold a Bachelor of Science Degree from the Michigan State University School 17 of Packaging, which is within the College of Agriculture.