South Carolina Regional Transmission Planning St k h ld M … · 2014-10-15 · South Carolina...
Transcript of South Carolina Regional Transmission Planning St k h ld M … · 2014-10-15 · South Carolina...
South Carolina Regional Transmission PlanningSouth Carolina Regional Transmission Planning
St k h ld M tiSt k h ld M tiStakeholder MeetingStakeholder Meeting
SCE&G Lake Murray Training CenterSCE&G Lake Murray Training Center
Columbia, SCColumbia, SC
August 4 2010August 4 2010August 4, 2010August 4, 2010
1
Purpose and Goals for Today’s MeetingPurpose and Goals for Today’s Meeting
• Review Initial Results of Reliability Assessments• Local Area • SERC • Multi-Party Local Area SERC Multi Party• Inter-regional • ERAG
• Discuss Proposed Changes to Expansion PlansDiscuss Proposed Changes to Expansion Plans• Discuss Alternative Solutions from Stakeholders• Present Activities of the CTPCAPresent Activities of the CTPCA• Present Activities of the Eastern Interconnection
Planning Collaborative (EIPC)
2
Planning Collaborative (EIPC)
Transmission Expansion Drivers:Transmission Expansion Drivers:– Criteria Testing
• NERC Reliability Standards• Internal Planning Guidelines• Internal Planning Guidelines
– Customer Needs• Distribution & Industrialst but o & dust a• Wholesale (cooperative & municipal)• Network• Firm PTP
– Generator Interconnection NeedsActual system performance (poor performance)– Actual system performance (poor performance)
4
SCE&G Internal Planning CriteriaSCE&G Internal Planning CriteriaEvent resulting in the
l f i l t Voltage limit Thermal li itloss of a single component Voltage limit limit
Generator 95.0% 100%Transformer 95.0% 100%Transmission line 95.0% 100%Underground cable 95.0% 100%Capacitor bank 95.0% 100%
Event resulting in the lossof two or more components Voltage limit Thermal
limitOne bus segment 95.0% 100%Two bus segments (one bus tie breaker failure) 92.5% 100%Multiple circuits on a same structure 95.0% 100%All ti i l t 95 0% 100%All generation in any one plant 95.0% 100%Generator+ Transmission Line or Underground Cable 92.5% 100%Generator + Generator 92.5% 100%Generator + Transformer 92.5% 100%Generator + Capacitor bank 92.5% 100%Transformer + Transformer 92.5% 100%Transformer + Transmission Line or Underground Cable 92.5% 100%Transformer + Switch 92.5% 100%Transformer + Capacitor bank 92.5% 100%Transmission line + Transmission line 92.5% 100%Transmission line + Underground cable 92.5% 100%Transmission line + Capacitor bank 92.5% 100%Transmission line Capacitor bank 92.5% 100%Capacitor bank + Underground cable 92.5% 100%
7
Modeling AssumptionsModeling Assumptions
Basecase Development:– SCE&G Area: Detailed Data from Model Database ‐ Including Most Current Transmission Expansion Plan p
– SERC Region: Latest 2010 Series
Reduced Long Term Study Group Models
– North America: 2009 Series MMWG Models (Electrically Equivalenced)
8
Modeling AssumptionsModeling Assumptions• Dispersed Substation Load Forecast
– Summer/Winter Peak, Off‐Peak and Seasonal Load Levels• Existing Generation• Existing Generation
– Input from Generation Maintenance Schedule• Generation Additions
f l– Input from Generation Expansion Plan• Transmission Additions
– Input from Planners and Engineering• Firm Transmission Service
– Input from OASIS, Coordinate with Neighbors• Neighboring Transmission Systems Modeled• Neighboring Transmission Systems Modeled
9
Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study Procedure
Analysis Tools:Siemens PSS/E Power– Siemens PSS/E Power Systems Simulator
– PowerWorld Simulator– PowerWorld Simulator
– Automation Programs (Python NET)(Python, .NET)
10
Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study ProcedureStartStart • Run all NERC TPL Category A, B and C
contingencies, and selected D contingencies for each iteration and
Run Criteria Screening
each seasonal/loading condition (~100,000 contingencies per iteration)
• Violations may initiate transmission
Violations ?
Create/Change Project or
Create/Change Procedure and
YesYes
expansion studies or require operating procedures depending on probability and severity of problem
Update Model
E dE d
NoNo
Initiate Detailed EndEnd Alternative Studies
11
Reliability Planning Study ActivitiesReliability Planning Study ActivitiesReliability Planning Study ActivitiesReliability Planning Study Activities
Santee CooperSantee Cooper
12
S t C L l R li bilit St diS t C L l R li bilit St diSantee Cooper Local Reliability StudiesSantee Cooper Local Reliability Studies
•• Planning CriteriaPlanning Criteria•• Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study Procedure
William GaitherWilliam Gaither
y yy y
William GaitherWilliam Gaither
13
Planning CriteriaPlanning Criteria
• Santee Cooper Internal Planning CriteriaD t d i 1987– Documented in 1987
– Last revised in September, 2007
• North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) TPL Standards
14
SCPSA Internal Planning CriteriaSCPSA Internal Planning Criteria
Event Description Voltage limit
Delivery Point Bus, normal operating conditions 92.5% to 102.5%
Delivery Point Bus, emergency operating conditions 90.0% to 104.0%
Transmission lines, within continuous rating during normal operations
Transmission lines within emergency rating during contingency eventsTransmission lines, within emergency rating during contingency events
Transformers, within its max. 55 degree C rating during normal operations
Transformers, within 107 % of its max. 65 degree C rating during contingency events
15
Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study Procedure• Power Flow Models
– Updated loads from current corporate load forecast and Central supplied load forecast
– Detailed data including the most current transmission expansion planexpansion plan
– Transmission associated with new generation– SERC Region: 2009 Series Reduced LTSG Modelsg– North America: 2009 Series MMWG Models (Electrically
Equivalenced)
17
Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study Procedure
• Analysis Tools– Siemens/PTI PSS/E Power Systems Simulator– Python Automation Programs– Microsoft Access and Excel
18
Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study Procedure• Contingencies Tested:• Contingencies Tested:
– All Single Transmission Line Outages at 230 kV, 115 kV, and 69 kV– All Single Transformer Outages
All Si l B O t– All Single Bus Outages– All Single Generator Unit Outages– Selected Combinations of 2 Transmission Line Outages
S l t d C bi ti f 2 T f O t– Selected Combinations of 2 Transformer Outages– Selected Combinations of 2 Generator Unit Outages– Selected Combinations of 1 Transmission Line Outage and 1 Transformer Outage
S C f O G O– Selected Combinations of 1 Transmission Line Outage and 1 Generator Unit Outage– Selected Combinations of 1 Transformer Outage and 1 Generator Unit Outage
19
Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study Procedure
• Review results of tested contingencies• Identify contingencies that fail to meet planning criteriay g p g• Recommend project to correct facility not meeting criteria• Test recommended project against planning criteriap j g p g• If recommended project meets criteria add to transmission plan• If recommended project does not meet criteria, develop
alternative project and re-test until planning criteria met• Develop transmission plan based on recommended projects
20
VACAR Power Flow Working GroupVACAR Power Flow Working Group
• Dominion Virginia Power• Duke Energy• Progress Energy Carolinas• SCE&G• Santee Cooper
22
VACAR Power Flow Working GroupVACAR Power Flow Working Group• Conduct joint studies as assigned by VACAR PTF• Exchange forecast loads, bulk power facility plans, and g , p y p ,
systems conditions• Assesses voltage and thermal limitsg• Publish report of the joint studies • Investigate improved study methods and proceduresg p y p• Make recommendations to the PTF for future studies
23
VACAR 2015 Summer Study VACAR 2015 Summer Study ScopeScopeScopeScope
• Part one - Update 2009 Series MMWG 2015 Summer Peak Case -Completep
• Part two - Assess using merged monitor and n-1 contingency files concentrated on 230 kV and above facilities, critical facilities below 230 kV ill b id d C l tkV will be considered. – Complete
• Part three - Assess using n-2 contingency file – Complete• Part four - Evaluate contingency combinations – Complete• Part four - Evaluate contingency combinations – Complete• Write Report and present to VACAR PTF - Complete• Finalize Report – August 13, 2010p g ,
24
VACAR 2015 Summer StudyVACAR 2015 Summer StudyResultsResultsResultsResults
• N-1 Thermal and Voltage AssessmentNeither Santee Cooper or South Carolina Electric & Gas show any – Neither Santee Cooper or South Carolina Electric & Gas show any thermal or voltage constraints for the 2015 Summer Study.
• N-2 Thermal and Voltage AssessmentN 2 Thermal and Voltage Assessment– Several elements exceed their rating under double contingency in
both Santee Cooper and South Carolina Electric & Gas control areas.
25
Okatie 230/115 kVLexington-Lyles 115 kVJasper-Yemassee 230 kVJasper Yemassee 230 kVMcIntosh-Jasper 115 kVAFY-Aiken Hampton 115 kVUrquhart-Graniteville 230 kVqCallawassie Tap-Okatie 115 kVSavannah River Services 230/115 kVVogtle-Savannah River Services 230 kVSavannah River Services-Canadys 230 kV
Batesburg-Monetta 115 kVVarnville 230/115 kVWinyah-Campfield 230 kVy pWinyah 230/115 kVBatesburg-Gilbert 115 kV
SERC Long Term Study GroupSERC Long Term Study Group• 2015 Summer
Future Year Study: CompleteComplete
• 2016 Summer Future Year Study: in Progress
30
SERC LTSGSERC LTSGPurposePurposePurposePurpose
• Analysis of the performance of the members’ transmission y psystems that identifies limits to power transfers occurring non-simultaneously among the SERC members.
• Analysis of the performance of the members’ transmission systems under normal conditions and loss of a single element.
31
SERC LTSGSERC LTSGSi ifi t F ilitiSi ifi t F ilitiSignificant FacilitiesSignificant Facilities
• Facility is a limit below the test level and transfer factors are b th t ffabove the cutoff.
• The number of different transfers/companies impacted.• If the facility requires the use of an operating guide.• If the outage of the facility results in overloads of several
i i ltransmission elements.• If actual TLRs have been called on the facility.
32
SERC LTSGSERC LTSG2015 Summer Future Year Study: Results2015 Summer Future Year Study: Results2015 Summer Future Year Study: Results2015 Summer Future Year Study: Results
• McIntosh to Jasper Tap 115 kV Interconnection (Southern-SCEG)• For the loss of the McIntosh – Purrysburg 230 kV line, this facility limits some
t f S th d th S th t b i S th h exports from Southern and the Southeastern sub-region. Southern has addressed this contingency event through planned system reinforcements.
• Urquhart to Graniteville 230 kV (SCEG)Li it th S th t t VACAR b i l t f d b • Limits the Southeastern to VACAR sub-regional transfer under base case conditions. Loading on this facility is impacted by generation dispatch in SCEG’s area. SCEG currently has a project that will alleviate the facility.
• Pee Dee to Marion 230 kV (SCPSA)• Pee Dee to Marion 230 kV (SCPSA)• Limits some export from SCPSA under contingency of the Kingstree-Kingstree
230 kV Line. SCPSA is currently evaluating potential solutions for this limit.
33
SERC LTSGSERC LTSG2016 Summer Future Year Study: Progress2016 Summer Future Year Study: Progress2016 Summer Future Year Study: Progress2016 Summer Future Year Study: Progress
• Develop Base Case for study – Complete
• Perform multiple iterations of linear analysis – Complete
• AC power flow verification – August 11, 2010
• Draft 1 of the report and preliminary results – September 9, 2010
• Final report draft published – December 3, 2010p p ,
34
SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCSERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCInterregional Transmission SystemInterregional Transmission System
R li bilit A tR li bilit A tReliability AssessmentsReliability Assessments
37
SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFC• SERC East SERC East
VACAR (Duke, DVP, PEC, SCE&G, SCPSA)Central (TVA LGEE EKPC BREC)Central (TVA, LGEE, EKPC, BREC)
• Reliability First Corporation PJM (Pennsylvania New Jersey Maryland)PJM (Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland)MISO (Midwest Independent System Operator)
38
SERC EastSERC East--RFC Operating Studies RFC Operating Studies Working GroupWorking GroupWorking GroupWorking Group
A l i f i t i l t f d i • Analysis of interregional system performance during regional and sub-regional power transfersSt d f l d ti diti• Study of normal and contingency conditions
• Effects of selected multiple outages and simultaneous transfers on system performance transfers on system performance
40
SERC EastSERC East RFC Operating Studies RFC Operating Studies SERC EastSERC East--RFC Operating Studies RFC Operating Studies Working GroupWorking Group
• Identify transfer limits from and to each study region• Transfer limits are not ATC or TTC as required in FERC
Orders 888 and 889 and posted on OASIS• Results are conditional, not absolute or optimal• Identify facilities having thermal or selected
voltage/reactive limits for regional and sub-regional transfers
41
SERC EastSERC East--RFC Operating Studies RFC Operating Studies Working GroupWorking GroupWorking GroupWorking Group
• FCITC - First Contingency Incremental Transfer Capability is the incremental transfer capability above the transfers is the incremental transfer capability above the transfers modeled in the base case
• FCCTC - First Contingency Total Transfer Capability is the CC C s Co ge cy o a a s e Capab y s ealgebraic sum of the FCITC and the base case region-to-region transfer
42
SERC EastSERC East--RFC Operating Studies RFC Operating Studies Working GroupWorking GroupWorking GroupWorking Group
• Analysis of FCITC’s for selected simultaneous transfers among, or through study areas
• FCITC’s and FCTTC’s for non-simultaneous transfers• Appraisals for PJM, Midwest ISO and SERC East study
areas43
SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCReliability AssessmentReliability AssessmentReliability AssessmentReliability Assessment
• Interchange of power at peak load extremely sensitive to pricing
• Small pricing differentials can cause large power interchanges
44
Reliability Assessment Study AssumptionsReliability Assessment Study Assumptions
• Load forecasts and generation availabilityG hi di t ib ti f l d d ti• Geographic distribution of load and generation
• Transmission system configuration
45
Reliability Assessment Study AssumptionsReliability Assessment Study Assumptions
• Simultaneous inter-system power transfersR i l i t f ti i• Regional requirements for contingencies
• Phase Angle Regulator control settings
46
2014 S SERC E t2014 S SERC E t RFCRFC2014 Summer SERC East2014 Summer SERC East--RFCRFCReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study Resultsy yy y
• MISO to SERC East – No FCITC import limit at 4400 MW MISO to SERC East No FCITC import limit at 4400 MW. Increased from 4400 MW in 2009 Summer study
• SERC East to MISO – FCITC export limit of 1450 MW.SERC East to MISO FCITC export limit of 1450 MW.No limit found in 2009 Summer study
47
2014 Summer SERC East2014 Summer SERC East--RFCRFCReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study Results
• PJM to SERC East – FCITC Import limit of 3650 MW. Decreased from 4200 MW in 2009 Summer study
• SERC East to PJM – FCITC export limit of 1450 MW. Decreased from 4150 in 2009 Summer study
48
SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study Results
• 500/230kV transformers moderately responsive to transfers
• Some contingency overloading of transformers may occur for imports into VACAR
49
SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCFuture StudiesFuture StudiesFuture StudiesFuture Studies
• Alternate between upcoming winter operational study and Near Term/Long Term assessments
• Next reliability assessment - 2021 Summer study, due November 2011
50
SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCSERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCInterregional Transmission SystemInterregional Transmission System
R li bilit A tR li bilit A tReliability AssessmentsReliability Assessments
Questions?Questions?
51
SCSC--PEC 2016 Summer StudyPEC 2016 Summer Studyyy
• Previous SC-PEC Summer 2016 Study (2009)
– Pee Dee Generating Station
600 MW• 600 MW
• 04/1/2014
– Pee Dee to Lake City 230 kV Line
53
SCSC--PEC 2016 Summer Study (2010)PEC 2016 Summer Study (2010)y ( )y ( )
• Pee Dee Generating Station deferred indefinitelyg y
• Pee Dee to Lake City 230 kV Line cancelled
• Progress Energy Transmission Plan revised
54
SCSC--PEC 2016 Summer StudyPEC 2016 Summer Studyyy
• Previous study results invalid resulting from Santee y g
Cooper and Progress Energy transmission plan
hchanges
• Revise study scope to incorporate revised e se study scope to co po ate e sed
transmission and generation plans.
55
SCSC--PEC 2016 Summer Study StatusPEC 2016 Summer Study Statusyy
• Revised Transmission Plans incorporated into 2016
Base Case
• Transfers completed by Progress Energy
• Schedule conference call to discuss preliminary Schedule conference call to discuss preliminary
results.
56
Propose Changes to Transmission Propose Changes to Transmission p gp gExpansion PlansExpansion Plans
SCE&GSCE&GSCE&GSCE&G
57
Transmission Expansion Plan Disclaimer
• The projects described in these presentations The projects described in these presentations represent the current transmission plans within the SCRTP footprint.
• The expansion plan is continuously reviewed and may change due to changes in assumptions.
• This presentation does not represent a commitment to build.
58
SCE&G Recently Completed Transmission ProjectsSCE&G Recently Completed Transmission Projectsy p jy p j
Columbia Industrial Park ‐ Hopkins 115kV Line Upgrade p pg
Urquhart ‐ Belvedere 115kV Rebuild to Double Circuit
Pineland Substation Add 2nd 230/115kV AutotransformerPineland Substation Add 2nd 230/115kV Autotransformer
Church Creek ‐ Savage Rd 115kV Rebuild to Double Circuit
l d l d S S b ild bl Ci iBelvedere ‐ Belvedere Sw. Sta. Rebuild to Double Circuit
59
SCE&G Active Transmission Projects (Aug 2010)SCE&G Active Transmission Projects (Aug 2010)j ( g )j ( g )
• Pepperhill ‐ Ladson Tap 115kV Upgrade 5/31/2010 2011
• Charleston Trans ‐ Charlotte St 115kV Line 5/31/2011 2012
• Graniteville Add #3 Autotransformer 5/31/2012
• Denny Terrace ‐ Pineland 230kV Line 5/31/2012
• Ritter 230/115kV Sub Construct 5/31/2012 12/31/2010 / / / / /
• Yemassee Add 3rd Autotransformer 5/31/2012
60
SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010‐‐20192019
i Ch l S 11 k i d /31/2010 201• Bayview‐Charlotte St 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2010 2014
• Lake Murray Add 2nd 336 MVA Autotransformer 5/31/2011 2013
• Aiken #3 to Aiken Hampton 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2012 2014Aiken #3 to Aiken Hampton 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2012 2014
• Pepperhill ‐ Summerville 230kV Line Construct 5/31/2012 2013
• Canadys‐Church Ck 230KV Increase Rating 12/31/2012
• Canadys‐Church Ck 230KV Rebuild to Dbl Circuit 5/31/2012 12/31/2015
• Edenwood ‐ Lake Murray Trans 230kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2013
• Cainhoy 230/115kV Substation Construct 5/31/2013• Cainhoy 230/115kV Substation Construct 5/31/2013
• Cainhoy ‐ A.M. Williams 115kV #1 Convert to 230kV 5/31/2013
• Bayview Tap ‐ Osceola 115kV Rebuild to Dbl Circuit 5/31/2013y p / /
61
h i 230/11 k S b i C /31/201
SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010‐‐2019 (continued)2019 (continued)
• Bush River 230/115kV Substation Construct 5/31/2014
• Yemassee ‐ Burton 115kV Rebuild 5/31/2014
• Mt Pleasant ‐ Bayview 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2014Mt Pleasant Bayview 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2014
• Aiken Hampton ‐ Aiken Trans 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2014 2015
• Belvedere ‐ Stevens Ck 115kV Rebuild to Dbl Circuit 5/31/201412/31/2012
• Lyles ‐ Denny Terrace 115kV #1 and #2 Upgrade 5/31/2014
• Okatie 230/115kV Sub Construct 5/31/2014
• St Andrews Queensboro 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2015• St Andrews ‐ Queensboro 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2015
• Lyles ‐Williams St 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2015
• Cainhoy ‐ Thomas Island 115kV Line Construct 5/31/2015 y / /
62
SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010‐‐2019 (continued)2019 (continued)
• Columbia Industrial Park 2nd 336 Autotransformer 5/31/2015 2018
• Faber Place ‐ Charleston Trans 115kV #1 and #2 Upgrade 5/31/2015
• Hopkins ‐ Edenwood 115kV Rebuild as Dbl Circuit 5/31/2015
• Pineland ‐ Killian 115kV Rebuild as Dbl Circuit 5/31/2015
• Cainhoy A M W 230kV #2 and 115kV #2 Lines Construct 5/31/2016 2017• Cainhoy ‐ A.M.W. 230kV #2 and 115kV #2 Lines Construct 5/31/2016 2017
• Cainhoy ‐ Hamlin 115kV Rebuild to Dbl Circuit 5/31/2016
• Lexington Junction 115kV Switching Station Construct 5/31/2016 2018
• Urquhart ‐ Graniteville 230kV Line #2 Construct 5/31/2016
• Queensboro 230/115kV Sub Construct 5/31/2018
63
V.C. Summer Unit #2 Related ProjectsV.C. Summer Unit #2 Related Projectsjj
• Denny Terrace ‐ Lyles 230kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2015• Denny Terrace Add 3rd 336 Autotransformer 12/01/2015
SCE&GSCE&G
• Denny Terrace Add 3rd 336 Autotransformer 12/01/2015• Lake Murray Add 3rd 336 Autotransformer 12/01/2015• Lake Murray ‐McMeekin 115kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2015• Lake Murray ‐ Saluda 115kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2015Lake Murray Saluda 115kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2015• Saluda ‐McMeekin 115kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2015• VCS2 ‐ Lake Murray #2 230kV Line Construct 12/01/2015• VCS2 ‐Winnsboro ‐ Killian 230kV Line Construct 12/01/2015
64
V.C. Summer Unit #3 Related ProjectsV.C. Summer Unit #3 Related Projects
• Saluda ‐ Duke 115kV Tielines Upgrade 12/01/2018h l bi / k / /
SCE&GSCE&G
• South Columbia 230/115kV Construct 12/01/2018• South Lexington 230/115kV Construct 12/01/2018• St George 230kV Switching Station Construct 12/01/2018• St George Canadys 230kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2018• St George ‐ Canadys 230kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2018• St George ‐ Summerville 230kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2018• VCS Sub #2 ‐ St George 230kV Double Circuit Construct 12/01/2018
65
Transmission Expansion Project CategoriesTransmission Expansion Project Categories1. Transmission Line Improvements1. Transmission Line Improvements
A. New Lines ‐ Construction of New 230kV or 115kV Transmission LinesB. Line Upgrades ‐ Increase Thermal Limits and/or Operating Voltage of
Existing LinesExisting Lines.
2. Transmission Substation ImprovementsA. 230/115kV Autotransformers
E t bli h N 230/115kV S b t ti I C it t E i ti• Establish New 230/115kV Substation or Increase Capacity at Existing Substations
• Adds Strong 230kV Sources at Load Centers• Allows 230 and 115kV Systems to Support Each Other• Allows 230 and 115kV Systems to Support Each Other
B. Capacitor Banks and Switching Stations• Can be More Economic Alternatives to More Costly Upgrades• Improves System Performance Under ContingenciesImproves System Performance Under Contingencies
66
SCE&GSCE&G New and Upgraded Lines 2010New and Upgraded Lines 2010‐‐20192019
New Lines
Upgraded Lines
67
SCE&G Transmission Substation Improvements SCE&G Transmission Substation Improvements 20102010‐‐20192019
New 230/115Autotransformers
Switching Stations
68
Propose Changes to Transmission Propose Changes to Transmission p gp gExpansion PlansExpansion Plans
Santee CooperSantee CooperSantee CooperSantee Cooper
77
Transmission NetworkCompleted Projects
• Replace Hilton Head Submarine Cable 04/02/2009• Replace Hilton Head Submarine Cable 04/02/2009• Varnville-Bluffton 115 kV Line Reconfiguration 03/31/2009• Shamrock 230-115-69 kV Substation 07/08/2009Shamrock 230 115 69 kV Substation 07/08/2009• Rebuild Georgetown Switching Station-Campfield
115 kV Lines 11/25/2009• Sandy Run-Orangeburg 115 kV Line 08/04/2009• Rebuild Burke Road Tap for 115 kV Operation 05/20/2010
78
Transmission NetworkNew/Modified Projects
• Fold Hemingway-Marion 230 kV Line into Lake City 06/2012
79
Transmission NetworkPlanned ProjectsPlanned Projects
• Arcadia-Garden City #2 115 kV Line 12/2011C li F t 230 115 kV S b t ti 06/2012• Carolina Forest 230-115 kV Substation 06/2012
• Carolina Forest-Dunes #2 115 kV Line 06/2012• Orangeburg 230-115 kV Substation 12/2012g g• Pomaria 230-69 kV Substation 06/2013• Bucksville 230-115 kV Substation 06/2015
230 06/2016• Winyah-Bucksville 230 kV Line 06/2016• Bucksville-Garden City 115 kV Line 06/2017• Transmission Plans Associated with VCS #2 (2016)Transmission Plans Associated with VCS #2 (2016)
and VCS #3 (2019)81
Myrtle Beach Area
• Issues:– Large load center served from remote resources – Tightly-integrated transmission system– Numerous contingencies impact “source” lines into the
area– Line loadings projected to exceed their normal rating
83
Carolina Forest 230/115 kV Substation
• Solution:– Construct the Carolina Forest
230/115 kV Substation
CarolinaForest
230/115 kV Substation– Construct 115 kV line from
Carolina Forest to Dunes 115-12 kV Substation115 12 kV Substation
• Benefits:– Provide another bulk source into
th t l t f M tl B hthe central part of Myrtle Beach– Relieve dependency on Perry
Road and Myrtle Beach S b t tiSubstations
84
Arcadia-Garden City 115 kV Line
• Problem:– Contingency:
O t f C fi ld P R d 230 kV Li• Outage of Campfield-Perry Road 230 kV Line• Severe or extreme events in the Myrtle Beach Area
– Result:• Arcadia-Litchfield 115 kV line section may overloady
– Base case loading projected to exceed normal rating in 2012
85
Arcadia-Garden City 115 kV Line• Solution:
– Rebuild the existing Garden City-Arcadia 115 kV Line as City Arcadia 115 kV Line as a double circuit line
• Benefit:– Provide another source into
southern portion of Myrtle southern portion of Myrtle Beach area.
86
MarionBucksville Transmission Projects
Fold Hemingway-Red Bluff
Lake CityConway
Carolina Forest 230-115 kV Substation
Fold HemingwayMarion 230 kV Line
into Lake City
Bucksville 230-115 kV S b t ti
DunesPerry Road
Kingstree
Hemingway
ykV Substation
Garden City
Winyah-Bucksville 230 kV Line
Arcadia
Campfield
Georgetown
Arcadia-Garden City 115 kV Line #2
Winyah
89
VC Summer #2 Transmission Plan (ISD 2016)Flat Creek 230 69 kV Sub
Richburg 69 kV Sw. Sta.Flat Creek 230-69 kV Sub.
Winnsboro 69 kV Sw. Sta.C d 230 69 kV S bVC Summer Nuclear Plant
Lugoff 230-69 kV Sub.
Camden 230-69 kV Sub.
Pomaria 69 kV Sw. Sta.Blythewood 230-115-69 kV Sub.
90
Flat Creek 230 69 kV SubVC Summer #2 Transmission Plan (ISD 2016)
Richburg 230-69 kV Sub.Flat Creek 230-69 kV Sub.
Winnsboro 230-69 kV Sub.C d 230 69 kV S bVC Summer Nuclear Plant
Lugoff 230-69 kV Sub.
Camden 230-69 kV Sub.
Pomaria 230-69 kV Sub.Blythewood 230-115-69 kV Sub.
91
VCS #2 Transmission Projects
• Winnsboro 230-69 kV Substation 09/2013• VCS-Winnsboro 230 kV Line 11/2013• Richburg 230-69 kV Substation 06/2014• Winnsboro-Richburg 230 kV Line 08/2014• Richburg-Flat Creek 230 kV Line 10/2015
92
VC Summer Nuclear
Pomaria 69 kV SS
Newberry 230-69 kV Sub.
Blythewood 230-69 kV Sub.
Sandy Run 115 kV SS
VC Summer #3 TransmissionSandy Run 115 kV SS
Plan (ISD 2019)
Orangeburg 115-69 kV Sub.
Bamberg 69 kV SS
Sycamore 69 kV SS St. George 115-69 kV Sub.
Yemassee 230 kV SS
Varnville 230-115-69 kV Sub.
93
Blythewood 230-69 kV Sub.Pomaria 230-69 kV Sub.
VCS-Pomaria 230 kV Line
Pomaria-Sandy Run 230 kV LineNewberry 230-69 kV Sub.
VC Summer Nuclear
Sandy Run 230-115 kV Sub
Pomaria-Sandy Run 230 kV Line
VC Summer #3 Transmission Sandy Run 230-115 kV Sub.
Sandy Run-Orangeburg 230 kV Line
VC Summer #3 Transmission
Plan (ISD 2019)Orangeburg 230-115-69 kV Sub.
Bamberg 69 kV SS
St George 230 115 kV Sub
Orangeburg-St. George 230 kV Line
Sycamore 69 kV SS
St. George 230-115 kV Sub.
St. George-Varnville 230 kV Line
St. George 115-69 kV Sub.
Varnville 230-115-69 kV Sub.
Yemassee 230 kV SS
94
VCS #3 Transmission Projects• VCS-Pomaria #2 230 kV Line 05/2014• Sandy Run 230-115 kV Substation 04/2016• Pomaria-Sandy Run 230 kV Line 05/2016• Sandy Run-Orangeburg 230 kV Line 05/2017• St George 230-115 kV Substation 04/2018• St. George 230-115 kV Substation 04/2018• Varnville 230-115 kV Substation 05/2019• St. George-Varnville 230 kV Line 06/2019
95
Stakeholder Input andStakeholder Input andppAlternative Discussion OnAlternative Discussion On
Proposed Changes toProposed Changes toProposed Changes toProposed Changes toTransmission Expansion PlansTransmission Expansion Plans
96
Carolinas Transmission Planning Carolinas Transmission Planning Carolinas Transmission Planning Carolinas Transmission Planning Coordination AgreementCoordination Agreement
(CTPCA)(CTPCA)(CTPCA)(CTPCA)
97
Eastern Interconnection Planning Eastern Interconnection Planning Eastern Interconnection Planning Eastern Interconnection Planning CollaborativeCollaborative
(EIPC)(EIPC)(EIPC)(EIPC)
99
What is the EIPC?What is the EIPC?• Eastern Interconnection Planning Collaborative
• Planning Authorities throughout the Eastern Interconnect including U.S. and Canadaincluding U.S. and Canada
• Member geography covers over 600GW of connected g g p ycustomer demand
101
Who are the Planning Authorities?Who are the Planning Authorities?• Alcoa Power Generating• American Transmission Co.• Duke Energy Carolinas
• Midwest ISO *• Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia• New Brunswick System Operator
• Electric Energy Inc.• Entergy *• E.ON (Louisville/Kentucky Util.)
Florida Power & Light
• New York ISO *• PJM Interconnection *• PowerSouth Energy Coop.
Progress Energy Carolinas• Florida Power & Light• Georgia Transmission Corp.• IESO (Ontario, Canada)• International Transmission Co
• Progress Energy – Carolinas• Progress Energy – Florida• South Carolina Electric &Gas• Santee Cooper• International Transmission Co.
• ISO-New England *• JEA (Jacksonville, Florida)• MAPPCOR *
• Santee Cooper• Southern Company *• Southwest Power Pool• Tennessee Valley Authority *CO ss y y
102
*Principal investigators on DOE Project
What are the Objectives of the EIPC?What are the Objectives of the EIPC?1. Integration (“roll-up”) and analysis of approved local and
regional plans2. Development of possible interregional expansion
scenarios to be studied3. Development of interregional transmission expansion
information associated with the scenarios studied
The EIPC is committed to an open and transparent process that uses aroll-up of regional plans as a starting point and is consistent with FERCOrder 890 principles.
103
EIPC StatusEIPC Status• EIPC structure in place• 26 Planning Authorities signed (U.S. and Canada) with approximately
95% of the Eastern Interconnection c stomers co ered95% of the Eastern Interconnection customers covered• Website launched – www.eipconline.com• Formation of Stakeholder Steering Committee (SSC) completed and • Formation of Stakeholder Steering Committee (SSC) completed and
first SSC meeting was in Chicago on July 15-16, 2010• DOE announced $16M funding of interconnection studies proposal g p p• DOE/EIPC Contract finalized last week• DOE announced $14 M funding for State participation in the EIPCg p p
104
DOE Project DOE Project –– Primary TasksPrimary Tasks• Establish an open and inclusive Stakeholder process with
participation by all industry segments and state representatives C l t i t ti f i ti R i l l t f • Complete an integration of existing Regional plans to form an interconnection-wide model suitable for studies of the interconnection as a wholeinterconnection as a whole
• Develop potential “resource futures” through economic analyses conducted at the macro-level
• Complete interconnection-wide analyses of Stakeholder postulated resource scenarios including a transmission topology th t t th ithat supports those scenarios
105
DOE Project DOE Project –– Study ResultsStudy Results• Roll-up and integration of regional plans for 2020• Roll-up and integration of regional plans for 2020• 8 Macroeconomic “futures”
– Input assumptions determined by states/stakeholders– Input assumptions determined by states/stakeholders– Up to 9 sensitivities of input variables on each “future”– Provides useful information on future resource scenarios that are of
interest for future transmission analyses
• 3 Future resource scenarios with fully developed transmission build-out information that meet reliability requirements– States agreement with resource scenarios to be studied
• 2 Project reports – June 2011 and June 2012106
Draft EIPC Process FlowPolicy
Discussions
Analysis Group
Refines Existing
Models for EIPC Use
Determine Scenario
ProposalsWorkshop Study
Scenarios
Analysis Group
Completes Work
Develop Draft
Summaries and Reports
Public Input on Draft Reports
Publish Final
ReportsEIPC Use
Sub-Process
Regional Planning Processes
107
SectorsSectors and and SeatsSeats on SSCon SSC3 Transmission Owners and Developers3 Generation Owners & Developers (minimum 1 renewable and 1
nonrenewable)3 Other Suppliers e.g., Power Marketers, Distributed Generation, Energy
Storage (minimum 1 demand-side resources representative)3 Transmission Dependent Utilities (TDUs), Public Power & Coops e.g.,
Municipal utilities, Rural Co-ops, Power Authorities (minimum 1 Public P C TDU)Power or Coop TDU)
3 End Users e.g., Small consumer advocates, large consumers (minimum 1 state consumer advocate agency)
3 NGO li t h & l d d h bit t ti3 NGOs e.g. climate change & energy, land and habitat conservation10 State representatives1 Canadian Provincial representativeEx Officio Members: US DOE US EPA
108
Ex Officio Members: US DOE, US EPATOTAL: 29 members
Sector Caucus SelectionSector Caucus SelectionProcessProcess
PJM, 4 sectors, 3
nominations to ProcessProcess nominations to each MISO, 4
sectors, 3 nominations to
each
SPP 4 Sectors, 3
nominations each
S t
MAPP, 4 sectors, 3
nominations to each
Eastern Canada 4 sectors, 3
nominations to each
Sector Caucuses
ISO-NE, 4 sectors, 3
nominations to each
EU & NGO sectors EI-
wide, 27 nominations to each
NYISO, 4 sectors, 3
nominations
SIRPP, 4 sectors, 3
nominations
each
nominations to eachFlorida, 4
sectors, 3 nominations
to each
nominations each
109
Recent Activities and Target Schedule For 2010Recent Activities and Target Schedule For 2010
• July 6th – Announcement of SSC members
• July 15‐16 – 1st SSC meeting at Crowne Plaza in Chicagodd d l f h i d G– Address development of a charter – assigned to WG
– Determine role for SWG, appoint core members
– Start effort to create a 6‐12 month work plan p
– Learn more about scenario planning and macroeconomic work
• September‐October – Initial results from 2020 integrated regional case availableregional case available
• Fall 2010 – Initial work on macroeconomic analyses
110
SCRTP SCRTP -- Next MeetingNext Meeting
• Discuss Alternative Solution AnalysesSCRTP St k h ld G ill d l t 5 • SCRTP Stakeholder Group will propose and select 5 intra-regional economic transfers for study
• Proposed inter regional economic transfers will be • Proposed inter-regional economic transfers will be advanced to the SIRPP
112
South Carolina Regional Transmission PlanningSouth Carolina Regional Transmission Planning
St k h ld M tiSt k h ld M tiStakeholder MeetingStakeholder Meeting
SCE&G Lake Murray Training CenterSCE&G Lake Murray Training Center
Columbia, SCColumbia, SC
August 4 2010August 4 2010August 4, 2010August 4, 2010
113