NEPOOL Participants Committee Boston, MA September 10, 2004

NEPOOL Participants Committee

Boston, MA

September 10, 2004

Stephen G. WhitleySenior Vice President & COO

2

• System Operations• Market Operations• Cold Snap Task Force• Winter 2004/2005 Outlook• Back-Up Detail

Agenda

3

System Operations

4

Operations Highlights• Boston & Hartford Weather Pattern:

– Temperatures were near normal with slightly above precipitation during August.• Peak load of 24,153 MW at 16:00 hours on August 30, 2004.• During August:

– NPCC Shared Activation of Reserve Events:• August 1 L/O Lake Road 708 Mw• August 4 L/O Granite Ridge 672 Mw• August 4 L/O Granite Ridge 680 Mw• August 19 L/O Bruce #6 864 Mw• August 20 L/O Mystic #9 675 Mw• August 30 L/O Nine Mile Point #1585 Mw

– Minimum Generation:• August 8, 17 and 23.

– MS #2:• August 15 Hurricane Charley• August 20 Lightning with multiple trips

– OP #4• August 20 Boston Area – Lightning with multiple trips

5

Market Operations

6

Day–Ahead & Real-Time Prices, ISO Hub:

OP4 Declared in Boston

SAT_SANDY_PD_1X_1X Constraint Binding Due to Load and Generation.

7

Day-Ahead–LMP Average by Zone & Hub:

LMP Marginal Loss Component Congestion Component

August 1, 2004 to August 30, 2004

(-11.31)

(-3.63)(0.08)

(2.99)(-2.16) (-2.85)

(0.75)(-1.55)

8

97.4%

Real-Time-LMP Average by Zone & Hub:

LMP Marginal Loss Component Congestion Component

(-11.96)

(0.25) (3.45)(-2.55) (-2.77)

(1.29) (0.07)(-3.54)

August 1, 2004 to August 30, 2004

9

Day - Ahead Market vs. Forecast Load

Day Ahead Market Demand Cleared vs. Forecast Load (%)

999998

020406080

100120

June July August

August data represents August 1-August 30

Day Ahead Market Generation Cleared vs. Forecast Load (%)

919293

0

20

40

60

80

100

June July August

August data represents August 1-August 30

10

Day - Ahead LMPAugust, 2004 DAM LMP

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

Day

$/M

Wh

INTERNAL_HUB CONNECTICUT MAINE NEMASSBOST NEWHAMPSHIRE

RHODEISLAND SEMASS VERMONT WCMASS

KENTCNTY3X TRANSFORMER CONSTRAINT BINDING DUE TO LOAD/GEN PATTERN.

CT IMPORT INTERFACE CONSTRAINED DUE TO LOAD/GENERATION PATTERN.

11

Real - Time LMPAugust, 2004 Real-Time LMP

0.00

30.00

60.00

90.00

120.00

150.00

180.00

210.00

240.00

270.00

300.00

Day

$/M

Wh

INTERNAL_HUB CONNECTICUT MAINE NEMASSBOST NEWHAMPSHIRE

RHODEISLAND SEMASS VERMONT WCMASS

MINIMUM GENERATION EMERGENCY

MINIMUM GENERATION EMERGENCY

CT IMPORT INTERFACE CONSTRAINED DUE TO LOAD/GENERATION PATTERN.

NEMASS/BOSTON INTERFACE CONSTRAINED DUE TO TRIP OF 338 LINE AND MYS9 AT 675 MW DUE TO STORM ACTIVITY. MS2 AND OP4 WAS DECLARED IN BOSTON.

NORWALK-STAMFORD INTERFACE AND CT IMPORT INTERFACE CONSTRAINED DUE TO LOAD/GENERATION PATTERN.

SAT_SANDY_PD_1X_1X CONSTRAINT BINDING DUE TO LOAD AND GENERATION.

12

Settlement Data – Real Time & Balancing MarketPercentage of Real-Time Load Fully Hedged Through ISO-NE

Settlement System

Month

% R

T L

oa

d F

ull

y H

ed

ge

d

Note: Partial Data (August 1-26, 2004)

74%

71%70% 71% 73%73%

75%75%

75%73%

71%72% 72%

70%71% 71%

70%

77%

73%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

Mar

02

- Feb

03

Avera

ge

Mar

-03

Apr-0

3

May

-03

Jun-

03

Jul-0

3

Aug-0

3

Sep-0

3

Oct-03

Nov-0

3

Dec-0

3

Jan-

04

Feb-0

4

Mar

-04

Apr-0

4

May

-04

Jun-

04

Jul-0

4

Aug-0

4

13

Cold Snap Task Force

14

Cold Snap Task Force

Three high-priority, short-term objectives targeted for implementation prior to winter 2004/2005:

1) Electric Market Synchronization with Gas Market• ISO & NEPOOL Cold Snap Task Force (CSTF) –

Finalizing proposal with NEPOOL MC2) Electric/Gas Operating Committee

• Education, Understanding, Coordination, Communications

3) Investigate True Dual Fuel Capability & Promote Expansion

• EES Group – Environmental Consultants

15

1) Electric Market Synchronization with Gas Market– Cold Snap Proposal is event driven, triggered by

extreme weather and a potential for capacity shortages.

– Two options being decided upon by NEPOOL MC

2)Electric/Gas Operating Committee:- Coordination within four areas:

• Maintenance: scheduled & unscheduled• Operations: contingencies, blackout/system

restoration• Training: common-mode & emergency drills• Planning: contingency identification & analysis

Cold Snap Task Force, Con’t.

16

3) Investigate True Dual Fuel Capability & Promote Expansion

– ESS Group = Environmental Consultants• Compilation of environmental permits• Assess dual fuel constraints & limitations• Expansion strategies & feasibility analysis• Dialogue with New England Air Regulators• Site visits will determine real barriers

4) Other ISO Activities:– Access to pipelines EBBs: OFO & nomination confirmation– New England specific natural gas supply study


17

• Timeline– Define problem & key issues - Complete– Publish Interim ISO-NE Cold Snap Report -

Complete– Prioritize issues & brainstorm solution sets -

Complete– Present proposal options to stakeholders - September – Finalize proposal & Market Rule &

procedures changes - September– Publish Final ISO-NE Cold Snap Report - September– Implement & test changes - Fall 2004


18

Winter Outlook

19

Winter 2004-05 Capacity Assessment 50/50 Forecast

December ’04 through March ’05Conditions for Week of Lowest Operable Capacity

MarginWeek beginning January 8th

MWProjected Peak (50/50) 22,370 Operating Reserve Required 1,700Total Operable Cap. Required 24,070Projected Capacity 33,820Assumed Outages 6,500Total Capacity 27,320Operable Capacity Margin 3,250

20

Winter 2004-05 Capacity

Assessment

Week Beginning, Saturday

Year Month Day

Installed Seasonal Claimed

Capability (SCC)

[Note 1]

Interchange (NYPP, NB, HQ, Highgate, Block Load)

No

te

New Generation

[Note 2]

De-listed ICAP

Resources [Note 3]

Net Capacity [Note 4]

Peak Load Exposure [Note 5]

Operating Reserve

Requirement [Note 6]

Total Known Maintenance

Allowance for Unplanned

Outages [Note 7]

Generation at Risk Due

to Gas Supply [Note

8]Total

Capacity

Operable Capacity

Margin (+/-)

Extent of OP 4 Actions That May be Necessary (OP 4

Actions up to and including) [Note 9]

(MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW)2004 September 4 30,871 410 0 950 30,330 23,666 1,700 500 2,100 0 27,730 2,360

11 30,871 410 0 950 30,330 22,387 1,700 1,100 2,100 0 27,130 3,040 18 30,871 410 0 950 30,330 22,047 1,700 2,300 2,100 0 25,930 2,180 25 30,871 410 0 950 30,330 21,962 1,700 2,300 2,100 0 25,930 2,270

2004 October 2 33,271 450 0 - 33,720 17,590 1,700 3,900 2,800 0 27,020 7,730 9 33,271 450 0 - 33,720 17,625 1,700 3,300 2,800 0 27,620 8,300 16 33,271 450 0 - 33,720 18,556 1,700 3,500 2,800 0 27,420 7,160 23 33,271 450 0 - 33,720 18,923 1,700 2,800 2,800 0 28,120 7,500 30 33,275 450 0 - 33,730 19,131 1,700 3,100 3,600 0 27,030 6,200

2004 November 6 33,275 450 100 - 33,830 19,247 1,700 1,700 3,600 0 28,530 7,580 13 33,275 450 100 - 33,830 19,594 1,700 2,800 3,600 0 27,430 6,140 20 33,275 450 100 - 33,830 20,337 1,700 900 3,600 0 29,330 7,290 27 33,275 450 100 - 33,830 21,061 1,700 200 3,600 0 30,030 7,270

2004 December 4 33,275 450 100 - 33,820 21,263 1,700 500 3,200 0 30,120 7,160 11 33,275 450 100 - 33,820 21,554 1,700 200 3,200 0 30,420 7,170 18 33,275 450 100 - 33,820 21,565 1,700 100 3,200 0 30,520 7,260 25 33,275 450 100 - 33,820 21,627 1,700 100 3,200 0 30,520 7,190

3. De-listed ICAP quantities are only known with certainty in the current month. This number is adjusted when a delisted generator is out on maintenance to avoid double counting.4. Net Capacity = (SCC) + (Interchange) + (New Generation) - (De-listed ICAP Resources). In this equation, the SCC, Interchange and De-listed ICAP values are rounded to the nearest ten

and New Generation is rounded to the nearest hundred.5. Peak Load Exposure reflects values published in the April 2004 CELT Report. 6. Operating Reserve Requirement based on the first contingency (Generator at 1160 MW) plus 1/2 the second contingency (Generator at 1155 MW).7. Allowance for Unplanned Outages includes: forced outages and maintenance outages scheduled less than 14 days in advance.8. Assumed values based on ISO-NE study. 9. Relief from certain OP 4 Actions varies, depending on system conditions.

This analysis is a tabulation of weekly assessments shown in one single table. The information shows the operable capacity situation under assumed conditions for each week. It is not expected that the system peak will occur every week during June, July and August.

ISO-NE 2004 OPERABLE CAPACITY ANALYSISSeptember 5, 2004 - WITH KNOWN EXTERNAL CONTRACTS - 50/50 FORECAST

21

Winter 2004-05 Capacity Assessment


Year Month Day


Capability (SCC)

[Note 1]


No

te

New Generation

[Note 2]

De-listed ICAP

Resources [Note 3]



Operating Reserve



Allowance for Unplanned

Outages [Note 7]

Generation at Risk Due

to Gas Supply [Note

8]Total

Capacity

Operable Capacity

Margin (+/-)

Extent of OP 4 Actions That May be Necessary (OP 4

Actions up to and including) [Note 9]

(MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW)2005 January 1 33,271 450 100 - 33,820 21,902 1,700 100 2,800 2,250 28,670 5,070

8 33,271 450 100 - 33,820 22,370 1,700 900 2,800 2,800 27,320 3,250 15 33,271 450 100 - 33,820 22,370 1,700 800 2,800 2,800 27,420 3,350 22 33,271 450 100 - 33,820 22,370 1,700 500 2,800 2,800 27,720 3,650 29 33,272 450 100 - 33,820 22,146 1,700 100 3,100 2,250 28,370 4,520

2005 February 5 33,272 450 100 - 33,820 21,878 1,700 100 3,100 2,250 28,370 4,790 12 33,272 450 100 - 33,820 21,849 1,700 100 3,100 2,250 28,370 4,820 19 33,272 450 100 - 33,820 21,585 1,700 1,000 3,100 0 29,720 6,440 26 33,277 450 100 - 33,830 20,592 1,700 800 2,200 0 30,830 8,540

2005 March 5 33,277 450 100 - 33,830 20,240 1,700 1,700 2,200 0 29,930 7,990 12 33,277 450 100 - 33,830 20,044 1,700 1,700 2,200 0 29,930 8,190 19 33,277 450 100 - 33,830 19,677 1,700 2,200 2,200 0 29,430 8,050 26 33,277 450 100 - 33,830 19,108 1,700 1,400 2,200 0 30,230 9,420

3. De-listed ICAP quantities are only known with certainty in the current month. This number is adjusted when a delisted generator is out on maintenance to avoid double counting.4. Net Capacity = (SCC) + (Interchange) + (New Generation) - (De-listed ICAP Resources). In this equation, the SCC, Interchange and De-listed ICAP values are rounded to the nearest ten

and New Generation is rounded to the nearest hundred.5. Peak Load Exposure reflects values published in the April 2004 CELT Report. 6. Operating Reserve Requirement based on the first contingency (Generator at 1160 MW) plus 1/2 the second contingency (Generator at 1155 MW).7. Allowance for Unplanned Outages includes: forced outages and maintenance outages scheduled less than 14 days in advance.8. Assumed values based on ISO-NE study. 9. Relief from certain OP 4 Actions varies, depending on system conditions.



22

Winter 2004-05 Capacity

AssessmentNEPOOL Operating Capacity Margins

WITH KNOWN EXTERNAL TRANSACTIONS - 50/50 FORECAST

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

11,000

12,000

4-S

ep

11-S

ep

18-S

ep

25-S

ep

2-O

ct

9-O

ct

16-O

ct

23-O

ct

30-O

ct

6-N

ov

13-N

ov

20-N

ov

27-N

ov

4-D

ec

11-D

ec

18-D

ec

25-D

ec

25-D

ec

1-Ja

n

8-Ja

n

15-J

an

22-J

an

29-J

an

5-F

eb

12-F

eb

19-F

eb

26-F

eb

5-M

ar

12-M

ar

19-M

ar

26-M

ar

September 2004 - March 2005, W/B Saturday

Ope

ratin

g C

apac

ity M

argi

n (M

W)

23


December ’04 through March ’05Conditions for Week of Lowest Operable Capacity Margin

Week beginning January 8th

MWProjected Peak (90/10) 23,255 Operating Reserve Required 1,700Total Operable Cap. Required 24,955Projected Capacity 33,820 Assumed Outages 7,000Total Capacity 26,820Operable Capacity Margin 1,865

An additional 2,000 MW of capacity, which was not available during the 2004 Cold Snap, is expected to be available as result of preliminary Cold Snap Initiatives.

24



Year Month Day


Capability (SCC)

[Note 1]


No

te

New Generation

[Note 2]

De-listed ICAP

Resources [Note 3]



Operating Reserve



Allowance for Unplanned Outages [Note 7]

Generation at Risk Due to Gas Supply

[Note 8]Total

Capacity

Operable Capacity

Margin (+/-)

Extent of OP 4 Actions That May be Necessary (OP 4 Actions up

to and including) [Note 9]

(MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW)2004 September 11 30,871 410 0 950 30,330 23,754 1,700 1,100 2,100 0 27,130 1,680

18 30,871 410 0 950 30,330 23,393 1,700 2,300 2,100 0 25,930 840 25 30,871 410 0 950 30,330 23,303 1,700 2,300 2,100 0 25,930 930

2004 October 2 33,271 450 0 - 33,720 18,286 1,700 3,900 2,800 0 27,020 7,030 9 33,271 450 0 - 33,720 18,324 1,700 3,300 2,800 0 27,620 7,600 16 33,271 450 0 - 33,720 19,291 1,700 3,500 2,800 0 27,420 6,430 23 33,271 450 0 - 33,720 19,673 1,700 2,800 2,800 0 28,120 6,750 30 33,275 450 0 - 33,730 19,889 1,700 3,100 3,600 0 27,030 5,440

2004 November 6 33,275 450 100 - 33,830 20,010 1,700 1,700 3,600 0 28,530 6,820 13 33,275 450 100 - 33,830 20,370 1,700 2,800 3,600 0 27,430 5,360 20 33,275 450 100 - 33,830 21,142 1,700 900 3,600 0 29,330 6,490 27 33,275 450 100 - 33,830 21,896 1,700 200 3,600 0 30,030 6,430

2004 December 4 33,275 450 100 - 33,820 22,105 1,700 500 3,200 0 30,120 6,320 11 33,275 450 100 - 33,820 22,407 1,700 200 3,200 0 30,420 6,310 18 33,275 450 100 - 33,820 22,419 1,700 100 3,200 0 30,520 6,400 25 33,275 450 100 - 33,820 22,484 1,700 100 3,200 0 30,520 6,340

Notes: Please note that the information contained within the Capacity Analysis is a deterministic projection of system conditions which could materialize during any given week of the year.1. Installed Capability per September 1, 2004 SCC Report, less recent retirements or deactivations that have not yet been reflected in the SCC Report. The Operable Capability does not reflect possible

transmission constraints within the NEPOOL system.2. New Generation information includes 1) generation recently commercial but not yet reflected in the NEPOOL SCC Report totals used in the Installed Capability Column, and 2) future generation

as assumed by ISO-NE Planning Department. This value is rounded to the nearest hundred.3. De-listed ICAP quantities are only known with certainty in the current month. This number is adjusted when a delisted generator is out on maintenance to avoid double counting.4. Net Capacity = (SCC) + (Interchange) + (New Generation) - (De-listed ICAP Resources). In this equation, the SCC, Interchange and De-listed ICAP values are rounded to the nearest ten

and New Generation is rounded to the nearest hundred.5. Peak Load Exposure reflects values published in the April 2004 CELT Report. 6. Operating Reserve Requirement based on the first contingency (Generator at 1160 MW) plus 1/2 the second contingency (Generator at 1155 MW).7. Allowance for Unplanned Outages includes: forced outages and maintenance outages scheduled less than 14 days in advance.8. Assumed values based on ISO-NE study.9. Relief from certain OP 4 Actions varies, depending on system conditions.



25



Year Month Day


Capability (SCC)

[Note 1]


No

te

New Generation

[Note 2]

De-listed ICAP

Resources [Note 3]



Operating Reserve



Allowance for Unplanned Outages [Note 7]

Generation at Risk Due to Gas Supply

[Note 8]Total

Capacity

Operable Capacity

Margin (+/-)

Extent of OP 4 Actions That May be Necessary (OP 4 Actions up

to and including) [Note 9]

(MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW)2005 January 1 33,271 450 100 - 33,820 22,769 1,700 100 2,800 4,100 26,820 2,350

8 33,271 450 100 - 33,820 23,255 1,700 900 2,800 3,300 26,820 1,870 15 33,271 450 100 - 33,820 23,255 1,700 800 2,800 3,400 26,820 1,870 22 33,271 450 100 - 33,820 23,255 1,700 500 2,800 3,700 26,820 1,870 29 33,272 450 100 - 33,820 23,022 1,700 100 3,100 3,800 26,820 2,100

2005 February 5 33,272 450 100 - 33,820 22,743 1,700 100 3,100 3,800 26,820 2,380 12 33,272 450 100 - 33,820 22,713 1,700 100 3,100 3,800 26,820 2,410 19 33,272 450 100 - 33,820 22,439 1,700 1,000 3,100 0 29,720 5,580 26 33,277 450 100 - 33,830 21,406 1,700 800 2,200 0 30,830 7,720

2005 March 5 33,277 450 100 - 33,830 21,041 1,700 1,700 2,200 0 29,930 7,190 12 33,277 450 100 - 33,830 20,836 1,700 1,700 2,200 0 29,930 7,390 19 33,277 450 100 - 33,830 20,455 1,700 2,200 2,200 0 29,430 7,280 26 33,277 450 100 - 33,830 19,864 1,700 1,400 2,200 0 30,230 8,670

Notes: Please note that the information contained within the Capacity Analysis is a deterministic projection of system conditions which could materialize during any given week of the year.1. Installed Capability per September 1, 2004 SCC Report, less recent retirements or deactivations that have not yet been reflected in the SCC Report. The Operable Capability does not reflect possible

transmission constraints within the NEPOOL system.2. New Generation information includes 1) generation recently commercial but not yet reflected in the NEPOOL SCC Report totals used in the Installed Capability Column, and 2) future generation

as assumed by ISO-NE Planning Department. This value is rounded to the nearest hundred.3. De-listed ICAP quantities are only known with certainty in the current month. This number is adjusted when a delisted generator is out on maintenance to avoid double counting.4. Net Capacity = (SCC) + (Interchange) + (New Generation) - (De-listed ICAP Resources). In this equation, the SCC, Interchange and De-listed ICAP values are rounded to the nearest ten

and New Generation is rounded to the nearest hundred.5. Peak Load Exposure reflects values published in the April 2004 CELT Report. 6. Operating Reserve Requirement based on the first contingency (Generator at 1160 MW) plus 1/2 the second contingency (Generator at 1155 MW).7. Allowance for Unplanned Outages includes: forced outages and maintenance outages scheduled less than 14 days in advance.8. Assumed values based on ISO-NE study.9. Relief from certain OP 4 Actions varies, depending on system conditions.



26


NEPOOL Operating Capacity Margins WITH KNOWN EXTERNAL TRANSACTIONS - 90/10 FORECAST

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

11,000

12,000

4-S

ep

11-S

ep

18-S

ep

25-S

ep

2-O

ct

9-O

ct

16-O

ct

23-O

ct

30-O

ct

6-N

ov

13-N

ov

20-N

ov

27-N

ov

4-D

ec

11-D

ec

18-D

ec

25-D

ec

1-Ja

n

8-Ja

n

15-J

an

22-J

an

29-J

an

5-F

eb

12-F

eb

19-F

eb

26-F

eb

5-M

ar

12-M

ar

19-M

ar

26-M

ar

September 2004 - March 2005, W/B Saturday

Ope

ratin

g C

apac

ity M

argi

n (M

W)

27

Back-Up Detail

28

Demand Response

29

Demand Response(as of August 31, 2004)

ReadyTo Respond: Approved:Zone Assets Total Assets Total

CT 129 178.5 10 7.6ME 5 78.5 0 0.0NEMA 118 45.7 1 24.0NH 3 1.6 0 0.0RI 15 3.3 0 0.0SEMA 92 9.9 2 0.2VT 17 13.5 0 0.0WCMA 105 25.1 2 0.4

Total 484 356.0 15 32.2

30

Demand Response, Con’t.(as of August 31, 2004)

484 Assets 356.0 MW 15 Assets 32.2 MWZone Assets RT Price RT 30-Min RT 2-Hour Profiled Assets RT Price RT 30-Min RT 2-Hour Profiled

CT 129 31.7 146.3 0.4 0.0 10 0.1 7.5 0.0 0.0

SWCT* 79 5.2 121.4 0.4 0.0 9 0.0 7.5 0.0 0.0

ME 5 1.5 0.0 1.0 76.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

NEMA 118 39.5 3.3 1.5 1.4 1 0.0 24.0 0.0 0.0

NH 3 1.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

RI 15 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

SEMA 92 9.4 0.5 0.0 0.0 2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0

VT 17 7.5 0.1 0.0 5.9 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

WCMA 105 13.6 2.2 9.3 0.0 2 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.0

Total 484 107.6 152.9 12.3 83.2 15.0 0.4 31.8 0.0 0.0

Ready To Respond: Approved:

* SWCT assets are included in CT values and are not included in Total

31

New Generation

32

New Generation Update

• No new resources were added in August.

• Approximately 60 MW expected on line by the end of the year.

• Status of Generation Projects as of September 1, 2004: No. MW

In Construction 3 127.4with 18.4 approval

Not in Construction 7 1,417with 18.4 Approval

33

RTEP

34

RTEP Update

• Major changes from TEAC August 2 version of RTEP04– Generation duty analysis requires much follow-up work and

will be an RTEP05 effort.– TEAC comments on the market summarized in the Technical

Report with details included as minutes.• Public Meeting held on Thursday, September 9, in Boston.

– Comments received• Support for RTEP process.• Use of 90/10 forecast for Operable Capacity analysis.• Need for improved coordination of planning and market

development effort.– ISO BOD action anticipated in October.

• Project Listing– Update to be discussed at October 5 joint TEAC/RC meeting

as addendum to RTEP04.

35

Inter-ISO Update

• Northeastern ISO/RTO Planning Coordination Protocol – Signed by ISO-NE and NYISO– Awaiting signature by PJM– Next Steps

• Form Joint ISO/RTO Planning Committee.• Exchange system plans and SIS queues.• Initiate Inter-area Planning Stakeholder Advisory

Committee.

36

RTEP Project Stage Descriptions

Stage Description

1 Planning and Preparation of Project Configuration2 Pre-construction (e.g., material ordering, project scheduling)3 Construction in Progress4 Completed

37

NSTAR 345 kV Transmission Reliability ProjectStatus as of 9/7/04Project Benefit: Improves New England reliability by

addressing Boston Area concerns and increasing Boston Import Limit from 3,600 MW to approximately 4,500 MW.

UpgradeExpectedIn-service

OriginalIn-service

Present Stage

Stoughton 345 kV Substation Jun-06 Jun-06 1Stoughton - Hyde Park 345 kV Jun-06 Jun-06 1Stoughton - K Street 345 kV #1 Jun-06 Jun-06 1

Stoughton - K Street 345 kV #2 Dec-07 Dec-07 1

Notes:- Siting review in progress; ruling due 4th quarter 2004.

- Detailed engineering in progress.

Phase 2

Phase 1

- Received conditional ISO approval 8-4-04.

38

SWCT 345 kV Transmission Reliability ProjectStatus as of 9/7/04Project Benefit: Improves New England reliability by

addressing SWCT concerns. Increases SWCT Import Limit from 2,000 MW to approximately 3,400 MW.


OriginalIn-service

Present Stage

Norwalk 345 kV Substation Nov-05 Dec-04 2

Plumtree 345 kV Substation Nov-05 Dec-04 2

Norwalk - Plumtree 345 kV Nov-05 Dec-04 2

Associated 115 kV Line Work Nov-05 Dec-04 2

Beseck 345 kV Substation Dec-07 Jan-06 1

East Devon 345 kV Substation Dec-07 Jan-06 1

Singer 345 kV Substation Dec-07 Jan-06 1

Beseck - East Devon 345 kV Dec-07 Jan-06 1

East Devon - Singer 345 kV Dec-07 Jan-06 1

Singer - Norwalk 345 kV Dec-07 Jan-06 1

Associated 115 kV Line Work Dec-07 Jan-06 1

Notes Phase 1:- Siting review complete; appeal denied.- Detailed engineering in progress.

- Modification may become necessary to mitigate harmonic resonance concerns.

Notes Phase 2:- Siting review in progress, ruling due December 2004.

- Modification may become necessary to mitigate harmonic resonance concerns.

Phase 2

Phase 1

39

Northeast Reliability Interconnect ProjectStatus as of 9/7/04

Project Benefit: Improves New England reliability by improving inter-area transfer capability and eliminating various protection/stability concerns.


OriginalIn-service

Present Stage

Orrington, ME - Pt. Lepreau, NB 345 kV Dec-08 Dec-08 1

Notes:- Siting approved for Canadian section of line.- DOE & Maine DEP review processes (approx. 1 year) to start 3rd quarter 2004.

40

NWVT 345 kV Transmission Reliability ProjectStatus as of 9/7/04

Project Benefit: Improves New England reliability by addressing NWVT concerns, bringing another source into the Burlington area.


OriginalIn-service

Present Stage

New Haven 345 kV Substation Oct-05 Oct-05 1

West Rutland - New Haven 345 kV Nov-05 Nov-05 1

New Haven - Queen City 115 kV Oct-06 Oct-06 1

Granite STATCOM/Upgrades Oct-07 Oct-07 1

Notes:- Siting review in progress, ruling due January 2005.- Sandbar Phase Angle Regulator in service.

41

Southern New England Reliability ProjectStatus as of 9/7/04

Project Benefit: Improves New England reliability by increasing transfer limits of three critical interfaces, including Connecticut Import Limit


OriginalIn-service

Present Stage

Millbury - Sherman Rd. 345 kV Dec-08 Dec-08 1

Sherman Rd. - Lake Rd. 345 kV Dec-08 Dec-08 1

Lake Rd. - Card St. 345 kV Dec-08 Dec-08 1

345 kV Substation Modifications Dec-08 Dec-08 1

Notes:- Planning studies in progress; estimated completion late 2004.- Project specifics may change; alternatives still under review.

42

Transmission Siting Update• SWCT

– Phase I• Received conditional approval from Connecticut Siting Council 2/11/04

– Phase II• Town hearings complete• “Need” hearings complete• ISO-NE testified on June 17 and expressed concerned with proposal as filed due to

harmonics problems. ISO, NU and UI submitted ROC report on August 16.• ROC has reconvened to perform additional analyses.

• BOSTON– New Boston 1 needed until NSTAR completes 345 kV Reliability Project from

Stoughton to Hyde Park and K Street (2006 earliest)• 18.4 approval for the NSTAR 345 kV transmission reliability project expected 3Q

2004– Salem Harbor needed at least until NGRID North Shore upgrades (2006 earliest)– These units provide operating reserves for the current system as well as insurance for

delays in transmission projects– Long-term solution is functioning Resource Adequacy market to incent generation to

locate in the most appropriate areas, with the ability to do gap RFP’s to address timing issues

43

Transmission Siting Update, Con’t.

• NWVT– State hearing process continues

• Technical and relocation hearings complete• Rebuttal pre-file testimony submitted July 2• Rebuttal hearings complete• Decision delayed; expected by January, 2005• Surrebuttal pre-file testimony submitted 9-3-04• Surrebuttal hearings scheduled for September

44

Compliance

45

2004 Compliance Update

• A4: Maintenance for Bulk Power System Protection

– Responses to ISO-NE survey were required by 1/5/04.

– Level 2 sanction was imposed on 3 Participants for failure to respond on time.

– ISO-NE reported full compliance with this Standard to NPCC.

46

2004 Compliance Update Con’t.

• A3-4.9: Generator Underfrequency Tripping– All Participants surveyed responded to the ISO-NE

Survey • 3 Participants have generators with non-

compliant trip settings– 2 are exempt (nuclear plants)– 1 will require that ISO-NE enforce compliance

• A3-4.6: Underfrequency Load Shedding

– All Participants surveyed responded to the ISO-NE Survey

– ISO-NE reported full compliance with this Standard to NPCC

47

SANCTIONS

• Level 1 – Letter from Director SP to the functional head of the Industry Participant with copy to NCWG

• Level 2 – Letter from COO to the Chief Executive of the Industry Participant with copy to the relevant functional head, all NEPOOL Participants and NPCC

• Level 3 – Letter from the CEO to the Board of Directors of the Industry Participant with copies to Level 2 recipients. Post on the ISO-NE Compliance Website.

• Level 4 –Level 3 penalty with copies to State/Provincial regulatory agencies, FERC, DOE, State Governor and Legislators.

2004 Compliance Update, Con’t.

NEPOOL Participants Committee Boston, MA September 10, 2004

Documents

Transcript of NEPOOL Participants Committee Boston, MA September 10, 2004