Workpapers - Southern California Edison€¦ · EBR for Energy Management System Project Detail...
Transcript of Workpapers - Southern California Edison€¦ · EBR for Energy Management System Project Detail...
(U 338-E)
2018 General Rate Case A.16-09-_____
Workpapers
IT- Capital Software (OU Software Projects) SCE-04 Volume 02, Book C
September 2016
2018 General Rate Case Index of Workpapers
SCE-04, Vol.02 Book A
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)Operating Unit Summary - Operating Software, Cybersecurity, and Technology Consolidation & Optimization 1-4
2015 Cap Software Authorized vs Recorded Table 5-6 Operating System Software 7-43
Operating Software Project Detail Worksheet 8-10 Investment Memo – Operating System 11-15 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Operating System 16 Database Platform Upgrade Project Detail Worksheet 17 Investment Memo - Database Platform Upgrade 18-20 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Database Platform Upgrade 21 System D Replacement Project Detail Worksheet 22 Investment Memo - System D Replacement 23-27 Business Intelligence Project Detail Worksheet 28 Investment Memo - Business Intelligence 29-31 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Business Intelligence 32 Enterprise Integration Tools Project Detail Worksheet 33 Investment Memo - Enterprise Integration Tools 34-36 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Enterprise Integration Tools 37 SAP Core Refresh Project Detail Worksheet 38 Investment Memo - SAP Core Refresh 39-42 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - SAP Core Refresh 43
Massive breach at health care company Anthem Inc. 44-46 Hidden costs of Sony’s data breach will add up for years, experts say 47-50 The eBay data compromise: What you need to know 51-53 Neglected Server Provided Entry for JPMorgan Hackers - The New York Times 54-57
Inside the Cunning, Unprecedented Hack of Ukraine’s Power Grid 58-63 Recommended Practice: Improving Industrial Control Systems Cybersecurity with Defense-In-Depth Strategies 64-108
Perimeter Defense 109-120 Perimeter Defense Project Detail Worksheet 110 Investment Memo - Perimeter Defense 111-113 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Perimeter Defense 114
The U.S. Power Grid Is Under Near Continuous Attack 115-116 Defending an Undefinable Cyber Security Perimeter 117-120 Interior Defense 121-126
Interior Defense Project Detail Worksheet 122 Investment Memo - Interior Defense 123-125
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Interior Defense 126
Spoiler Alert: 10 Business Technology Trends You'll Read About in 2014 127-131 Data Protection 132-137
Data Protection Project Detail Worksheet 133 Investment Memo - Data Protection 134-136 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Data Protection 137
SCADA Cybersecurity 138-140 SCADA Cybersecurity Project Detail Worksheet 139 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - SCADA Cybersecurity 140
Targeted Attacks Against the Energy Sector 141-170 Russian hackers suspected in attack that blacked out parts of Ukraine 171-173 Common Cybersecurity Services (CCS) for Generator Interconnections 174-179
CCS for Generator Interconnections Project Detail Worksheet 175 Investment Memo – CCS for Generator Interconnections 176-178 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - CCS for Generator Interconnections 179
Grid Modernization Cybersecurity 180-186 Grid Modernization Cybersecurity Project Detail Worksheet 181 Investment Memo – Grid Modernization Cybersecurity 182-185 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Grid Modernization Cybersecurity 186
NERC CIP Compliance 187-208 NERC CIP Compliance Project Detail Worksheet 188-191 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - NERC CIP Compliance Project 192 Investment Memo – NERC CIP 006 PSP for Low Impact Facilities 193-1962018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - NERC CIP 006 PSP for Low Impact Facilities 197
Investment Memo – NERC CIP 0014 Program 198-2022018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - NERC CIP 0014 Program 203Investment Memo – Test Smart Form Tool 204-207 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Test Smart Form Tool 208
Data Warehouse Consolidation 209-217 Data Warehouse Consolidation Project Detail Worksheet 210-211 Investment Memo – Data Warehouse Consolidation 212-216 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Data Warehouse Consolidation 217
Lotus Notes Migration 218-223 Lotus Notes Migration Project Detail Worksheet 219 Investment Memo – Lotus Notes Migration 220-222 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Lotus Notes Migration 223
Backup and Disaster Recovery Optimization 224-229 Backup and Disaster Recovery Optimization Project Detail Worksheet 225 Investment Memo – Backup and Disaster Recovery Optimization 226-228 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Backup and Disaster Recovery Optimization 229
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)Information Technology OU Projects less than $3M 230-262Enterprise Scheduler Consolidation 231-235
Enterprise Scheduler Consolidation Project Detail Worksheet 231 Investment Memo – Enterprise Scheduler Consolidation 232-234 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Enterprise Scheduler Consolidation 235
Database Backup Optimization 236-241 Database Backup Optimization Project Detail Worksheet 236 Investment Memo – Database Backup Optimization 237-240 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Database Backup Optimization 241
Citrix VDI Capacity Increase 242-246 Citrix VDI Capacity Increase Project Detail Worksheet 242 Investment Memo – Citrix VDI Capacity Increase 243-245 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Citrix VDI Capacity Increase 246
User Experience Technologies 247-251 User Experience Technologies Project Detail Worksheet 247 Investment Memo – User Experience Technologies 248-250 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - User Experience Technologies 251
Application Distribution 252-257 Application Distribution Project Detail Worksheet 252 Investment Memo – Application Distribution 253-256 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Application Distribution 257
Modernize Tools for Software Development 258-262 Modernize Tools for Software Development Project Detail Worksheet 258 Investment Memo – Modernize Tools for Software Development 259-261 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Modernize Tools for Software Development 262
2018 General Rate Case Index of Workpapers
SCE-04, Vol.02 Book B
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)Customer Service Capitalized Software Projects 1-73 SCE.com Strategic Upgrade/Stabilization 6-8
SCE.com Project Detail Worksheet 7 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - SCE.com 8
Digital Customer Self Service 9-30 Digital Customer Self Service Project Detail Worksheet 10 Investment Memo - Digital Customer Self Service 11-17 Digital Customer Self Service Benefit-Cost Analysis 18-20 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Digital Customer Self Service 21 Mary Meeker, “Internet Trends 2015 – Code Conference,” Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, May 27, 2015, page 123 22-23
Francesco Banfi, Boris Gbahoue, Jeremy Schneider, “Higher Satisfaction at Lower Costs: Digitizing Customer Care, ” page 12 23-30
Alerts & Notifications 31-36 Alerts & Notifications Project Detail Worksheet 32-33 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Alerts & Notifications 34 Notification Architecture 35-36
Meter Data Management System Upgrade 37-43 Meter Data Management System Upgrade Project Detail Worksheet 38 Investment Memo - Meter Data Management System Upgrade 39-42 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Meter Data Management System Upgrade 43
Customer Service Projects less than $3M 44-732015 GRC Rate Changes 45
2015 GRC Rate Changes Project Detail Worksheet 45 Investment Memo 2015 GRC Rate Changes 46-48 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – 2015 GRC Rate Changes 49
2018 GRC Rate Changes 50 2018 GRC Rate Changes Project Detail Worksheet 50 Investment Memo 2018 GRC Rate Changes 51-53 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - 2018 GRC Rate Changes 54
Contact Center Optimization 55 Contact Center Optimization Project Detail Worksheet 55 Investment Memo Contact Center Optimization 56-58 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Contact Center Optimization 59-61
Itron 3.9 NMS Upgrade Project 62 Itron 3.9 NMS Upgrade Project – Project Detail Worksheet 63
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)Investment Memo Itron 3.9 NMS Upgrade Project 64-65 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Itron 3.9 NMS Upgrade Project 66
SmartConnect Monitor & Analysis 67-73 SmartConnect Monitor & Analysis Project Detail Worksheet 67 Investment Memo SmartConnect Monitor & Analysis 68-72 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - SmartConnect Monitor & Analysis 73
T&D Capitalized Software Projects 77-353 T&D Work Management Gap Analysis 77-101 WM - Portfolio Management 102-110
WM - Portfolio Management Project Detail Worksheet 103 Investment Memo - WM - Portfolio Management 104-109 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - WM - Portfolio Management 110
Scope Cost Management Tool 111-118 SCMT Project Detail Worksheet 112 Investment Memo – SCMT 113-117 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – SCMT 118
Work Management Dashboard 119-127 Work Management Dashboard Project Detail Worksheet 120 Investment Memo - Work Management Dashboard 121-126 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Work Management Dashboard 127
Transmission Telecommunication Work Order Lifecycle 128-136 Trans Telecomm Work Order Lifecycle Project Detail Worksheet 129 Investment Memo - Trans Telecomm Work Order Lifecycle 130-135 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Trans Telecomm Work Order Lifecycle 136
Click Schedule Refresh Release 1&2 137-140 Click Schedule Refresh Release 1&2 Project Detail Worksheet 138-139 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Click Schedule Refresh Release 1&2 140
Vegetation Management 141-148 Vegetation Management Project Detail Worksheet 142 Investment Memo - Vegetation Management 143-146 Vegetation Management Financial Forecast Workpaper 147 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Vegetation Management 148
Pole Loading Application Replacement Tool 149-153 PoLAR Tool Project Detail Worksheet 150 Investment Memo - PoLAR Tool 151-152 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - PoLAR Tool 153
Design Manager Refresh 154-158 DM Refresh Project Detail Worksheet 155 Investment Memo - DM Refresh 156-157 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - DM Refresh 158
Graphic Design Tool and Tract Deployment Refresh 159-168 GDT and Tract Deployment Refresh Project Detail Worksheet 160
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)Investment Memo - GDT and Tract Deployment Refresh 161-167 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - GDT and Tract Deployment Refresh 168
Consolidated Mobile Solution 169-174 CMS Project Detail Worksheet 170 Investment Memo – CMS 171-173 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – CMS 174
Field Tools Upgrade 175-180 Field Tools Upgrade Project Detail Worksheet 176 Investment Memo - Field Tools Upgrade 177-179 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - Field Tools Upgrade 180
Enhanced Business Resiliency for Energy Management System 181-186 EBR for Energy Management System Project Detail Worksheet 182 Investment Memo - EBR for Energy Management System 183-185 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates - EBR for Energy Management System 186
Comprehensive Situational Awareness for Transmission 187-353 CSAT Project Detail Worksheet 188 Investment Memo – CSAT 189-192 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – CSAT 193 Increased Trans Line Utilization: Arizona Southern California Outages on September 8 2011 194-349
Transmission Sensitivity Analysis for Stability Rating Increases. 350-353
2018 General Rate Case Index of Workpapers
SCE-04, Vol.02 Book C
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)Transmission and Distribution Software Projects (Cont.) 1-2Centralized Remedial Action Scheme (CRAS) 3-91
CRAS Project Detail Worksheet 4 Investment Memo – CRAS 5-7 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – CRAS 8 CRAS Cost Study Overview and Reference 9-56 CRAS Cost Study Worksheet 57-71 Northern Area Arming Points Comparison 72-74 Evolution of RAS Complexity - Base Data 75-78 Arming Points (Current and Future) 79-80 RASs Nearing or Exceeding Capacity Limits 81-85 Northern Area RAS Arming Points - Base Data 86-87 Stand-Alone RAS Capacity Increase Factors 88-89 Cumulative Completion Percentage of Transmission Interconnection Queue Projects 90-91
RGOOSE Project 92-103 RGOOSE Project Detail Worksheet 93 Investment Memo – RGOOSE 94-101 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – RGOOSE 102 GOOSE Data Volume Study 103-106
Energy Management System (EMS) Refresh 107-115 EMS Project Detail Worksheet 108 Investment Memo – EMS 109-114 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – EMS 115
Outage Management System (OMS) Refresh 116-123 OMS Project Detail Worksheet 117 Investment Memo – OMS 118-122 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – OMS 123
Distribution Management System 124-130 DMS Project Detail Worksheet 125 Investment Memo – DMS 126-129 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – DMS 130
Grid Interconnection Processing Tool (GIPT) 131-133 GIPT Project Detail Worksheet 132 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – GIPT 133
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)Grid Analytics Applications (GAA) 134-136
GAA Project Detail Worksheet 135 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – GAA 136
Long-Term Planning Tools 137-139 Long-Term Planning Tools Project Detail Worksheet 138 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Long-Term Planning Tools 139
Grid Connectivity Model 140-142 Grid Connectivity Model Project Detail Worksheet 141 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Grid Connectivity Model 142
Transmission and Distribution Projects less than $3 Million 143-192 Substation Health Assessment Tool 144-149
Substation Health Assessment Tool Project Detail Worksheet 144 Investment Memo – Substation Health Assessment Tool 145-148 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Substation Health Assessment Tool 149
Substation 3D Design 150-155 Substation 3D Design Project Detail Worksheet 150 Investment Memo – Substation 3D Design 151-154 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Substation 3D Design 155
Electronic WO Package Automation 156-161 Electronic WO Package Automation Project Detail Worksheet 156 Investment Memo – Electronic WO Package Automation 157-160 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Electronic WO Package Automation 161
Fast Response Energy Storage 162-166 Fast Response Energy Storage Project Detail Worksheet 162 Investment Memo – Fast Response Energy Storage 163-165 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Fast Response Energy Storage 166
Transient Devices 167-172 Transient Devices Project Detail Worksheet 167 Investment Memo – Transient Devices 168-171 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Transient Devices 172
High Z Impedance Fault Detection 173-177 High Z Impedance Fault Detection Project Detail Worksheet 173 Investment Memo – High Z Impedance Fault Detection 174-176 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – High Z Impedance Fault Detection 177
Secure DNP Ver5 Support for EMS 178-181 Secure DNP Ver5 Support for EMS Project Detail Worksheet 178 Investment Memo – Secure DNP Ver5 Support for EMS 179-180 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Secure DNP Ver5 Support for EMS 181
Grid Management Dashboard 182-186 Grid Management Dashboard Project Detail Worksheet 182 Investment Memo – Grid Management Dashboard 183-185 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Grid Management Dashboard 186
PSMP 2.0 187-192
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)PSMP 2.0 Project Detail Worksheet 187 Investment Memo – PSMP 2.0 188-191 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – PSMP 2.0 192
Power Supply Software Projects 193-262 Generation Automation Upgrade & Control Systems Refresh 196-199
Generation Automation Upgrade & Control Systems Refresh Project Detail Worksheet 197-198
2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Generation Automation Upgrade & Control Systems Refresh 199
Dam Monitoring and Surveillance 200-203 Dam Monitoring and Surveillance Project Detail Worksheet 201-202 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Dam Monitoring and Surveillance 203
CAISO Market Enhancements Program (IMEP) 204-211 IMEP Project Detail Worksheet 205-206 Investment Memo – IMEP 207-210 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – IMEP 211
Energy Planning Platform Upgrade (EPP) 212-218 EPP Project Detail Worksheet 213 Investment Memo – EPP 214-217 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – EPP 218
PCI Replacement 219-224 PCI Replacement Project Detail Worksheet 220 Investment Memo – PCI Replacement 221-223 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – PCI Replacement 224 Power Procurement Market Systems Front-Office (FO) Capabilities Strategic Assessment 225-236
Energy Trading and Risk Management (ETRM) 237-242 ETRM Project Detail Worksheet 238 Investment Memo – ETRM 239-241 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – ETRM 242
Aggregated Demand Response (ADR) 243-248 ADR Project Detail Worksheet 244 Investment Memo – ADR 245-247 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – ADR 248
Commodity Management Platform (CMP) 249-255 CMP Project Detail Worksheet 250 Investment Memo – CMP 251-254 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – CMP 255
Generation Management System (GMS) Upgrade 256-262 GMS Project Detail Worksheet 257 Investment Memo – GMS 258-261 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – GMS 262
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)Power Supply Projects less than $3M 263-281 Usage Measurement System (UMS) 264-268
Usage Measurement System (UMS) Project Detail Worksheet 264 Investment Memo – Usage Measurement System (UMS) 265-267 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Usage Measurement System (UMS) 268
PPD Control System HW Refresh 269-272 PPD Control System HW Refresh Project Detail Worksheet 269 Investment Memo – PPD Control System HW Refresh 270-271 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – PPD Control System HW Refresh 272
Gas Solar Control System Refresh 273-276 Gas Solar Control System Refresh Project Detail Worksheet 273 Investment Memo – Gas Solar Control System Refresh 274-275 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Gas Solar Control System Refresh 276
WM Reliability-Centered Maintenance 277-281 WM Reliability Centered Maint. Project Detail Worksheet 277 Investment Memo – WM Reliability Centered Maint. 278-280 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – WM Reliability Centered Maint. 281
Enterprise / Corporate Software Projects 282-318 Enterprise Content Management (ECM) 286-292
ECM Project Detail Worksheet 287 Investment Memo – ECM 288-291 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – ECM 292
Electronic Document Management / Records Management (eDMRM) 293-299 eDMRM Project Detail Worksheet 294 Investment Memo – eDMRM 295-298 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – eDMRM 299
Plant Ledger Upgrade and Tax Module Installation 300-318 PLU and TMI Project Detail Worksheet 301 Investment Memo – PLU and TMI 302-304 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – PLU and TMI 305 PowerPlan Tax Repairs White Paper 306-318
Corporate Projects less than $3M 319-342 Legal Platform Modernization 321-325
Legal Platform Modernization Project Detail Worksheet 321 Investment Memo – Legal Platform Modernization 322-324 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Legal Platform Modernization 325
Reg Affairs - TM2 Replacement 326-331 Reg Affairs - TM2 Replacement Project Detail Worksheet 326 Investment Memo – Reg Affairs - TM2 Replacement 327-330 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Reg Affairs - TM2 Replacement 331
Integrated Budget Planning 332-336 Integrated Budget Planning Project Detail Worksheet 332
DOCUMENT PAGE(S)Investment Memo – Integrated Budget Planning 333-335 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Integrated Budget Planning 336
Union Negotiations 337-342 Union Negotiations Project Detail Worksheet 337 Investment Memo – Union Negotiations 338-341 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Union Negotiations 342
Operation Services Projects 343-392 C-CURE 9000 344-349
C-CURE 9000 Project Detail Worksheet 345 Investment Memo - C-CURE 9000 346-348 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – C-CURE 9000 349
Operational Services Projects less than $3M 350-392 Mobile Field Response 351-357
Mobile Field Response Project Detail Worksheet 351 Investment Memo – Mobile Field Response 352-356 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Mobile Field Response 357
Crisis Information Management System 358-362 Crisis Information Management System Project Detail Worksheet 358 Investment Memo – Crisis Information Management System 359-361 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Crisis Information Management System 362
Seismic Risk Assessment 363-367 Seismic Risk Assessment Project Detail Worksheet 363 Investment Memo – Seismic Risk Assessment 364-366 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Seismic Risk Assessment 367
EHSync Environmental Clearance Phase 2 368-375EHSync Environmental Clearance Phase 2 Project Detail Worksheet 368-369 Investment Memo – EHSync Environmental Clearance 370-374 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – EHSync Environmental Clearance 375
Facilities Management System 376-380 Facilities Management System Project Detail Worksheet 376 Investment Memo – Facilities Management System 377-379 Facilities Management System 380
Safety Observations 381-385 Safety Observations Project Detail Worksheet 381 Investment Memo – Safety Observations 382-384 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Safety Observations 385
Ariba Deployment and Supplier Portal Decomm 386-392 Ariba Deployment and Supplier Portal Decomm Detail Worksheet 386 Investment Memo – Ariba Detail Worksheet 387-391 2018 GRC IT Capital Estimates – Ariba 392
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Transmission and Distribution Software Projects (Cont.)
1
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CAPITAL WORKPAPERS - ITSouthern California Edison Company
OU SUMMARY, BY WITNESS, BY EXHIBIT(Nominal $000)
Forecast Capital Expenditures
TotalTestimony DescriptionItem
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
38,201 56,470 37,782 23,380 13,392 169,2251 Tim Boucher
SCE-04, Vol. 02 38,201 56,470 37,782 23,380 13,392 169,2251.1
3,744 12,732 356 367 392 17,590CIT-00-SD-PM-0002471.1.1
0 2,000 4,000 8,000 8,000 22,000CIT-00-DM-DM-0000851.1.2
459 6,323 6,029 2,260 0 15,070CIT-00-OP-NS-0005191.1.3
459 6,901 6,318 0 0 13,678CIT-00-OP-NS-0005201.1.4
3,440 5,025 5,049 1,432 0 14,946CIT-00-OP-NS-0005211.1.5
950 0 0 0 0 950CIT-00-SD-PM-0001021.1.6
2,440 0 0 0 0 2,440CIT-00-SD-PM-0001371.1.7
0 0 2,600 0 0 2,600CIT-00-SD-PM-0001871.1.8
0 0 1,260 720 0 1,980CIT-00-SD-PM-0002061.1.9
0 0 0 0 1,000 1,000CIT-00-SD-PM-0002331.1.10
0 0 0 1,000 1,000 2,000CIT-00-DM-DM-0000831.1.11
4,500 5,900 0 0 0 10,400CIT-00-SD-PM-0002431.1.12
6,210 7,220 2,670 0 0 16,100CIT-00-SD-PM-0002311.1.13
0 1,500 3,500 1,600 0 6,600CIT-00-DM-DM-0000231.1.14
0 0 1,000 6,000 3,000 10,000CIT-00-DM-DM-0000471.1.15
6,800 3,500 0 0 0 10,300CIT-00-DM-DM-0000501.1.16
0 3,000 4,000 0 0 7,000CIT-00-DM-DM-0000511.1.17
0 0 0 1,000 0 1,000CIT-00-DM-DM-0000841.1.18
0 2,000 0 0 0 2,000CIT-00-DM-DM-0000861.1.19
0 0 1,000 1,000 0 2,000CIT-00-DM-DM-0000901.1.20
5,450 370 0 0 0 5,820CIT-00-SD-PM-0000411.1.21
1,500 0 0 0 0 1,500CIT-00-SD-PM-0001401.1.22
1,620 0 0 0 0 1,620CIT-00-SD-PM-0001521.1.23
630 0 0 0 0 630CIT-00-SD-PM-0002341.1.24
2
See WP_SCE-04, Vol. 2 Bk B for the following:CIT-00-DM-DM-000023CIT-00-DM-DM-000047CIT-00-SD-PM-000137CIT-00-DM-DM-000085CIT-00-DM-DM-000051
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Centralized Remedial Action Scheme
3
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 6428
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000102
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 4/17/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year950
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
950
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software795
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Centralized Remedial Action Scheme Project (CRAS)
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
CRAS Project
4
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Centralized Remedial Action Schemes EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (1 of 3)
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Buy or build: [X]Leverage current capabilities: [ ]
Description:
This new system software and hardware will allow better compliance with state generation interconnection requirements and Renewable Portfolio Standards and reduce operating risks on the transmission grid by reducing the amount of generation tripped and/or firm load shed. In addition, once the CRAS platform is in place, adding new schemes is less expensive (less relays and less field labor needed) than stand-alone RASs. The CRAS platform will be implemented with two initial stand-alone RASs incorporated. Then normal RAS deployment will occur using the following criteria for RASs into CRAS:
All new RASs Complex existing RASs in renewables-rich areas
This funding request is for CRAS Phase 1 only. Future deployment is covered by existing approved infrastructure funding for RAS deployment.
PROJECT RATIONALE
Discretionary / Non-negotiable: Discretionary
Justification:
Compliance with state generation interconnection requirements and Renewable Portfolio Standards, as well as reduction of operating risks.
Rate impact:
Decrease (BC ratio = 2.00)
Business needs:
This project addresses the following needs:
1. Stand-alone RASs are bottle-necked in design and installation, hampering SCE’s ability to interconnect generation in compliance with state policies on large generation interconnections and to meet the 2020 33% and 2030 50% Renewable Portfolio Standard targets;
2. Stand-alone RASs are more expensive to implement and test or change and test (require more labor because of different test methodologies and capabilities);
3. As they become more complex, stand-alone RASs trip too much generation and/or shed too much firm load, substantially increasing operating risks for complex schemes; and
4. Certain upcoming RASs are too complex (have too many arming points needed when future growth is considered) for a stand-alone RAS approach and require CRAS.
Urgency:
1. Renewable Portfolio Standard requirements and other incentives have an increase in generation projects in the CISO queue and an increase in percentage of projects completing;
2. Due to complexity of most new interconnection clusters, individual RASs are less practical and tend to trip more generation and/or load than needed, increasing operating risks; and
3. CRAS is needed to facilitate generation interconnections.
5
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2
Centralized Remedial Action Schemes EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (2 of 3)
PROJECT FINANCIALS
6
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
3
Centralized Remedial Action Schemes EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (3 of 3)
ALTERNATIVES Alternatives Considered
Alternative 1: Do not do “project” (in this sense, by “project” we mean further deployment of CRAS, not the base CRAS project already implemented) and instead, for the three RASs out of the four under consideration where a stand-alone RAS capacity upgrade is possible, increase the capacity of stand-alone RAS relays instead of converting the RASs into CRAS. This alternative is not recommended because it is cost prohibitive and merely sets another hard arming points limit in place that will be exceeded in the future, causing the same capacity shortfall. In addition, a critical deficiency of this alternative is that Northern Area RAS (the remaining RAS out of the four under consideration) cannot be accommodated as a stand-alone RAS, asit would not meet grid protection requirements even if there is an increase in stand-alone RAS relay capacity (see Alternative 2). Alternative 1 does not provide a long-term solution to arming point capacity and is not cost-efficient.
Alternative 2: Do not do “project” (in this sense, by “project” we mean further deployment of CRAS, beyond the base CRAS project already implemented) and instead, build a transmission line to meet the Northern Area protection needs. This alternative is not recommended due to costly infrastructure and lead time requirements that would significantly impact the feasibility of QC-8 and QC-9 renewables generation projects.
KEY BENEFITS
Benefits:
1. CRAS has a Benefit/Cost ratio of 2.00 (please see work papers: “CRAS Cost Study Overview and Reference” and “CRAS Cost Study Worksheet” for supporting information).
2. CRAS has a $49.13 million cost, which is less than the cost of 20 miles of new transmission, making it the least cost alternative to both transmission build out and stand-alone RAS implementation (using the criteria mentioned earlier for new and existing RASs); and
3. CRAS enables the business to address interconnection requests from generators in a timely manner, supports SCE’s achievement of the 33% RPS by 2020 and 50% RPS by 2030.
PV of Savings:
BC = 2.00
Justification of Benefits:
See cost study work papers cited above.
KEY ISSUES / RISKS
1. N/A: Project is completed. Current GRC effort is around remaining cost recovery for project phase (about $16 M not including AFUDC)
2. A network upgrade project, RGOOSE Project, is required as a key enabler for CRAS deployment based on upcoming complex RAS data volume requirements. The RGOOSE protocol based on standard IEC 61850 90-5 has been implemented by GE Multilin (relay provider) and thoroughly tested by GE. The CRAS Central Controller sub-vendor, SISCO, will need to upgrade central controller software to enable use of RGOOSE protocol. This is relatively low risk.
Mitigation:
1. N/A 2. Perform initial tests of higher risk items (such as ability of RGOOSE data packets to pass quickly through required firewall devices on the data paths) in the RGOOSE Project, followed by deployment of Colorado River RAS into CRAS with RGOOSE with additional cycles of testing.
7
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-$
-
$
-$
-$
-
$
-$
-
$
Ven
dor L
abor
(Con
tract
)83
,342
$
22
7,50
2$
1,
269,
791
$
1,
940,
669
$
1,49
1,03
2$
5,
645,
898
$76
8,29
6$
-$
-
$
11,4
26,5
29$
SC
E L
abor
(Lab
or)
242,
837
$
50
0,03
5$
1,
546,
999
$
3,
662,
097
$
1,73
2,16
5$
2,
677,
303
$18
1,70
4$
-$
-
$
10,5
43,1
39$
SI L
abor
(Oth
ers)
251
$
11
,799
$
10
0,83
3$
1,
953,
412
$
1,05
9,36
5$
44
2,70
1$
-$
-
$
-$
3,
568,
362
$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n (In
dire
ct)
-$
-$
-$
24
,515
$
22,8
95$
21
,410
$
-
$
-$
-
$
68,8
20$
La
bor S
ubto
tal
-$
326,
430
$
73
9,33
6$
2,
917,
622
$
7,
580,
692
$
4,30
5,45
8$
8,
787,
312
$95
0,00
0$
-$
-
$
25,6
06,8
50$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
-$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
-$
Har
dwar
e(M
ater
ial +
Allo
catio
n +
Ove
rhea
ds)
-$
15,290
$8,73
6,47
3$
12,963
,006
$54
1,31
3$
511,66
1$
756,22
3$
$$
$23
,523
,966
$O
S a
ndD
BLi
cens
es-
$
$
$$
$$
$$
$$
-$
To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.-
$
15
,290
$
8,
736,
473
$ 12
,963
,006
$
541,
313
$
51
1,66
1$
756,
223
$
-
$
-$
-
$
23,5
23,9
66$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t-
$
34
1,72
0$
9,47
5,80
9$
15,8
80,6
29$
8,
122,
005
$
4,81
7,11
9$
9,
543,
535
$95
0,00
0$
-$
-
$
49,1
30,8
17$
Con
tinge
ncy
-$
-$
-$
-$
-
$
-$
-
$
-
$
-$
-
$
-$
TOTA
L-
$
34
1,72
0$
9,47
5,80
9$
15,8
80,6
29$
8,
122,
005
$
4,81
7,11
9$
9,
543,
535
$95
0,00
0$
-$
-
$
49,1
30,8
17$
Test
imon
y*34
0,00
0$
9,48
0,00
0$
15,8
80,0
00$
8,
120,
000
$
4,82
0,00
0$
9,
540,
000
$95
0,00
0$
-$
-
$
49,1
30,0
00$
Ass
umpt
ions
:
Cen
tral
ized
Rem
edia
l Act
ion
Sche
me
(CR
AS)
Pro
ject
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
8
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CRAS Cost Study Overview and Reference
9
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CRAS
(Cen
tralize
dRe
med
ialA
ctionSche
me)
WorkPape
rs
CRAS
CostStud
yOverviewan
dRe
ference
For2
018GR
CFilin
g
1.Starth
ereforo
verviewof
busin
essd
rivers,alternatives
considered
,costd
rivers,and
detailedbreakdow
nsof
howtheeq
uatio
nsandvaria
bles
work
2.Associated
workpape
r“CR
ASCo
stStud
yWorkshe
et”istheExcelw
orkshe
etthat
calculates
expe
cted
costavoidances
usingeq
uatio
nsde
scrib
edinthisworkpape
r.
1CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
10
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Glo
ssar
y of
Ter
ms
•ArmingPo
int–
Acontingencythat
theRA
Sconstantlyevaluates.RA
S“arm
s”(becom
esreadyto
tripgene
ratio
nor
shed
load)atthis
thresholdvalue.Fore
xample,thiscouldbe
atransm
issionlineflo
wam
ount.A
rmingpo
intsareassociated
with
specificgene
rators,
thou
ghthey
may
sharecontingencies.
•Ba
seCase
RAS–Thestandalon
eRA
Ss(ElN
idoandElSegund
o),con
sidered
asaun
it,that
CRAS
replaced
/incorporated
inproject
phase.Ga
vevery
usefulandaccurate
comparison
betw
eenCR
ASandstandalon
eRA
Ssviarecorded
costs.
•CR
AS–Ce
ntralized
Remed
ialA
ctionSche
me–Ce
ntralized
RASthat
haslogiccontrollersinhigh
speedserversinGridCo
ntrolCen
ters.
•CapacityUpgrade
–Logiccapacityup
gradeto
astandalon
eRA
Srelaythat
allowsittohave
morearmingpo
intsandadditio
nal
commun
ications
channe
ls.Fore
xistingstandalon
eRA
Ss,thisinvolvesinstalling
anup
graded
CPUmod
uleandpo
wer
supp
ly,and
individu
alrelayre
testing,as
wellasretestin
gtheoverallRAS
forp
rope
rfun
ctionality.Thisleaves
ahigher
“hardstop
”inarming
pointsforthe
standalon
eRA
S,so
itisatempo
rary
solutio
nto
capacityissue
s.•
Contingency
An“N
1”sin
gleou
tage
or“N
2”do
ubleou
tage,suchas
atransm
issionlineor
lines
beingoverloaded
,thata
RAS
evaluatestoprotecttransmissionor
gene
ratio
nassets.Firstthe
RASarms,then
ifthevaluegettingmon
itored(suchas
alineflo
w)
getsworse,risk
ingdamage,theRA
Stripsg
enerationor
shed
sload(orb
oth).
•Ge
nerator–
Agene
rator(whe
nreferred
toincontexto
fapo
wer
source)o
rgen
erationcustom
er(w
henreferringto
abu
sinesse
ntity
with
aprojectintheCaliforniaISOIntercon
nectionQue
ueor
completed
projectinthefie
ld)
•Ha
rdStop
–Refersto
hard
limits
implicitinarelay’sh
ardw
areof
firmwarethat
limitthenu
mbe
roflogicstep
s(armingpo
ints)itcan
have.Thisthresho
ldvalue(currently48
armingpo
ints)isa
limitto
thecapacityto
addadditio
nalgen
eratorsfor
astandalon
eRA
S.•
PSCor
ITPSC–SCE’sP
ower
System
sCon
trolsg
roup
.Adm
inistersC
RASintheGridCo
ntrolCen
ters.
•Re
lays
(stand
alon
eRA
S)–GE
N60
with
individu
allycustom
izedsettings.
•Re
lays
(CRA
S)–GE
N60
with
standardize
dsettings
(onlytw
obasic
type
s:mon
itorin
gor
mitigatio
n).
•SC&M
SCE’sS
ubstationCo
nstructio
n&Mainten
ance
–thisgrou
phastesttechs
that
workon
fieldrelays.
•TS&S–TechnicalSup
port&Strategy
–partof
SCE’sS
C&M
(Sub
stationCo
nstructio
n&Mainten
ance)–
testingSM
Es.
2CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
11
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CRAS
CostStud
yOverviewan
dRe
ference
Tableof
Conten
ts,H
ighLevelSectio
n
•D
efin
ition
of R
AS
s an
d W
hat T
hey
Do
on th
e Tr
ansm
issi
on G
rid
(slid
es 4
–6)
•Bu
sine
ss P
robl
em a
nd A
ltern
ativ
es C
onsi
dere
d (s
lides
7 –
9)•
SCE
’s P
ositi
on o
n C
ost R
ecov
ery
for C
RA
S a
nd R
GO
OS
E P
roje
ct
(slid
e 10
) •
Sum
mar
y of
Res
ults
(Exp
ecte
d C
ost S
avin
gs in
Nom
inal
Dol
lars
) (s
lide
11)
•Im
plem
enta
tion
Cos
t Per
Rel
ay: R
ecor
ded
Cos
t Diff
eren
ces
(slid
e 12
)•
Nor
ther
n A
rea
Avoi
ded
Tran
smis
sion
Cos
t(s
lide
13)
•C
ost C
ompo
nent
Diff
eren
ces
Bet
wee
n C
RA
S a
nd S
tand
-Alo
ne R
AS
s(s
lide
14)
•C
ost P
er R
elay
: Spe
cific
Cos
t Fac
tors
Driv
ing
CR
AS
Fav
orab
le V
aria
nce
(slid
e 15
)•
Gre
ater
Effi
cien
cy o
f CR
AS
Fie
ld T
estin
g(s
lide
16)
•D
etai
l Lev
el/B
acku
p S
ectio
n(s
lides
17
–47
) 3CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
12
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
RASProtectio
nSystem
–Co
mmon
Factors
4
1.RA
Ss(bothstandalon
eandCR
AS)are
desig
nedto
mitigate
transm
issionsystem
prob
lemsc
ausedby
thelossof
transm
issionsystem
capacity(e.g.,lossof
alineor
atransformer).
2.Iftheprob
lem
isgene
ratio
nexceed
ingtheremaining
transm
issioncapacity(resultin
ginoverloadso
rinstability),the
RASwilltripgene
ratio
n.3.
Iftheprob
lem
isload
exceed
ingtheremaining
transm
issioncapacity(resultin
gin
overloadso
rvoltage
collapse),the
RASwilltripload.
•Thereisno
diffe
rencebe
tweenastandalon
eRA
SandCR
ASintheserespects(1
–3).
13
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
RASProtectio
nSystem
–CR
ASAd
vantages
5
•CR
ASim
provem
entsover
standalon
eRA
Ssinclud
e:o
Logi
c pr
oces
sing
(“an
alyt
ics”
) bei
ng a
t the
con
trol c
ente
rs in
stea
d of
in th
e su
bsta
tion
Sig
nific
antly
gre
ater
eas
e of
cha
nge
of lo
gic
proc
essi
ngo
Gre
atly
impr
oved
arc
hite
ctur
eB
ette
r des
ign
for p
rote
ctin
g tra
nsm
issi
on a
sset
so
Bet
ter s
yste
m a
war
enes
s an
d st
abili
tyG
loba
l rea
ch a
cros
s in
corp
orat
ed R
AS
sA
ble
to in
corp
orat
e ex
tern
al s
yste
m d
ata
Hel
ps p
reve
nt c
asca
ding
failu
res
betw
een
inte
rrela
ted
RA
Ss
oE
nhan
ced
auto
mat
ion
and
sim
ulat
ion
capa
bilit
ies
Mor
e co
mpr
ehen
sive
test
ing
Sig
nific
ant r
educ
tion
in te
stin
g la
bor
•C
RA
S a
nd c
omm
unic
atio
ns: T
he n
eed
for s
peed
and
aw
aren
ess
of c
ondi
tions
at m
ultip
le
subs
tatio
ns in
volv
ing
mul
tiple
tran
smis
sion
line
s dr
ives
the
need
for h
igh
spee
d, p
reci
se
com
mun
icat
ions
pro
toco
ls s
uch
as th
e re
cent
ly a
vaila
ble
RG
OO
SE
–w
hich
was
des
igne
d by
in
dust
ry e
xper
ts in
the
IEC
618
50 s
tand
ards
gro
ups
for t
hat v
ery
purp
ose.
RG
OO
SE
pro
vide
s “r
outa
ble”
com
mun
icat
ions
–w
hich
giv
es p
reci
se ta
rget
ing
to e
ach
mes
sage
–un
like
GO
OS
E,
the
curr
ent b
road
cast
(non
-targ
eted
) pro
toco
l tha
t CR
AS
use
s.
14
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CRAS
Simplified
System
Diagram
6
•Blue
lines
indicate
high
speeddiversepath
commun
icationlinks
with
switche
sand
routers.AandBsid
emon
itorin
gandmitigatin
gdata
goes
toandfrom
controlcenters.Per
WECCrequ
irementsRA
Sshave
AandBsid
esanddiversepathsfor
redu
ndancy/reliabilitypu
rposes.The
smallarrow
srep
resent
high
volumeof
messages.
•CR
AScentralcon
trollersareserversincontrolcentersthat
evaluate
mon
itorin
gdata
andsend
mitigatio
nsig
nals.
•Mitigatio
nrelays
tripgene
ratio
nor
shed
load
asne
eded
toprotectg
rid(viacircuitb
reakersn
otshow
n).
•RG
OOSE
isthecommun
icationarchite
cturethat
enablesh
ighspeedandreliablecommun
icationbe
tweenthesubstatio
nandcontrolcenter.Im
portantto
hand
lethehigh
volumeof
complex
messaging
need
ed.
1. O
nly
one
sim
plifi
ed s
ubst
atio
n sh
own.
RA
Ss
are
tight
ly in
tegr
ated
with
one
or m
ore
subs
, gen
erat
ors,
and
tran
smis
sion
line
s.
AlhambraCo
ntrol
Center
IrvineCo
ntrol
Center
Mitigatio
nRe
lay
Mitigatio
nRe
lay
Mon
itorin
gRe
lay
Mon
itorin
gRe
lay
Bsid
eAsid
e
Substatio
n1
Gene
rator
orTrans
mission
Line
Sm
all a
rrow
s re
pres
ent h
igh
volu
me
of
com
plex
m
essa
ges
6CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
CB CB
CircuitB
reaker
15
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Busin
ess
Driv
er –
RASs
Nea
ring
or E
xcee
ding
Cap
acity
Lim
its
6CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
16
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Arm
ing
Poin
ts (C
urre
nt &
Fut
ure)
6CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
•Armingpo
intsbe
stmeasure
ofcomplexity
andcapa
city.
•Th
esearethe4RA
Sson
priorslid
e
17
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
9
Busin
essP
roblem
&Options
Considered
•Bu
sine
ssProb
lem:C
apacity
issue
sonup
comingRA
Ssareexpe
cted
with
numerou
sgen
erationcustom
ers
inqu
eue.SCEtariffreq
uiresthatthe
gene
ratorsbe
accommod
ated
insomemanne
r.•Options:
1.CR
ASwith
RGOOSE
2.Increase
capacity
ofstandalon
eRA
Srelays
3.CR
ASwith
GOOSE
4.Bu
ildtransm
ission
•Re
commen
datio
n:Option#1
bestaddressesthe
busin
essp
roblem
servinggene
ratio
ninasecure
manne
r.Option2on
lyworks
for3
ofthe4RA
Ssun
dercon
sideration(see
testim
onydraftfor
anexplanationof
why
astandalon
eRA
Sisno
tfeasib
leforN
orthernArea
RAS).O
ption2ismoreexpe
nsivethan
Option1andison
eof
thealternatives
inthiscost
stud
y.Option3isdiscussedinthetestim
onydraft.Theup
comingRA
Sshave
muchhigher
volumedata
requ
irementsthan
project
phaseRA
SsandGO
OSE
does
notg
ivethepe
rform
ance
orabilityto
trackandqu
icklyfix
commun
icationprob
lemsthat
RGOOSE
does.
Option4isthealternativeto
CRAS
with
RGOOSE
forN
orthernArea
RASandison
eof
thealternatives
inthiscoststud
y.
18
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
10
SCE’
s C
ost R
ecov
ery
Posi
tion
on C
RA
S an
d R
GO
OSE
•R
GO
OS
E, a
s ex
plai
ned
furth
er in
the
RG
OO
SE
sec
tion
of th
e G
RC
test
imon
y, is
a
netw
ork
com
mun
icat
ions
pro
toco
l upg
rade
that
ser
ves
as a
n en
able
r for
fu
rther
CR
AS
dep
loym
ent.
Com
pare
d to
GO
OS
E s
tand
ard
(onl
y av
aila
ble
prot
ocol
whe
n C
RA
S la
unch
ed),
RG
OO
SE
sta
ndar
d gi
ves
mor
e re
liabl
e co
mm
unic
atio
ns p
erfo
rman
ce, i
s si
gnifi
cant
ly m
ore
scal
able
, and
pro
vide
s en
hanc
ed c
omm
unic
atio
ns tr
oubl
esho
otin
g an
d au
tom
atio
n.
•C
RA
S is
mor
e co
st e
ffici
ent t
han
the
alte
rnat
ives
con
side
red
on p
rior s
lide.
C
RA
S c
ost e
ffici
ency
is c
over
ed a
t a h
igh
leve
l in
the
CR
AS
test
imon
y se
ctio
n,
deta
iled
in th
e C
RA
S C
ost S
tudy
Wor
kshe
et, a
nd e
xpla
ined
in d
epth
in th
is w
ork
pape
r.
•Th
eref
ore
CR
AS
cos
t avo
idan
ces
shou
ld c
over
bot
hC
RA
S re
mai
ning
un
reco
vere
d pr
ojec
t cos
ts a
nd R
GO
OS
E p
roje
ct c
osts
.
19
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Summarytableusingda
tafrom
Expe
cted
Savingsa
ndTran
smission
tabs
ofCR
ASCo
stStud
yWorkshe
et
Summaryof
Results
11CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
20
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Impl
emen
tatio
n C
ost P
er R
elay
: Rec
orde
d C
ost D
iffer
ence
sVirtua
llyallcostsallocatedto
relays
arelabo
rand
overhe
adso
nlabo
r.Th
ereisvery
little
materialcost.
Stan
dAlon
eRe
lay
CRAS
Relay
7%
42%
51%STANDALO
NERA
SRE
LAY
Material
Engine
eringandDe
sign
FieldWork
Stan
d-Al
one
RAS
Rela
y, E
ach
Cos
t Cat
egor
yP
erce
ntC
ost
Mat
eria
l7%
15,0
00$
E
ngin
eerin
g an
d D
esig
n42
%84
,000
$
Fiel
d W
ork
51%
101,
570
$
To
tal
100%
200,
570
$
CRAS
Rel
ay, E
ach
Cos
t Cat
egor
yP
erce
ntC
ost
Mat
eria
l12
%15
,000
$
Eng
inee
ring
and
Des
ign
40%
47,7
42$
Fi
eld
Wor
k48
%57
,973
$
Tota
l10
0%12
0,71
5$
12%
40%
48%
CRASRE
LAY
Material
Engine
eringandDe
sign
FieldWork
$200,570
$120,715
12CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
21
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CRAS
CostStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
13
Nor
ther
n A
rea
Avoi
ded
Tran
smis
sion
Cos
t
Reason
swhy
newtransm
issionbu
ildison
lyalternativeto
CRAS
with
RGOOSE
forN
orthernArea:
SeeCR
ASTestim
onysectionand
workpape
r:“Transmission
Alternativeto
CRAS
forN
orthern
Area.”
Form
oreinform
ationon
thecost
aspe
ctsa
ndannu
alcostdistrib
ution:
See“TransmissionAlternativeto
CRAS
forN
orthernArea”or
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et.
22
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Cos
t Com
pone
nt D
iffer
ence
s B
etw
een
CR
AS
and
Stan
d-A
lone
RA
Ss
Com
pone
ntR
AS
CR
AS
Con
trolle
rLo
gic
cont
rolle
r is
in th
e fie
ld –
hard
mem
ory
step
s lim
its w
hat i
t ca
n ha
ndle
for c
ompl
ex g
ener
atio
n in
terc
onne
ctio
ns.
Cen
traliz
ed lo
gic
is n
ot li
mite
d an
d ca
n ha
ndle
eve
n th
e m
ost
com
plex
gen
erat
ion
inte
rcon
nect
ions
.
Rel
ay (A
lloca
ted
Labo
r and
Cou
nt)
Eac
h R
AS
has
a s
et o
f ded
icat
ed re
lays
–re
sulti
ng in
mul
tiple
re
lays
for o
ne li
ne/b
ank
elem
ent.
Few
er re
lays
nee
ded
in th
e lo
ng te
rm: E
ach
line/
bank
ele
men
t has
a
dedi
cate
d re
lay
–on
e tim
e in
stal
latio
n an
d co
mm
issi
onin
g.
Rel
ay s
harin
g of
line
mon
itorin
g re
lays
pos
sibl
e w
ith C
RAS
, re
quire
s ad
ditio
nal r
elay
s w
ith s
tand
-alo
ne.
Com
mun
icat
ion
Pro
prie
tary
poin
t-to-
poin
t pro
toco
l.S
tand
ards
-bas
edm
ultic
ast i
nter
natio
nal p
roto
col.
Alg
orith
m“G
ener
ator
-cen
tric:
” Non
-sys
tem
atic
, not
as
focu
sed
on
cont
inge
ncie
s as
it s
houl
d be
.“C
ontin
genc
y-ce
ntric
:” B
ette
r arc
hite
ctur
e –
syst
emat
ic a
nd a
ble
to
take
mor
e fo
cuse
d an
d pr
ecis
e ac
tion
to p
rote
ct li
nes.
Test
ing
(Sig
nific
ant L
abor
C
ompo
nent
)
Fiel
d cr
ew e
nd-to
-end
test
ing
requ
ires
mul
tiple
cre
ws
at e
ach
subs
tatio
n an
d fre
quen
t shi
fts o
f phy
sica
l con
nect
ions
with
test
se
ts (l
abor
inte
nsiv
e)
CR
AS
’ onb
oard
test
tool
s en
able
sam
e va
lidat
ion
wor
king
with
fie
ld c
rew
s bu
t is
muc
h fa
ster
(low
labo
r im
pact
, les
s cr
ews,
less
du
ratio
n)
14CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
•Significant
driversa
rehighlighted
inyellow:C
RASstandardiza
tionof
relaysettings,increased
automationintesting
process,andlong
term
redu
ctioninrelaycoun
tper
RAS.Nextslidedrillsd
ownfurthe
r.
23
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Cos
t Per
Rel
ay: S
peci
fic C
ost F
acto
rs D
rivin
g C
RA
S Fa
vora
ble
Varia
nce
CRAS
isless
expe
nsivethan
tradition
al,stand
alon
eRA
Ss(ofthe
type
ofRA
Ssplanne
dto
bebrou
ghtinto
CRAS
).AThreemainareaso
fcostsavings
forC
RAS:
1.Re
lays:Lesslab
orfora
llRA
Ss,from
design
toim
plem
entatio
n(la
borisa
llocatedto
relays
from
design
on)
CRAS
relays
andfie
ldde
ploymentsarestandardize
dandtestingisautomated
andstream
lined
(vs.muchmore
labo
rintensivestandalon
eRA
Ss)–
significantred
uctio
nintestinglabo
r2.
Relays:A
llocatedlabo
rcostsassociated
with
chan
gesinRA
Ssaremuchless
onaverageforC
RAS
CRAS
Analyticchangesa
remucheasie
rtoprogram
andtestcentrally
Endto
endfie
ldcrew
testingistim
econsum
ingandexpe
nsive(one
ormorecrew
sate
achsubstatio
n,all
substatio
nsinRA
S,extend
edpe
riodof
time)
–isrequ
iredforstand
alon
eRA
Ssbu
tthe
testingmetho
dsforC
RAS
aremuchmorestream
lined
inthefie
ld,tho
ughthesamethings
arevalidated
.CRA
Sen
dto
endtestingproves
outthe
RASfunctio
nalitymoreefficiently.
CRAS
haso
nboard
automated
testtoolsa
ndismuchlesstim
econsum
ingto
testas
RASs
areadde
d.3.
Relaycoun
t:Less
relays
need
edlong
term
whe
nusingCR
ASdu
eto
relaysharingbe
tweenRA
Ss21
%fewer
relays
forC
RASinthelong
term
versus
standalon
eRA
Sapproach.
Dueto
somede
sign/settings
diffe
rences
basedon
standardiza
tion,CR
ASuses
10%morerelays
tostartw
ithand
over
timetheCR
ASrelaysharingadvantagekicksinto
give
fewer
relays
overall.
[A].Allnew
RASs,and
conversio
nRA
Ssthat
meetcriteria(com
plex
RAS,high
grow
threne
wablesa
rea)
15CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
24
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Gre
ater
Effi
cien
cy o
f CR
AS
Fiel
d Te
stin
gAfterind
ividua
lrelay
testingiscomplete(assum
ediden
ticalcostsfor
stan
dalon
eRA
Srelayan
dCR
ASrelay),req
uiredlabo
rdivergesd
ramaticallybe
tweenthetw
oalternatives:
•Standalon
eRA
Sfie
ldtestinguses
100%
physical/electricalinpu
tsas
provided
bybu
lkyfie
ldtestsets.The
testsetshave
tobe
hooked
upto
multip
lerelays
totestseveral“testplan
lines”(in
othe
rwords,run
throughaserie
sofsteps
inatest
scen
ario).
•Then
thetestsetleads
have
tocarefully
bediscon
nected
from
liverelayeq
uipm
entw
ithshockhazards.
•Ane
wseto
frelaysish
ookedup
usingtestleads.Thisusually
willrequ
iremovingthetestset.Then
anothe
rfew
test
plan
lines
canbe
done
.•Thisprocessisrep
eatedas
need
edto
completethetestplan
forthe
RAS,which
istypically
250–10
00lines
inlength.
•Thisisacumbe
rsom
e,manualprocessandcann
otbe
done
quicklybe
causeof
theshockhazardsa
nddangerou
ssubstatio
nenvironm
ent.
Diffe
rences
inCR
AStestingprocesstha
tdriv
elargelabo
rsavings:
•Inessence,CR
ASbe
nefitsfrom
itsability
toqu
icklyload
virtualscenario
swith
outreq
uirin
grepe
titiveph
ysicalinpu
ts.
•Thetestscen
ariosa
re,incompu
tingterm
sand
abilityto
validatetheRA
S,identical.
•Bu
tsettin
gthescen
ariosu
pandrunn
ingthem
with
fullfie
ldverificationcantake
minutes
insteadof
hours.
•Partof
thereason
forthisisthatp
riortestin
gof
theRA
Slogicisdo
neby
ITPo
wer
System
sCon
trolsp
riortofie
ldtesting(in
clud
edinITPSCcostsfor
CRAS
costs)andallthe
scen
ariosb
eing
referred
toarealreadyde
velope
dandeasy
toload
(essentia
lly“point
andclick”).
16CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
25
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Det
ail L
evel
/Bac
kup
Sect
ion
Purp
ose:
Set
s in
pla
ce th
e fa
ctor
s an
d as
sum
ptio
ns th
at d
rive
the
cost
equ
atio
ns•
Assu
mpt
ions
abo
ut fu
ture
RA
S g
row
th•
Diff
eren
ces
(CR
AS
ver
sus
stan
d-al
one
RA
S) i
n en
gine
erin
g an
d de
sign
•D
iffer
ence
s (C
RA
S v
ersu
s st
and-
alon
e R
AS
) in
test
met
hods
•Te
stin
g P
roce
ss F
low
Cha
rts (C
RA
S v
ersu
s st
and-
alon
e R
AS
)•
Gen
erat
or s
ite c
osts
for C
RA
S c
onve
rsio
ns (h
ow th
e co
sts
wer
e es
timat
ed fo
r 3 b
asic
type
s)•
Base
cos
ts u
sed
in e
quat
ions
(sum
mar
y ta
ble)
•Eq
uatio
n de
tails
: Bec
ause
onl
y ha
rd c
opy
prin
tout
s an
d P
DFs
are
pro
vide
d in
the
filin
g, th
ese
slid
es e
xpla
in
and
brea
k do
wn
the
8 ba
sic
RA
S c
ost e
quat
ions
from
spe
cific
cel
ls o
f the
CR
AS
Cos
t Sav
ings
Wor
kshe
et:
1.S
tand
-alo
ne R
AS
, New
, Yea
r 12.
Sta
nd-a
lone
RA
S, N
ew, Y
ear 2
and
follo
win
g3.
CR
AS
, New
, Yea
r 1
4.C
RA
S, N
ew, Y
ear 2
and
follo
win
g5.
Sta
nd-a
lone
RA
S, C
apac
ity U
pgra
de, Y
ear 1
6.S
tand
-alo
ne R
AS
, Cap
acity
Upg
rade
, Yea
r 2 a
nd fo
llow
ing
7.C
RA
S, C
onve
rsio
n of
Exi
stin
g S
tand
-alo
ne R
AS
, Yea
r 18.
CR
AS
, Con
vers
ion
of E
xist
ing
Sta
nd-a
lone
RA
S, Y
ear 2
and
follo
win
g
17CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
26
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
GENER
ALAS
SUMPT
IONS–NormalDe
ploymen
tand
Future
Busine
ssas
UsualAssumptions
•Standalon
eRA
S:Years1
and2:Use
2relays/gen
erator
and1relay/gene
ratoryear3
on(ProtectionEngine
ering)
•ForC
RAS,assumesameas
standalon
e+10
%to
accoun
tfor
diffe
rences
inCR
ASrelaysettings
(Protection
Engine
ering)
•Forstand
alon
eRA
Srelaycapacityup
grade(existingRA
SlikeCo
lorado
River)assumeaddrelayCP
Umod
uleand
upgraderelaypo
wer
supp
ly.Testeach
relaylocally
afterflashingne
wfirmware.Then
dofie
ldcrew
endto
endtestfor
themod
ified
standalon
eRA
S.(ProtectionEngine
eringandSC&M
Test)
•Telecom
assumptions
forR
ASs(whe
ther
CRAS
orstandalon
e)mandatedby
WECC:
99.95%
availabilityeach
path,
dualredu
ndantp
aths
requ
iredwhe
retelecom
isused
.(ProtectionEngine
ering)
Forw
ardLook
ingAssumptions
•Use
year
2030
astarget
form
axim
umrelaysharingby
CRAS
.Thatism
andatory
year
for5
0%rene
wablesa
ndqu
eue
sizes
andgrow
thprospe
ctssup
portthisou
tlook.(System
Planning)
•Use
21%lessrelays
forC
RASversus
standalon
eRA
Sapproach
perthe
agreed
relaysharingcoststud
yincorporated
in20
15GR
Cfiling
(ProtectionEngine
ering)
•ExistingRA
SsinCR
Tde
ck(W
hirlw
ind,Co
lorado
River,MojaveDe
sert)a
rerunn
ingou
tofcapacity
basedon
arming
pointsanalysisandrene
wablesq
ueue
analysis.
(ProtectionEngine
eringandSystem
Planning)
•NorthernArea
RAS,ane
wRA
Swith
76–12
4armingpo
ints(QC8
total–
QC9
total)requ
iredby
System
Planning,
cann
otbe
done
asastandalon
eRA
S(stand
alon
erelaycapacityup
gradeapproach
nota
dequ
atebasedon
available
relayfirmwareup
grades).
(ProtectionEngine
eringandSystem
Planning)
18CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
27
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ENGINEERINGAN
DDE
SIGN
ASSU
MPT
IONS–Stan
dAlon
eRA
San
dCR
ASStan
dalon
eRA
Ss•
Weknow
that
engine
eringandde
signsoak
upalargepe
rcentage
oflabo
r(abou
t45%
oftotalbased
onrecorded
costs).
•Thesecostsn
eedto
berefle
cted
incapacityup
grades
toan
existingstandalon
eRA
Sas
wellaslater
gene
ratio
nadditio
ns.
•Major
activ
ities
involved
perchangeinStandAlon
eRA
S:1.
Abou
t3mon
thso
fEngineerin
geffortby
Engine
eringTeam
.(Typical2
FTE,may
bemorebasedon
complexity
ofthechange)
oActiv
ities
includ
e,gene
ratin
gandreview
ingne
wde
sign
oGe
neratin
gne
wdraw
ings
tomatch
with
newde
sign
oProcureadditio
nalhardw
are(gen
eratebillof
material,placetheorde
rand
ensure
itreache
ssub
station)
2.Ab
out1
mon
thof
Protectio
nEngine
er'seffortto
writethetestplan
andgene
rate
testcases.(Typical1FTE)
oRe
view
thene
wde
signandgene
rate
testplan
oGe
nerate
andreview
testcases
3.Forb
asecase
RAS,abou
t1weekof
testingwith
testcrew
inthefie
ld(Abo
ut2days
forA
sideand2days
forB
sidewith
onedaycontingency).
oDe
pend
sonnu
mbe
rofsub
stations
andcrew
sneede
d,1Protectio
nEngine
er,1
Supe
rviso
r.o
PerH
owardHa
m(ProtectionEngine
ering),PSC
wou
ldhave
tested
thetarget
armingselection(based
onrequ
iredcontingencies)priortofie
ldtesting.
oDu
ringFieldtesting,on
lythene
wchangesa
retested
,acrossa
llrelays
affected
.19
CRAS
CostStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
28
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ENGINEERINGAN
DDE
SIGN
ASSU
MPT
IONS–Stan
dAlon
eRA
San
dCR
ASCR
AS•
Comparedto
standalon
eRA
S,hasa
diffe
rent
andlessfreq
uent
patternof
rede
signs
basedon
itsmoreefficient
metho
dsof
testing.
•ForC
RAS,rede
signs
areno
ttrig
geredby
each
gene
ratora
ddition
,but
typically
aredo
neon
anannu
albasis.Testin
ginvolvingthefie
ldcrew
scoversa
llthesameplanne
dgene
ratorsandallpermutations
ofcontingenciesa
sastand
alon
eRA
Swou
ldtestbu
tdon
einadvance.
•Individu
allocalrelay
testing(prio
rtoen
dto
endfie
ldtesting)isassumed
tobe
thesamecostforstand
alon
erelays
orCR
ASrelays.
•Someextratim
eisinclud
edinthe“CRA
SRe
ductionFactor”that
isused
tocalculateCR
AStestingcostsp
erroun
dof
testversus
astandalon
eRA
Spe
rrou
ndof
test.The
purposeof
theextratim
eisto
allowcrew
sand
testsupe
rviso
rsto
becomeused
tothene
wmetho
dsof
CRAS
endto
endtesting.
oInitialassumption:
One
crew
persub
station,tw
odays
duratio
n.(Thisisw
hatcoststudy
uses).
oLong
term
assumption:
One
crew
perR
AS,twodays
duratio
npe
rRAS
.(Thisisalong
term
goal,not
refle
cted
inthecoststud
yeq
uatio
ns).
oEven
shorterd
urations
perrou
ndof
CRAS
testingareclearly
feasible,but
SCEistrying
tokeep
assumptions
for
CRAS
timesavingsc
onservativeforn
ow(highe
rduration).See
“initia
lassum
ption”
above.
•Thereisalso
additio
naltestin
gusingRT
DSor
othe
rautom
ated
toolsintheearlier
CRAS
analytictestph
asethat
gowellbeyon
dwhatisp
ossib
lewith
standalon
etesting.CR
AStestingisthereforehigher
quality
(morecompreh
ensiv
e,checks
form
orepo
ssiblescen
ariosa
ndresulting
RASbe
haviors).
•ForC
RAS,laterred
esigns
assumed
done
annu
ally,
coverin
gallgen
eratorsp
lann
edto
beadde
dinthecomingyear.
20CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
29
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
TESTINGAS
SUMPT
IONS–Individu
alRe
lays
andCa
pacity
Upgrade
sIndividu
alrelaytesting(prio
rtofie
lden
dto
endtesting):
•Assumed
identicalforC
RASandStandalon
e(in
clud
edinfully
loaded
relaycostsfor
each
optio
n,en
dsup
beinga
washcostandthereforehasn
oim
pacton
thecostbe
nefits/avoidances
forC
RAS).O
neexception:
capacityup
grades
–seebe
low.
•Note:Inreality,itw
ouldbe
reason
ableto
expe
ctsomeefficienciesfrom
CRAS
’stand
ardizedsettings
with
onlytw
omajor
optio
ns,m
itigatio
nor
mon
itorin
g,versus
theindividu
allycustom
izedsettings
ofstandalon
eRA
Srelays.
•Itwou
ldbe
reason
ableto
expe
ctfurthe
rlearningcurvebasedassumptions
todrivelower
costsfor
CRAS
inthe
future,since
therecorded
costsw
eused
werethevery
firsttim
eSCEhaddo
neCR
AS.W
eshou
ldgetb
etterw
ithpractice.SCEhasn
otattempted
tomod
elthisaspe
ctof
learning
curveim
provem
entsintheCR
AScoststud
y.
Stan
dAlon
eRA
SCa
pacity
Upgrade
s•
One
area
whe
reindividu
altestingdo
esne
edto
befactored
iniscapacityup
grades
forstand
alon
eRA
Srelays.This
change
triggersindividu
alrelaytestingas
wellase
ndto
endtesting.
•Individu
alrelaytestingaftercapacity
upgradeassumes
tworelays
individu
allytested
pertesttechpe
rday
(not
includ
ingen
dto
endtestingcosts)
•One
aspe
ctthat
isim
portanttoremem
berw
ithfie
ldworkisthereis“m
orethan
justtesttechs”
involved
(sup
ervisio
n,MPO
,other
supp
ortin
gpe
rson
nel,etc.)(Re
corded
costsreflectthis)
•Tw
ocompo
nents:
1.Re
desig
nanden
gine
eringsupp
ortp
ertestcyclepe
rRAS
,calculatedusingprop
ortio
nalrelay
recorded
costsfor
a)en
gine
eringandde
signversus
b)im
plem
entatio
nandtestinthefie
ld–calculated
perrelay
acrosstheRA
S,pe
rtestcycle
21CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
30
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
TESTINGAS
SUMPT
IONS
Stan
dAlon
eRA
SCa
pacity
Upgrade
s–Co
ntinue
d2.
Additio
nalsup
portcostsinthefie
ld(sup
ervisio
n.MPO
,etc.)pe
rrelay
(cross
checkedusingprop
ortio
nalrelay
data
asin#1above)
•Existingrelays
andretestingandsupp
ortin
gcosts
oThisisaccoun
tedforinthefully
loaded
costsp
errelayforn
ewrelays
inthecoststud
y,whe
ther
CRAS
orstand
alon
e(based
onrecorded
costs)
oNeeds
tobe
refle
cted
inadditio
nalcostsforthe
standalon
eretestingfore
achtestcycle(Coststudy
willrefle
ctthis,
basedon
recorded
data)
CRAS
uses
asim
ilarcon
cept,but
itslessfreq
uent
desig
neffortsa
ndmoreefficient
testingapproach
minim
izethese
supp
ortin
gcosts.ForC
RAS,asim
plifyingassumptionisthat
they
arebakedinto
the2days
percrewpe
rsub
stationpe
rtestcycleassumption.Thisisaconservative(highdu
ratio
n)assumption.
Triptestingwith
theindividu
algene
rator:
•IdenticalforC
RASandStandalon
e,1day(8
hours)pe
rgen
erator,one
twoman
crew
•Thesecastareawashbe
tweenthetw
oop
tions
andareno
tdire
ctlyused
inthecoststud
y.
22CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
31
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
TESTINGAS
SUMPT
IONS(m
ostly
SC&M
Test)
Stan
dAlon
eRA
STesting
Stan
dalon
eTesting
•Everygene
ratora
dded
causes
aroun
dof
fieldcrew
endto
endtesting
•Capacity
upgrades
torelays
causeindividu
alretestingof
upgraded
relayandaroun
dof
testingfora
llrelays.
•AllSCE
substatio
nsrequ
ireat
leasto
necrew
each
•Crew
sper
substatio
nestim
ated
byon
etesttech
per4
relays
•Du
ratio
npe
rtestcycle:Variesw
iththe“durationfactor”o
fthe
RASinvolved
.See
slide
s35and36
.•
Note:One
impo
rtantrealizationconveyed
bySC&M
TestManagem
entisthatthe
rearesig
nificantcon
straintson
the
numbe
roftesttechs
totalthatcan
bemob
ilizedforthisk
indof
testingas
astandalon
eRA
Sbe
comes
morecomplex.
Thisiscaused
bythede
pend
ency
betw
eenDo
bletestsetsandho
wmanyrelays
itisfeasiblefora
singletesttech
toho
okup
to.
•Thecoststud
yhasa
calculator
togene
rate
thenu
mbe
roftesttechs
need
edpe
rsub
station(and
overall,forthe
RAS)
astheoverallrelay
coun
tincreases.Thisisc
apturedas
“excessfieldcosts”
intheRA
Scosteq
uatio
ns,asfurther
mappe
dou
tinde
tailinlaterslides.
23CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
32
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
TESTINGAS
SUMPT
IONS–CR
ASTesting
1CR
ASTesting
•AllSCE
substatio
nsrequ
ireon
etw
oman
crew
each
inyear
oneandtw
ofora
givenRA
S(Thisislikelyto
beexcessive
basedon
conversatio
nwith
SC&M
TestandSC&M
TestManagem
ent,bu
titw
illtake
timeto
getfieldcrew
scomfortablewith
thediffe
rent
testmetho
dsforC
RAS).
•Four
oppo
rtun
ities
overalltofamiliarize
testtechsw
ithne
wtestmetho
ds:
1.Targeted
training
toanytesttechsn
otyetfam
iliar
with
CRAS
testingmetho
ds:
oCR
ASlogicisresid
entincontrolcenterserversandPSC(Pow
erSystem
sCon
trols)createsthe
analytics.Testscen
arioinform
ationisloaded
byPSCwith
SC&M
fieldtesttechsv
iewingthat
inform
ationandverifying
perfo
rmance
usingmorestream
lined
metho
dsthan
astandalon
eRA
Swou
ldrequ
ire.The
refore,CRA
Sismorearou
ndtraining
anyne
wtechs,no
tyet
familiar
with
test
metho
ds.Thisisa
ssum
edto
bean
ongoingde
partmentalcost.Itwillrampdo
wnover
timeas
RASs
inCR
ASoccurm
ainlyingene
ratio
nrichareas.
oNote:By
contrast,stand
alon
eRA
Sareun
ique
custom
desig
ns,eachandeverytim
e–thisim
posesa
leveloffam
iliariza
tionwith
each
newRA
S,everytim
e,on
going.Re
flected
intestplan
developm
ent
anden
gine
eringcosts.
2.Testingandfamiliariza
tionby
testtechsw
ithstaged
relays
atAlhambrapriortoinitialim
plem
entatio
n.3.
Annu
altestingdo
neon
anyRA
SinCR
ASgiveso
pportunity
toob
serve&learn.
4.Actualde
ploymenta
ndtestingof
CRAS
inthefie
ldfurthe
rreinforcesthe
learning.
24CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
33
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
TESTINGAS
SUMPT
IONS–CR
ASTesting
2•
Each
relay:Ch
eckinpu
tvoltagesa
ndcurrentssuccessfullysent
toEM
S(Dob
letestsetsused
forthis)
•Use
CRAS
annu
altestto
confirm
mitigatio
nsig
nalsentb
yUA
Pandrelaytripou
tput
contactcloses.Inyear
one,the
duratio
nassumptions
allowforlim
itedtestingof
Dobleinitiated
scen
arios,bu
tthe
preferen
ceisto
usestaged
relays
atAlhambrabefore
deploymentinfie
ldto
provideamorecompactandefficient
testingenvironm
ent.
oSimulatesamescen
arios(setsof
contingencies)as
wou
ldbe
done
with
standalon
eRA
S,bu
tusin
gCR
ASon
boardtoolso
rRTD
S,no
tusin
gDo
bles.
oDu
ratio
n:As
notedon
slide
s35and36
,a“durationfactor”isused
basedon
relativenu
mbe
roftestlines
inthe
testplan
forthe
RASun
dercon
siderationversus
thebase
case
RAStestlines.
•Testingcanbe
done
once
pery
earfor
allplann
edgene
ratorsto
beadde
d(assum
esallnecessary
relays
areinplace)
•Note:Wealso
addincostse
achyear
forP
SCanalyticde
signandtestas
wellasred
esigns/add
ition
seachyear
thereafte
r
25CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
34
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
26
RelayTestSequ
ence
forcom
missioning
aRA
SSche
me
RelayInstall
RelayUnitTest
RelayPo
inttoPo
intTest
RelayEndto
EndTest
Thisisthetesting
segm
entthath
asvery
diffe
rent
labo
rimpacts
forS
tand
alon
eRA
Sversus
CRAS
Samelabo
rimpacts
forS
tand
alon
eRA
Sversus
CRAS CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
35
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
27
RelayUnitTestin
g
1.TS&Sde
velops
relaytestscrip
tsandshares
them
with
TestTechsfor
execution.
2.SC&M
TestTechsinstalls
relays
andload
therelaysettings
issue
dby
Protectio
n.3.
SC&M
TestTechsp
erform
sunittestin
gof
therelay.
CRAS
CostStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
36
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
28
RelayPo
inttoPo
intTestin
g(CRA
SShow
n)Po
inttoPo
intT
estin
g
UAP
XA21
Objectiv
eVe
rifypo
intm
apping
with
UAP
,XAandeD
NA.
ValidateGO
OSE
message
from
relay
GOOSE
Simulator
Relay
PhysicalParameters
such
asVo
ltage,
Curren
tsandPo
wer
UAP
XA21
Step
1
Step
2
Step
1(Perform
edby
PSC):
1.Validatepo
intm
apping
with
UAPandXA
21priortovalidatingthepo
intswith
relays.
2.Allrelay
pointswillbe
simulated
usinga
GOOSE
simulator
totestUA
PsandXA
data
flow.
Step
2(Perform
edby
SC&M
andPSC):
1.Validaterelaypo
intsby
simulatingph
ysical
parameters.
2.Programmaticapproach
fortestin
gthe
points.
3.Priorvalidationwith
inUA
PandXA
wou
ldhave
significantsavings
ontestingsche
dule
andfie
ldresources.
CRAS
CostStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
37
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
29
Tradition
alEndto
EndTesting(Stand
alon
eRA
S)
1.Highlylabo
rinten
sive.
2.With
increasednu
mbe
rofrelays(forincreased
load
and/or
numbe
rofgen
erators)thisadds
substantialsched
uleim
pactto
testing.
3.As
RASs
getm
orecomplex,crewrequ
irements
calculations
incoststud
yspreadsheetsho
wthat,for
thiskind
oflabo
rintensivetesting,
SCE’slocalandregion
alavailablecrew
coun
tswillbe
greatly
exceed
ed,m
akingthestand
alon
eapproach
infeasibleinanypractical
busin
esss
ense
becauseof
indu
stry
wide
constraintson
thesehighlyskilled
,scarce
resource
person
nel.
CRAS
CostStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
38
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
30
CRAS
Endto
EndTesting
1.Multip
lescen
ariosc
anbe
simulated
andtested
.2.
Testingoverlapbe
tweenun
ittesting,P2
Ptesting,therefore
notm
uchof
impactby
usingsim
ulators.
3.Fewselected
scen
ariosw
illbe
simulated
such
that
UAP
issue
strip
toan
actualmitigatio
nrelay.(Hybrid
approach).
4.Alltestscriptsshallbevery
detailedverifying
everyinpu
tand
output.
5.Subset
oftestscrip
tswillbe
defin
edby
TS&Sthat
wou
ldne
edto
beob
served
byTestTechsp
riortosig
ning
offo
nthe
testresults.
6.GO
OSE
Simulator
orRT
DSshalluse
relaysettingfileforthe
irconfiguration.
7.RT
DSTraining
willbe
requ
iredforT
S&Sandpo
ssiblySC&M
TestTechs.
8.Forn
extfew
RASs
TS&Spreferstohave
oneroun
dof
endto
endtesting(limite
d)priortonextfewRA
Ssgoinginto
Prod
uctio
n.CR
ASProgram
Managem
ent’s
suggestio
nisto
usestaged
relays
atAlhambraforthisp
urpo
se(m
ore
efficient
testingenvironm
ent).
CRAS
CostStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
39
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Gene
ratorS
iteCo
stsfor
ExistingGe
nerators
Gen
erationProject
RAS
#CB
sType
Scop
eCo
stGe
nesisI
Colorado
River
2Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$Ge
nesisII
Colorado
River
2Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$BlackCree
kCo
lorado
River
4Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$Dracker
Colorado
River
4Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$Alba
MojaveDe
sert
1Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$Ocaso
MojaveDe
sert
1Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$LSP220kV
lineatKram
erMojaveDe
sert
2Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$Av
enue
AWhirlw
ind
3Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$Av
enue
BWhirlw
ind
2Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$Kingbird
Whirlw
ind
2Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$Free
bird
Whirlw
ind
4Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$SolarR
anch
AWhirlw
ind
1Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$SolarR
anch
Whirlw
ind
1Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$
Soleil:
Whirlw
ind
3Standard
1CB
atplant1,2
CBsa
tplant
2(sep
araterelays
atthetw
oplants,
butthe
ybo
thtripatthesametim
e)150,000
$
Astoria
:Whirlw
ind
7Special
4CB
satp
lant
1,3CB
satp
lant
2(sep
araterelays
atthetw
oplants,
butthe
ybo
thtripatthesametim
e)Sameapproach
asatTedd
y)see
belowand"Ted
dy"tab).
290,000
$
Garla
nd:
Whirlw
ind
6Special
1CB
atplantA
,5CB
satp
lant
B/C(sep
araterelays
atthetw
oplants,but
they
both
tripatthesametim
e).
290,000
$Ro
yWhirlw
ind
4Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$Tedd
yph
ases
1and2
Whirlw
ind
4Standard
One
rack
with
2relays
150,000
$
Tedd
yWhirlw
ind
9Special
Multip
leph
ases
seeno
teso
n"Ted
dy"tab.Phases3
and4:6CB
s.Tedd
yph
ase5willadd3moreCB
s.4racks,6relays
total
540,000
$Total
3,520,000
$Av
eragepe
rSite
185,263
$
31CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
40
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Pha
se 1
& 2
Bld
g
4CB
tripping
relays
(2)
CommAg
gregator
Relays
(2,A
&B)
Altogether:
2racks,2relays
each
Pha
se 3
& 4
Bld
g
6-C
B tr
ippi
ng re
lays
(2)
= O
ne ra
ck, A
&B
, 2
rela
ys to
tal
Pha
se 5
Bld
g
6-C
B tr
ippi
ng re
lays
(2)
= O
ne ra
ck, A
&B
, 2
rela
ys to
tal
ExistingGe
nerators–Standard
Approach
versus
Special
Gen
erat
ion
Pro
ject
4C
Bs
to tr
ip o
r les
s
4CB
tripping
relays
(one
Asid
e,on
eB
side)
1rack,2
relays
total
Stan
dard
(Type1,Co
versmajority
Ofcustomers)
SpecialUsing
“Ted
dy”as
exam
ple
(Twodiffe
rent
“recipes,”Type
2an
dType
3,coverrem
aining
custom
ers)
Tedd
yph
ases
3,4,and5aretrippe
dwith
thesamearmingpo
int,requ
iring
tripping
atotalof9
CBs.Ph
ases
3and4areinon
econtrolbuilding,and
phase5isinaseparate
controlbuilding.ForTed
dyph
ases
1and2,a4CB
tripping
relaywilldo
thejob.Forp
hases3
,4,and
5,aCo
mmun
ications
Aggregator
relaywillbe
need
edintheph
ases
1and2controlbuilding(w
here
thetelecommfrom
Whirlw
indterm
inates),with
a6CB
tripping
relay
locatedintheph
ases
3and4controlbuildinganda6CB
tripping
relaylocatedintheph
ase5controlbuilding.Existingfib
ersw
illconn
ectthe
tripping
relays
totheCo
mmun
ications
Aggregator
relayviaGO
OSE.
32CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
41
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ExistingGe
nerators–Standard
Approach
Details
One
rack
with
2relays
–coversmostcustomer
situatio
ns(Type1of
3)Telecom
•$1
0Ktotal:N60
relayspec
with
DirectI/Ouses
C37.94
protocol(con
firmed
byProtectio
nEngine
ering).Thecostfor2
newOHS
Uchanne
lcards
(A&Bsid
es)inan
existingchanne
lbankwith
labo
risa
bout
$10,00
0.$2
,300
fore
achcard
andtotalof4
Engine
eringman
days
and4Tech
man
days
(based
onTelecom’sstandard
estim
atingtool).–from
Telecom
Engine
eringem
ail6/16/16
•Other
telecom
(existingchanne
lbanks
andfib
er)alre
adyinplaceor
requ
iredat
gene
ratorcustomer
expe
nse.
Costsp
er2relayrack,pre
fabb
edandde
livered
•Perrecorde
dcosts,wehadStationElectriccharge
us$5
44,445
forw
iring
onCR
ASProject.With
26relays
with
inSCEandassuming2relays
per
rack,thisc
omes
to13
racksw
ired@
$41,88
0pe
rrack.Weassumeprefabb
edrack
costto
be$5
0Keach
(with
escalatio
nandsomecontingency).
•Re
lays
=$1
5Keach
*2=$3
0K.
Gene
ratorO
nSite
Labo
rCosts
•Ap
prop
riate
duratio
nsandcrew
numbe
rsprovided
bySC&M
Test
•Includ
estim
econtingency.Theserelays
aresim
pler
than
averageinsettings.
•Calculation:
One
crew
(firstw
iring,the
ntest)X
2men
/crewX20
busin
essd
aysX
8ho
urs/dayX$1
50/hou
r=$5
0Kwith
roun
ding
•Outagecoordinatio
n&gene
ratorsite
trip
testing=$5
K•
Total$55
Kwith
roun
ding.
Bmaterials(m
iscellane
ousw
ire,jum
pers,etc.)
•$5
K
Total=
$10K+$5
0K+$3
0K+$5
5K+$5
K=$1
50Kpe
r2relayrack
completepe
rstand
ardapproach
33CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
42
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ExistingGe
nerators–“Spe
cial”Ap
proach
Details
SpecialA
pproachCo
stFactors
TwoRa
cks,2relays
each
(Type2of
3)Scop
e:Afewof
theup
cominggene
ratorcustomers(such
asGa
rland
onslide
25)tobe
conn
ectedhave
moregene
ratorcircuitb
reakerstotripthan
the
“Stand
ard”
approach
canhand
le.This“
Special”approach
hand
lesu
pto
8gene
rator C
Bswith
minor
adjustmentsinconfiguration.
Telecom
•$1
0Ktotal:N60
relayspec
with
DirectI/Ouses
C37.94
protocol(con
firmed
byProtectio
nEngine
ering).Thecostfor2
newOHS
Uchanne
lcards
(A&B
sides)inan
existingchanne
lbankwith
labo
risa
bout
$10,00
0.$2
,300
fore
achcard
andtotalof4
Engine
eringman
days
and4Tech
man
days
(based
onTelecom’sstandard
estim
atingtool).–from
Telecom
Engine
eringem
ail6/16/16
•Other
telecom
(existingchanne
lbanks
andfib
er)alre
adyinplaceor
requ
iredat
gene
ratorcustomer
expe
nse.
Costsp
ertw
o2relayracks,prefabb
edan
dde
livered
•Perrecorde
dcosts,wehadStationElectriccharge
us$5
44,445
forw
iring
onCR
ASProject.With
26relays
with
inSCEandassuming2relays
perrack,this
comes
to13
racksw
ired@
$41,88
0pe
rrack.Weassumeprefabb
edrack
costto
be$5
0Keach
(with
escalatio
nandsomecontingency).=
$50*2racks =
$100
K•Re
lays
=$1
5Keach
*4relays
=$6
0K.
Gene
ratorO
nSite
Labo
rCosts
•Ap
prop
riate
duratio
nsandcrew
numbe
rsprovided
bySC&M
Test
•Includ
estim
econtingency.Theserelays
aresim
pler
than
averageinsettings.
•Calculation:
One
crew
(firstw
iring,the
ntest)X
2men
/crewX20
busin
essdays
X8ho
urs/dayX$1
50/hou
r=$5
0Kwith
roun
ding
•Outagecoordinatio
n&gene
ratorsite
trip
testing=$5
K•Total$55
Kpe
rrackwith
roun
ding.=
$55K*2racks=
$110
K.
Bmaterials(m
iscellane
ousw
ire,jum
pers,etc.)
•$1
0K
Total=
$10K+$1
00K+$6
0K+$1
10K+$1
0K=$2
90Kpe
rtwo2relayracksc
ompletepe
rspe
cialap
proa
ch
34CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
43
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ExistingGe
nerators–“Ted
dy”ProjectE
xample
SpecialA
pproachCo
stFactors–
forsitu
ations
likeTedd
yprojectfrom
slide25
Four
Racks,2relays
each
–9+Ge
neratorC
Bs(Type3of
3)Scop
e:Afewof
theup
cominggene
ratorcustomers(such
asGa
rland
onslide
25)tobe
conn
ectedhave
moregene
ratorcircuitb
reakerstotripthan
the
“Stand
ard”
approach
canhand
le.This“
Special”approach
hand
les9
ormoregene
ratorC
Bswith
minor
adjustmentsinconfiguration.
Telecom
•$1
0Ktotal:N60
relayspec
with
DirectI/Ouses
C37.94
protocol(con
firmed
byProtectio
nEngine
ering).Thecostfor2
newOHS
Uchanne
lcards
(A&B
sides)inan
existingchanne
lbankwith
labo
risa
bout
$10,00
0.$2
,300
fore
achcard
andtotalof4
Engine
eringman
days
and4Tech
man
days
(based
onTelecom’sstandard
estim
atingtool).–from
Telecom
Engine
eringem
ail6/16/16
•Other
telecom
(existingchanne
lbanks
andfib
er)alre
adyinplaceor
requ
iredat
gene
ratorcustomer
expe
nse.
Costsp
erfour
2relayracks,prefabb
edan
dde
livered
•Perrecorde
dcosts,wehadStationElectriccharge
us$5
44,445
forw
iring
onCR
ASProject.With
26relays
with
inSCEandassuming2relays
perrack,this
comes
to13
racksw
ired@
$41,88
0pe
rrack.Weassumeprefabb
edrack
costto
be$5
0Keach
(with
escalatio
nandsomecontingency).=
$50*4racks=
$200
K•Re
lays
=$1
5Keach
*8relays
=$9
0K.
Gene
ratorO
nSite
Labo
rCosts
•Ap
prop
riate
duratio
nsandcrew
numbe
rsprovided
bySC&M
Test
•Includ
estim
econtingency.Theserelays
aresim
pler
than
averageinsettings.
•Calculation:
One
crew
(firstw
iring,the
ntest)X
2men
/crewX20
busin
essd
aysX
8ho
urs/dayX$1
50/hou
r=$5
0Kwith
roun
ding
•Outagecoordinatio
n&gene
ratorsite
trip
testing=$5
K•Total$55
Kpe
rrackwith
roun
ding.=
$55K*4racks=
$220
K.
Bmaterials(m
iscellane
ousw
ire,jum
pers,etc.)
•$2
0K
Total=
$10K+$2
00K+$9
0K+$2
20K+$2
0K=$5
40Kpe
rfou
r2relayracksc
omplete
35CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
44
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Base
CostsU
sedInEquatio
nsinCR
ASCo
stStud
yWorkshe
et
36CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
RASType
CostFactor
Descrip
tion
2015
StandAlon
eLong
Term
RelaySharing
AsRA
Sscontinue
togrow
andprolife
rate
inremew
ablesrich
areas,overlaps
occur.CR
AScansharerelays,stand
alon
ene
edsa
ddition
alrelays.
0
Changesp
erYe
arAssumed
changesp
eryearinrene
wablesrichareas
0
CRAS
AnalyticTestingcostsp
erchange
inCR
AS(IT
Testing
cost)
Thisisanalytictestingcostfore
verycompleteCR
ASde
sign.
ByPSC,verifieso
utto
andinclud
ingtripof
relay.
100,800
$
CRAS
Additio
nalA
nalytic
Testing
Form
odificatio
nsto
existin
gCR
ASde
sign
64,800
$
CRAS
CRAS
RelayTotalCost
Installnew
relayandgetitind
ividually
ready.Includ
eslabo
randmaterial.Noen
dto
endtesting.
120,715
$
CRAS
CRAS
Existin
gGen
erator
Cost
Costinyearon
eto
payform
odificatio
nsto
existin
gIntercon
nectionFacilities
SCEpays
185,263
$
CRAS
CRAS
RelayRatio
Ratio
with
StandAlon
eRe
lays
is1.1:1
(i.e.10%more)
becauseof
somede
sign
diffs
TestTech
Rate
Rate
perh
our
75
StandAlon
eTestingcostsp
erchange
instandalone
RAS
Thisisadditio
naltestin
gcostfore
verychange
madeun
der
standalone
costso
npe
rrelay
basis.Note:Allrelaysm
ustb
eretested
whe
nne
won
esareadde
d.20,000
$
StandAlon
eRe
laymod
ulecostsfor
standalone
RASs
1CP
Umod
uleand1Po
wer
Supp
lymod
ule(existRA
Srelay
upgrade)
8,000
$
StandAlon
eStandAlon
eRe
layTotalCost
Installnew
relay,standalone
RAS.Escalatedvaluebasedon
2009
2010
recorded
costs.Includ
eslabo
rand
material.
200,570
$
2015
Dollarsareshow
n.Co
sts
areescalatedat
3%pe
ryear
anddraw
nfrom
columns
totherig
htinthecoststud
yto
match
theyear
oftheRA
Sun
dercon
sideration
45
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
New
RASCo
st–StandAlon
eRA
SYear
1=L47
*L$3
4/10
00+IF(L51
<1,0,L47
*L$3
2*(L51
1)/100
0)+L50
+IF(L44
=0,0,L44
*L47
*L$3
2*0.5*(L51
1)/100
0)+L44*L50
1)Accoun
tfor
costof
newrelays
Totalrelays*
newrelaycosteach/100
0L47*L$34
/100
02)
Addexcesscoststofirstroun
d,over
thebase
case
testroun
dcostinclud
edwith
relay,ifany:
+(IF
(durationfactor
<1,0,nu
mbe
rofrelays*
((per
relaybase
case
testroun
dcost+excessfie
ldsupp
ortcosts)*
duratio
nfactor)–
base
case
testroun
dcost))/10
00+excessfie
ldsupp
ortcostsifany
+IF(L51
<1,0,L47
*L$3
2*(L51
1)/100
0)+L50
3)Ad
dsubseq
uent
testroun
dsthat
year
with
ongoingredu
ctionfactor,ifany.
+(IF
(new
gene
rators=0,0,ne
wgene
rators*nu
mbe
rofrelays*
(per
relaybase
case
testroun
dcost*on
goingredu
ction
factor
*(durationfactor
–1))/10
00+excessfie
ldsupp
ortcostsifany
+IF(L44
=0,0,L44
*L47
*L$3
2*0.5*(L51
1)/100
0)+L44*L50
Note:Thiseq
uatio
ncomes
from
NorthernArea
RAS,cellL52of
workshe
et,w
hich,despite
beingabrandne
wRA
S,hassom
eexisting
gene
ratio
ncustom
ersa
lreadyconn
ectedto
anothe
rRAS
.The
assumptionisthat
fora
llsuch
existingcustom
ers,thestandalon
eRA
Swill
bebu
iltwith
enou
ghrelays
forthe
existingcustom
erstotransfer
over,w
ithallthe
testinginon
eroun
d.New
gene
ratorslaterthatyear
willeach
causeon
eroun
dof
additio
naltestin
gas
theirrelaysg
etadde
d.Thisisbe
causeSCEhastoaccommod
ateeach
newcustom
er’s
diffe
rent
operatingdate.See
earlier
slide
sfor
howthepatternandfreq
uencyof
standalon
eRA
Stestingdiffe
rsfrom
CRAS
.
37CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
46
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
New
RASCo
st–StandAlon
eRA
SYear
2On
=(M47
L47)*M
$34/10
00+IF(M51
<1,0,(M
47L47)*M
$32*0.5*(M
511)/100
0)+M
50+IF(M44
=0,0,L44
*L47*L$32
*0.5*(L51
1)/100
0)+IF(M44
<2,0,(M
441)*M
47*L$3
2*0.5*(L51
1)/100
0)Accoun
tfor
costof
newrelays
New
relays
*ne
wrelaycosteach/100
0Note:Theseinclud
eon
lybase
case
RAStestroun
dcost
=(M47
L47)*M
$34/10
00Ad
dinanyexcessfirsttestroun
dcoststothene
wrelays
that
year
usingdu
ratio
nfactor
forR
ASun
dercon
sideration
+IF(durationfactor
<1,0,(new
relays
*pe
rrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*o
ngoing
redu
ctionfactor*(durationfactor
1))/10
00)+
excessfie
ldsupp
ortcosts
IF(M
51<1,0,(M
47L47)*M
$32*0.5*(M
511)/100
0)+M
50Ad
dallexistingrelays
testcostforfirstrou
ndusingon
goingredu
ctionfactor
toadjust
+IF(durationfactor
<1,0,(existingrelays
*pe
rrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*on
goingredu
ctionfactor
*(durationfactor
–1))/10
00)
+IF(M
44=0,(L44*L47*L$32
*0.50
*(L51
1))/10
00)
Addanyadditio
naltestrou
ndcostsa
fter the
firstroun
dcaused
byfirstgene
ratoru
singon
goingredu
ctionfactor
toadjust
+IF(new
gene
rators<2,0,((n
ewgene
rators–1)
*totalrelays*
perrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost
*on
goingredu
ction
factor
*(durationfactor
–1))/10
00)+
(new
gene
rators–1)
*M50
+IF(M44
<2,0,((M
441)*M
47*L$3
2*0.50
*(L51
1))/10
00)+(M
44–1)
*M50
38CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
47
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
New
RASCo
st–CR
ASYear
1=L$5
3*L$16
/100
0+0.4*IF(L51
<1,0,L53
*L$3
2*(L$5
11)/100
0)+0.4*L50+L$9/10
00+L43*L$17
/100
0Accoun
tfor
costof
newrelays
(forthe
entireyear,allplanne
dgene
rators)
New
relays
*ne
wCR
ASrelaycosteach/100
0L$53
*L$1
6/10
00Ad
dinanyexcesstestroun
dcoststothene
wrelays
forthe
entireyear
+CR
ASredu
ctionfactor
*IF(durationfactor
<1,0,(new
relays
*pe
rrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*(durationfactor
1))/10
00)+
CRAS
redu
ctionfactor
*excessfie
ldsupp
ortcosts
0.4*IF(L51
<1,0,L53
*L$3
2*(L$5
11)/100
0)+0.4*L50
AddintheITPSCcostsfor
aninitialde
signandtestingwith
fieldinvolvem
ent
+ITPSCcostsfor
initialde
signandtest
+L$9/10
00Ad
dinSCEcostform
aterialsprovided
andlabo
rpaidto
existinggene
ratorsto
transfer
tone
wRA
S(year1
only)
+existinggene
rators*CR
ASexistinggene
ratorcost/10
00+L$4
3*L$17
/100
0
Note:Thiseq
uatio
ncomes
from
NorthernArea
RAS,which,despite
beingabrandne
wRA
S,has som
eexistinggene
ratio
ncustom
ers
alreadyconn
ectedto
anothe
rRAS
.The
assumptionforC
RASisthat,due
tothestream
lined
testingandlower
crew
impacts,theRA
Swill
bebu
iltto
accommod
ateallexistingcustom
erstransferringas
wellasa
llexpe
cted
year
1ne
wcustom
ers.One
roun
dof
testingwillbe
done
tovalidatetheen
tireRA
S.39
CRAS
CostStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
48
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
New
RASCo
st–CR
ASYear
2On
=(M
53L53)*L$1
6/10
00+0.4*IF(M
51<1,0,(M
53L53)*M
$32*0.5*(M
511)/100
0)+0.4*0.5*M50
+0.4*IF(L51
<1,0,L53
*L$3
2*0.5*L$51
/100
0)+L$10
/100
0Accoun
tfor
costof
newrelays
(forthe
entireyear,allplanne
dne
wgene
rators)
New
relays
*ne
wCR
ASrelaycosteach/100
0(M
$53
L$53
)*L$16
/100
0Ad
dinanyexcesstestroun
dcoststothene
wrelays
forthe
entireyear
+CR
ASredu
ctionfactor
*IF(durationfactor
<1,0,(new
relays
*pe
rrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*on
goingredu
ctionfactor
*(durationfactor
1))/10
00)+
CRAS
redu
ctionfactor
*on
goingredu
ctionfactor
*excessfie
ldsupp
ortcosts
+0.4*IF(L51
<1,0,((M53
L53)*L$3
2*0.5*(L$5
11))/10
00)+
0.4*0.5*L50
Addinanytestroun
dcoststoexistingrelays
forthe
entireyear
(singleroun
d)Note:Excess
fieldcostsa
lreadytallied
above
+CR
ASredu
ctionfactor
*(existingrelays
*pe
rrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*on
goingredu
ctionfactor
*du
ratio
nfactor)
/100
0+0.4*IF(L51
<1,0,(L53
*L$3
2*0.5*L51)/100
0)Ad
dintheITPSCcostsfor
aninitialde
signandtestingwith
fieldinvolvem
ent
+ITPSCcostsfor
initialde
signandtest
+L$9/10
00
40CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
49
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ExistingStandAlon
eRA
SCo
st–Capacity
Upgrade
Year
1=(L67
K67)*L$3
4/10
00+IF(L71<1,0,(L67
K67)*L$3
2*(L71
1)/100
0)+L70+(L67
*(L$3
3+L$32
*L71))/10
00+(L64
*L67*L$32
*L71*
0.5)/100
0+L64*L70
Addne
wrelaycostinyear
1New
relays
*ne
wrelaycost/100
0(L67
K67)*L$3
4/10
00Ad
dexcesscoststofirstroun
dne
wrelays
ifany,over
thebase
case
testroun
dcostinclud
edwith
relay:
+(IF
(durationfactor
<1,0,ne
wrelays
*(per
relaybase
case
testroun
dcost*(durationfactor
1))/10
00)+
excessfie
ldsupp
ortcosts
+IF(L71<1,0,(L67
K67)*L$3
2*(L71
1)/100
0)+L70
Addcoststodo
capacityup
gradeandtestingto
existingrelays, i.e.,thecoun
taso
fprio
ryear:
Existingrelays
*(capacity
upgradeparts+
perrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*du
ratio
nfactor)
+(L67
*(L$3
3+L$32
*L71))/10
00Ad
dsubseq
uent
testroun
dsfora
llrelays
that
year
with
ongoingredu
ctionfactor,ifany.
+(new
gene
rators*nu
mbe
rofrelays*
perrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*du
ratio
nfactor
*on
goingredu
ctionfactor)/10
00+gene
ratorcou
nt*excessfie
ldsupp
ortcosts
+(L64
*L67*L$32
*L71*0.5)/100
0+L64*L70
41CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
50
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ExistingStandAlon
eRA
SCo
st–Capacity
Upgrade
Year
2On
=(M
67L67)*M
$34/10
00+IF(M71
<1,0,(M
67L67)
*L$32
*(M
711)/100
0)+M
70+IF(M
67L67=0,0,(L67
*M$3
2*M71
*0.5)/100
0)+
IF(M
64<2,0,((M64
1)*M67
*L$32
*M71
*0.5)/100
0)+IF(M
64<2,0,M
64*M
70)
Addne
wrelaycostinyear
2New
relays
*ne
wrelaycost/100
0(M
67L67)*M
$34/10
00Ad
dexcesscosts tofirstroun
dne
wrelays
ifany,over
thebase
case
testroun
dcostinclud
edwith
relay:
+(IF
(durationfactor
<1,0,ne
wrelays
*(per
relaybase
case
testroun
dcost*(durationfactor
1))/10
00)+
excessfie
ldsupp
ortcosts
+IF(M71
<1,0,(M
67L67)
*L$32
*(M
711)/100
0)+M
70Ad
dcoststodo
testingto
existingrelays,i.e.,therelaycoun
taso
fprio
ryearthatisinroun
d1of
testing:
Existingrelays
*pe
rrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*du
ratio
nfactor
*on
goingredu
ctionfactor
+IF(M
67L67=0,0,(L67
*M$3
2*M71
*0.5)/100
0)Ad
dsubseq
uent
testroun
dsfora
llrelays
that
year
with
ongoingredu
ctionfactor,ifany.
+((n
ewgene
rators–1)
*totalnum
bero
frelays1*pe
rrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*du
ratio
nfactor
*on
goingredu
ction
factor)/10
00+gene
ratorcou
nt*excessfie
ldsupp
ortcosts
+IF(M
64<2,0,M
64*M
70)
1.Simplifyingassumptionusingtotalnum
bero
frelays
42CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
51
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ExistingRA
SCo
nversio
nCo
st–CR
ASYear
1==L53
*L$1
6/10
00+0.4*IF(L51<1,0,L53*L$32
*(L511)/100
0)+0.4*L50+L$9/10
00+L43
*L$1
7/10
00
Accoun
tfor
costof
newrelays
(forthe
entireyear,allplanne
dgene
rators)
Allrelays*
newCR
ASrelaycosteach/100
0L53*L$16
/100
0Ad
dinanyexcesstestroun
dcoststothene
wrelays
forthe
entireyear
(one
roun
d,diffe
rent
metho
dology
forC
RAS)
+CR
ASredu
ctionfactor
*IF(durationfactor
<1,0,(allrelays
*pe
rrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*(durationfactor
1))/10
00)+
excessfie
ldsupp
ortcosts*CR
ASredu
ctionfactor
+0.4*IF(L51<1,0,(L53
*L$3
2*(L51
–1))/10
00)+
0.4*L50
AddintheITPSCcostsfor
aninitialde
signandtestingwith
fieldinvolvem
ent
+ITPSCcostsfor
initialde
signandtest
+L$9/10
00Ad
dinSCEcostform
aterialsprovided
andlabo
rpaidto
existinggene
ratorsto
transfer
tone
wRA
S(year1
only)
+existinggene
rators*CR
ASexistinggene
ratorcost/10
00+L43
*L$1
7/10
00
43CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
52
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ExistingRA
SCo
nversio
nCo
st–CR
ASYear
2=(M
73L73)*M
$16/10
00+0.4*IF(M71
<1,0,(M
73L73)*L$3
2*0.5*(L71
1)/100
0)+0.4*0.5*L70+0.4*IF(M71
<1,0,(M
73L73)
*L$32
*0.5*L71/10
00)+
L$10
/100
0Accoun
tfor
costof
newrelays
(forthe
entireyear,allplanne
dgene
rators)
New
relays
*ne
wCR
ASrelaycosteach/100
0(M
53L53)*M
$16/10
00Ad
dinanyexcesstestroun
dcoststone
wrelays
forthe
entireyear
(one
roun
d,diffe
rent
metho
dology
forC
RAS)
+CR
ASredu
ctionfactor
*IF(durationfactor
<1,0,(new
relays
*pe
rrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*on
goingredu
ction
factor
*(durationfactor
1))/10
00)+
excessfie
ldsupp
ortcosts*on
goingredu
ctionfactor
*CR
ASredu
ctionfactor
+0.4*IF(M51
<1,0,(M
53L53)*L$3
2*0.5*(L51
1)/100
0)+0.4*0.5*L50
Addinanytestroun
dcostsfor
existingrelays
forthe
entireyear
(one
roun
d,diffe
rent
metho
dology
forC
RAS)
+CR
ASredu
ctionfactor
*IF(durationfactor
<1,0,(existingrelays
*pe
rrelay
base
case
testroun
dcost*on
g oingredu
ction
factor
*du
ratio
nfactor)/10
00)
Note:Excess
fieldsupp
ortcostsalreadytallied
above
+0.4*IF(M51
<1,0,(M
53L53)
*L$32
*0.5*L51/10
00)+
AddintheITPSCcostsfor
arede
signandtestingwith
fieldinvolvem
ent
+ITPSCcostsfor
rede
signandtest(smallera
mou
ntthan
year
one)
+L$10
/100
0
44CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
53
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Dur
atio
n Fa
ctor
(mod
ifies
dur
atio
n on
RA
S un
der c
onsi
dera
tion
vers
us b
ase
case
RA
S)•
Acc
ount
s fo
r diff
eren
ces
in th
e st
and-
alon
e R
AS
und
er c
onsi
dera
tion
vers
us th
e ba
se c
ase
stan
d-al
one
RA
S u
sed
to c
alcu
late
bas
ic re
lay
cost
s.•
Cal
cula
ted
by (C
urre
nt R
AS
test
pla
n #
of li
nes)
/ (B
ase
case
RA
S #
of t
est l
ines
)•
See
tabl
e ne
xt s
lide
for h
ow d
urat
ion
fact
ors
are
calc
ulat
ed.
Ong
oing
redu
ctio
n fa
ctor
(mod
ifies
full
stan
d-al
one
cost
per
rela
y pe
r rou
nd o
f tes
t) •
Red
uces
cos
t per
roun
d of
test
afte
r the
initi
al in
stal
latio
n to
refle
ct th
at th
e te
st p
lans
for a
RA
S g
ener
ally
get
so
mew
hat s
impl
er a
nd re
lay
coun
ts in
volv
ed w
ith te
sts
tend
to g
o do
wn,
unl
ess
addi
tiona
l con
tinge
ncie
s ar
e ad
ded.
Th
is is
a s
traig
ht n
umer
ical
ave
rage
adj
ustm
ent o
f 0.5
0.o
Ref
lect
s up
war
d pr
essu
re o
n co
mpl
exity
cau
sed
by p
erio
dic
addi
tions
of A
A-b
ank
trans
form
ers
•B
alan
ced
agai
nst r
educ
tion
in c
ompl
exity
bas
ed o
n re
duce
d nu
mbe
r of r
elay
s pe
r rou
nd fo
r add
ing
an
indi
vidu
al g
ener
a
CR
AS
redu
ctio
n fa
ctor
(con
vert
s st
and-
alon
e te
st c
ost t
o C
RA
S te
st c
ost)
•R
educ
es c
ost p
er ro
und
of C
RA
S te
st b
y th
e ob
serv
ed ra
tio o
f CR
AS
dur
atio
n ve
rsus
sta
nd-a
lone
dur
atio
n fo
r the
ba
se c
ase
RA
S. T
his
is a
stra
ight
num
eric
al a
vera
ge a
djus
tmen
t of 0
.40.
It is
con
serv
ativ
e (h
ighe
r dur
atio
n th
an
actu
ally
exp
ecte
d).
Mod
ifiers
45CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
54
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Howthesemod
ifiersa
reused
•Theadjustmentism
adeto
thebase
assumptioninvolvingallthe
relays
beingtested
atthefulltest
roun
dcostlevel=
Fullroun
dtestcostbase
case
RAS(allrelays
incurrentR
AS)*
duratio
nfactor
*on
goingredu
ctionfactor.
•Ingene
ral,thou
gh,w
efoun
dthat
recorded
costsw
iththestandalon
eRA
Ssforv
irtually
anytesting
fora
nychange
(overa
largesampleof
twoyearso
fsuchchanges)werestub
bornlyhigh.
Mod
ifiers
DURA
TIONFA
CTORCA
LCUL
ATIONS
Stan
dAlon
eRA
SLine
Coun
tDu
ratio
nFactor
Notes
ElSegund
o/ElNidoTestPlan
242
1.00
Thisisthebase
case
RAS
NorthernArea
1000
4.13
Testplan
length
estim
ated
byProtectio
nEngine
ering6/21/16
Colorado
River
790
3.26
Actualtestplan
length
MojaveDe
sert
427
1.76
Actualtestplan
length
Whirlw
ind
234
0.97
Actualtestplan
length
46CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
55
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Protectio
nEn
gine
eringNotes
ontestplan
complexity
over
time–ba
lancingfactors
Downw
ardfactor
oncomplexity
:“The
testproced
ures
form
odified
RASs
areactuallysim
pler
than
theoriginalinstallatio
ntest
proced
ures.W
henyouaddane
wgene
rator,it’se
ither
adde
dto
anexistingrelayor
it’sa
dded
toane
wrelay.Thearmingpo
intsforthe
newgene
ratorm
ight
beinon
eor
moreothe
rrelays.Youon
lyne
edto
testtherelays
that
have
been
changed,so
therearefewer
relays
totestwhe
nyouaddagene
rator
than
therewerewhe
nyoufirstpu
tthe
RASinservice.
Upw
ardfactor
oncomplexity
:“Som
emod
ificatio
nshave
amuchlarger
impacton
thetestproced
ure.Exam
ples:A
Abanksg
ettin
gadde
dat
Whirlw
ind,Co
lorado
Rover,Re
dBluffsub
sovertim
edu
eto
increasin
ggene
ratio
n.Thiscan
makethesubseq
uent
roun
dof
testMORE
complex
than
thefirstroun
d.
Net
results:
Basedon
adiscussio
nwith
Protectio
nEngine
ering6/28/2016:Re
commen
datio
nwas
touse0.50
asthe
standalon
eRA
Son
goingdu
ratio
nfactor.Thisfactorb
alanceso
utthetw
oeffectsa
bove.
Mod
ifiers–
Additio
nalN
otes
47CR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference
56
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CRAS Cost Study Worksheet
57
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et
ThisExcelw
orkshe
ethasthe
equatio
nsandactualcalculations
togetthe
estim
ated
costavoidancetotalsshow
nintheCR
ASGR
Ctestim
onysection.
SuggestedOrder
ofRe
view
It'sb
esttostartw
iththeassociated
workpa
percalled"CRA
SCo
stStud
yOverviewan
dRe
ference,"which
gives:
•High
levelintrodu
ctionon
busin
essd
rivers,alternatives
that
wereconsidered
,and
costdrivers.
•Explanationof
whatd
ifferen
cesb
etweenCR
ASandstandalon
eRA
Ssaremajor
diffe
rences
incostdrivers.
•An
alysisof
each
costdriver
andtheassociated
activ
ities/processes
that
drivelargediffe
rences
inrequ
iredlabo
rbetweenthetw
odiffe
rent
RAS
techno
logy
approaches
(CRA
Sversus
standalon
eRA
S).
•Ho
wtheeq
uatio
nsarebu
ilt,w
hatthe
varia
bles
are,andwhatm
odifiersh
avebe
enused
tobu
ildan
effectivecostmod
el.
•Themod
elistheou
tcom
eof
detailedworkbe
tweenSCE'sP
rotectionEngine
ering,System
Planning,SC&
MTest,Finance,and
Project
Managem
entd
epartm
ents.
•Themod
eluses
data
from
CRAS
projectp
hase
aswellasrecorde
ddata
from
standalon
eRA
Sim
plem
entatio
nsandchanges.Please
see"CRA
SCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ference"
form
oreinform
ation.
StartH
ere
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
58
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
RAS
RASType
#of
Relays
asStan
dAlon
eRA
S20
1820
30
#of
Relays
asCR
AS20
1820
30
Nom
inal
Savings1
PVRR
Savings1
2
NorthernArea
RASAv
oide
dTransm
ission
New
1444
1647
234,28
8$
210,35
7$
Colorado
RiverC
RAS/RG
OOSE
vs.Cap.U
pgrade
Conversio
n20
5822
5146
,599
$24
,325
$MojaveDe
sertCR
AS/RGO
OSE
vs.Cap.U
pgrade
Conversio
n28
4931
4610
,768
$4,56
7$
Whirlw
indCR
AS/RGO
OSE
vs.Cap.U
pgrade
Conversio
n10
25024
9$
(1,385
)$
291,66
4$
237,864
$1$inthou
sand
s220
16ba
seyear
PVRR
2,3
Bene
fits
237,864
$CR
AS/RGO
OSE
vs.Cap
Upgrad
e27
,507
$NorthernArea
RASAv
oidedTran
smission
210,35
7$
Costs
118,693
$CR
AS1
107,05
1$
RGOOSE
11,643
$B/C
2.00
1Inclu
desrecordedcostsfor
initialim
plem
entatio
nan
d2system
refreshes
2$inthou
sand
s320
16ba
seyear
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Total
PVRR
2,3
CRAS
/RGO
OSE
vs.Cap
Upgrade
2(2,618
)2,50
3(817
)3,01
54,03
84,22
24,94
05,30
75,93
96,34
77,41
98,35
88,72
357
,376
27,507
NorthernArea
RASAv
oide
dTransm
ission
22,34
32,34
32,34
321
,086
51,543
65,601
53,886
35,143
234,28
821
0,35
7To
talN
ominalBe
nefits
2,34
32,34
3(275
)23
,589
50,726
68,615
57,924
39,366
4,940
5,30
75,93
96,34
77,41
98,358
8,72
329
1,664
237,864
CRAS
1,2
342
9,47
615
,881
8,12
24,81
49,28
01,51
34,31
14,31
14,71
74,71
767
,483
107,05
1RG
OOSE
23,55
36,34
39,89
611
,643
TotalN
ominalCo
sts
342
9,476
15,881
8,12
24,814
9,280
5,066
6,34
34,31
14,31
14,71
74,71
777
,379
118,693
120
1020
16:recordedcostsfor
initialim
plem
entatio
n2$inthou
sand
s320
16ba
seyear
Notes
1.NorthernArea
CRAS
/RGO
OSE
vs.N
ewStandAlon
e43
.05
$
2.Aw
aitin
grecommen
datio
nfrom
attorneyso
nwhe
ther
existingRA
Sgene
ratorscanbe
madeto
payforstand
ards
basedup
grades.
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
TotalN
ominalCo
sts
342
9,476
15,88
8,122
4,814
9,280
5,066
6,343
4,311
4,311
4,717
4,717
TotalN
ominalBe
nefits
2,343
2,343
(275)
23,58
50,72
68,61
57,92
39,36
4,940
5,307
5,939
6,347
7,419
8,358
8,723
(10,000)
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
CRAS
TotalN
ominalCo
sts
TotalN
ominalBe
nefits
$inthou
sand
s
The
stan
d-al
one
is du
mbe
d do
wn
and
over
trips
gen
erat
ion
-w
e w
ould
not
act
ually
do
stan
d-al
one
if RG
OO
SE
not a
ppro
ved.
Pro
vided
just
as h
ypot
hetic
al c
ompa
rison
. Act
ual a
ltern
ative
to C
RAS
with
RG
OO
SE is
tran
smiss
ion
(see
"Tra
nsm
issio
n" ta
b of
CRA
S Co
st S
tudy
Wor
kshe
et).
Curr
ently
the
estim
ates
for C
RAS
assu
me
SCE
pays
for e
xistin
g cu
stom
er fa
cility
cha
nges
on
cust
omer
side
of t
he
fenc
e. H
owev
er, G
ener
atio
n Co
ntra
cts b
elie
ves
likel
y w
e ca
n m
ake
exist
ing
cust
omer
s pay
bas
ed o
n im
prov
ed c
ontra
ct
lang
uage
we
have
bee
n us
ing.
Thi
s w
ould
add
$10
M to
avo
ided
nom
inal
cos
t tot
al a
bove
.
GRCSummaries
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
59
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Bene
fits
($inthou
sand
s)
AssetC
lass
Item
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Gran
dTo
tal
PVRR
2
Transm
ission
353
StationEquipm
ent
Colorado
RiverR
AS1
(158
)$
1,81
9$
2,02
5$
2,23
9$
3,14
4$
2,72
1$
3,87
4$
3,59
4$
4,68
4$
4,40
1$
5,36
7$
6,12
9$
6,75
9$
46,599
$24
,325
Transm
ission
353
StationEquipm
ent
MojaveDe
sertRA
S1
(2,460
)$
684
$49
6$
688
$73
0$
1,32
0$
866
$1,49
5$
1,01
7$
1,68
6$
1,18
2$
1,89
5$
1,16
8$
10,768
$4,56
7Transm
ission
353
StationEquipm
ent
Whirlw
indRA
S1
$$
(3,338
)$
87$
164
$18
1$
199
$21
8$
238
$25
9$
870
$33
4$
796
$9
$(1,385
)Transm
ission
354
Towers&
Fixtures
NorthernArea
Transm
issionLine
s3
2,34
32,34
32,34
321
,086
51,543
65,601
53,886
35,143
234,28
8$
210,35
7To
talB
enefits
2,34
3$
2,34
3$
(275
)$
23,589
$50
,726
$68
,615
$57
,924
$39
,366
$4,94
0$
5,30
7$
5,93
9$
6,34
7$
7,41
9$
8,35
8$
8,72
3$
291,664
$23
7,864
1SeeExpe
cted
Savingstab
2In20
16do
llars
3SeeTransm
issiontab
Costs
($inthou
sand
s)
AssetC
lass
Item
2010
120
111
2012
120
131
2014
120
151
2016
1,2
2017
220
182
2019
220
202
2021
220
222
2023
220
242
2025
2Gran
dTo
tal
PVRR
3
303
Software
CIT00
SDPM
0001
02CR
AS23
56,01
514
,057
4,64
23,99
96,71
51,36
54,31
14,31
14,71
74,71
755
,083
$81
,572
397
Telecom
Equipm
ent
CIT00
SDPM
0000
16CR
AS10
780
843
895
204
604
472,78
0$
5,51
1Transm
ission
353
StationEquipm
ent
CETOTOTBP
6428
00CR
AS3,38
198
12,58
561
11,96
110
19,62
0$
19,968
303
Software
RGOOSE
3,55
36,34
39,89
6$
11,643
$To
talCosts
342
$9,47
6$
15,881
$8,12
2$
4,814
$9,28
0$
5,06
6$
6,34
3$
4,31
1$
4,31
1$
$$
$$
4,71
7$
4,71
7$
77,379
$11
8,69
31CR
ASbasedon
recorded
2Ba
sedon
forecast
3In20
16do
llars
B/C
2.00
($ in
thou
sand
s)PV
RRBe
nefi
ts23
7,86
4$
CRAS
CostAv
oida
nce
27,507
NorthernArea
Tran
smissionAv
oida
nce
210,35
7Co
sts
118,
693
$
CR
AS C
osts
107,
051
$
RGO
OSE
Cos
ts11
,643
$
B/C
2.00
BCRa
tioCR
ASCo
stStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
60
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
RASType
CostFactor
Descrip
tion
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Stan
dAlon
eLong
Term
RelaySharing
AsRA
Sscontinue
togrow
andprolife
rate
inremew
ablesrichareas,overlaps
occur.CR
AScansharerelays,stand
alon
ene
edsa
ddition
alrelays.
00
00
00
02
22
22
22
22
Chan
gesp
erYe
arAssumed
changesp
eryear
inrene
wablesrichareas
00
00
33
22
22
22
22
22
CRAS
AnalyticTestingcostsp
erchan
geinCR
AS(IT
Testingcost)Thisisanalytictestingcostfore
very
completeCR
ASde
sign.By
PSC,verifieso
utto
andinclud
ingtripof
relay.
100,80
0$
103,82
4$
106,93
9$
110,14
7$
113,45
1$
116,85
5$
120,36
0$
123,97
1$
127,69
0$
131,52
1$
135,46
7$
139,53
1$
143,71
7$
148,02
8$
152,46
9$
157,04
3$
CRAS
Additio
nalA
nalytic
Testing
Form
odificatio
nsto
existingCR
ASde
sign
64,800
$66
,744
$68
,746
$70
,809
$72
,933
$75
,121
$77
,375
$79
,696
$82
,087
$84
,549
$87
,086
$89
,698
$92
,389
$95
,161
$98
,016
$10
0,95
6$
CRAS
CRAS
OverallTesting
SC&M
testtech
supp
ortcost
$7,86
8$
8,10
4$
8,34
7$
8,59
7$
8,85
5$
9,12
1$
9,39
4$
9,67
6$
9,96
6$
10,265
$10
,573
$10
,891
$11
,217
$CR
ASCR
ASOverallTesting
Man
hours/ite
ratio
n0
9696
9696
9696
9696
9696
9696
96CR
AS#Men
/FieldCrew
Headcoun
t2
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
2CR
ASCR
ASFieldTestingDu
ratio
nHo
urs
1616
1616
1616
1616
1616
1616
1616
1616
CRAS
CRAS
TripTestDu
ratio
nHo
urs
88
88
88
88
88
88
88
88
CRAS
CRAS
RelayTo
talCost
Installnew
relayandgetitind
ividually
ready.Includ
eslabo
rand
material.No
endto
endtesting.
120,71
5$
124,33
7$
128,06
7$
131,90
9$
135,86
6$
139,94
2$
144,14
1$
148,46
5$
152,91
9$
157,50
6$
162,23
2$
167,09
8$
172,11
1$
177,27
5$
182,59
3$
188,07
1$
CRAS
CRAS
Existin
gGe
neratorC
ost
Costinyear
oneto
payform
odificatio
nsto
existingIntercon
nectionFacilities
SCEpays
185,26
3$
190,82
1$
196,54
6$
202,44
2$
208,51
5$
214,77
1$
221,21
4$
227,85
0$
234,68
6$
241,72
6$
248,97
8$
256,44
7$
264,14
1$
272,06
5$
280,22
7$
288,63
4$
CRAS
CRAS
RelayRa
tioRa
tiowith
StandAlon
eRe
lays
is1.1:1
(i.e.10
%more)
becauseof
somede
sign
diffs
TestTech
Rate
Rate
perh
our
7577
8082
8487
9092
9598
101
104
107
110
113
117
All
TripTestIte
ratio
nsTriptests/year
(one
percustomer
OD)
04
32
22
22
22
22
22
All
TripTestCo
stOne
2man
crew
persub
perg
enerator
3,93
4$
4,05
2$
4,17
3$
4,29
9$
4,42
8$
4,56
0$
4,69
7$
4,83
8$
4,98
3$
5,13
3$
5,28
7$
5,44
5$
5,60
9$
Stan
dAlon
eStan
dalon
eTesting
Num
bero
fend
toen
dfie
ldcrew
testite
ratio
ns0
43
22
22
22
22
22
2Stan
dAlon
eStan
dalon
eTesting
Num
bertesttechs
requ
ired
04
56
67
88
99
1010
1111
Stan
dAlon
eStan
dalon
eTesting
Num
ber2
man
crew
s/ite
ratio
n0
23
33
44
45
55
56
6Stan
dAlon
eStan
dalon
eTesting
032
048
048
048
064
064
064
080
080
080
080
096
096
0Stan
dAlon
eStan
dalon
eTesting
Costpe
riteratio
n$
26,225
$40
,518
$41
,734
$42
,986
$59
,034
$60
,805
$62
,629
$80
,635
$83
,054
$85
,546
$88
,112
$10
8,90
6$
112,17
4$
Stan
dAlon
eTestingcostsp
erchan
gein
stan
dalone
RAS
Thisisadditio
naltestin
gcostfore
very
change
madeun
derstand
alon
ecostso
npe
rrelay
basis.N
ote:Allrelaysm
ustb
eretested
whe
nne
won
esareadde
d.20
,000
$20
,600
$21
,218
$21
,855
$22
,510
$23
,185
$23
,881
$24
,597
$25
,335
$26
,095
$26
,878
$27
,685
$28
,515
$29
,371
$30
,252
$31
,159
$
Stan
dAlon
eRe
laymod
ulecostsfor
stan
dalone
RASs
1CP
Umod
uleand1Po
wer
Supp
lymod
ule(existRA
Srelayup
grade)
8,00
0$
8,24
0$
8,48
7$
8,74
2$
9,00
4$
9,27
4$
9,55
2$
9,83
9$
10,134
$10
,438
$10
,751
$11
,074
$11
,406
$11
,748
$12
,101
$12
,464
$
Stan
dAlon
eStan
dAlon
eRe
layTo
talCost
Installnew
relay,standalone
RAS.Escalatedvaluebasedon
2009
2010
recorded
costs.Includ
eslabo
rand
material.
200,57
0$
206,58
7$
212,78
5$
219,16
8$
225,74
3$
232,51
6$
239,49
1$
246,67
6$
254,07
6$
261,69
8$
269,54
9$
277,63
6$
285,96
5$
294,54
4$
303,38
0$
312,48
2$
New
RAS
NorthernArea
CRAS
/RGO
OSE
vs.N
ewStan
dAlon
e20
1520
1620
1720
1820
1920
2020
2120
2220
2320
2420
2520
2620
2720
2820
2920
30
Num
berS
CEsubstatio
nsassumed
00
03
33
33
33
33
33
33
Num
bero
fexistinggene
rators
00
011
1518
2022
2426
2830
3234
3638
Num
bero
fgen
eratorsa
dded
pery
ear
00
04
32
22
22
22
22
22
Stan
dalon
eSCERe
lays
byyear
00
014
2022
2426
2830
3234
3638
4042
Relaysharingde
ficit
00
00
00
00
20
20
20
22
Stan
dalon
etotalrelaysb
yyear
00
814
2022
2426
3030
3434
3838
4244
Stan
dalon
eexcess
fieldsupp
ortcostsby
subcoun
t0
00
00
00
00
00
00
Stan
dalon
eexcess
fieldsupp
ortcostsby
relaycoun
t0
00
00
00
11
11
22
Excess
fieldsupp
ort
00
00
00
017
1718
1837
39Du
ratio
nfactor
versus
referenceRA
S4.13
4.13
4.13
4.13
4.13
4.13
4.13
4.13
4.13
4.13
4.13
4.13
4.13
OptionA
New
stan
dalon
eRA
Scosts
5,94
1$
4,84
9$
3,42
6$
3,02
1$
3,33
6$
4,33
1$
3,56
8$
5,10
2$
4,30
8$
5,93
3$
5,10
6$
6,86
4$
6,82
1$
62,607
$CR
ASSCErelays
byyear
00
016
2225
2729
3133
3638
4042
4447
OptionB
CRAS
with
RGOOSE
Costs
4,88
5$
1,23
6$
933
$86
4$
929
$99
8$
1,06
9$
1,32
2$
1,24
9$
1,33
2$
1,41
9$
1,51
4$
1,81
2$
19,562
$Nom
inalCo
stDe
ltaCR
ASCo
stAv
oida
nce
1,05
6$
3,61
4$
2,49
3$
2,15
7$
2,40
7$
3,33
4$
2,49
9$
3,78
0$
3,05
9$
4,60
1$
3,68
6$
5,35
0$
5,01
0$
43,046
$
Conversion
RAS
Colorado
RiverC
RAS/RG
OOSE
vs.C
ap.U
pgrade
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Num
berS
CEsubstatio
nsassumed
00
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
Num
bero
fexistinggene
rators
00
04
68
1012
1416
1820
2224
2628
Num
bero
fgen
eratorsa
dded
pery
ear
00
02
22
22
22
22
22
22
Stan
dalon
eSCERe
lays
byyear
00
1620
2426
2830
3234
3638
4042
4446
Relaysharingde
ficit
00
00
00
02
02
02
02
22
Stan
dalon
etotalrelaysb
yyear
00
1620
2426
2832
3438
4044
4650
5458
Stan
dalon
eexcess
fieldsupp
ortcostsby
subcoun
t0
00
00
00
00
00
00
Stan
dalon
eexcess
fieldsupp
ortcostsby
relaycoun
t0
00
00
11
12
23
34
Excess
fieldsupp
ort
00
00
012
1313
2728
4344
61
Duratio
nfactor
versus
referenceRA
S3.26
3.26
3.26
3.26
3.26
3.26
3.26
3.26
3.26
3.26
3.26
3.26
3.26
OptionA
Capa
city
upgrad
estan
dalon
eRA
Scosts
4,09
9$
2,68
9$
2,42
8$
2,65
4$
3,57
1$
3,34
1$
4,33
0$
4,06
3$
5,16
8$
4,90
2$
6,09
1$
6,66
3$
7,30
9$
57,307
$
CRAS
SCErelays
byyear
00
022
2729
3133
3638
4042
4447
4951
OptionB
CRAS
with
RGOOSE
Costs
4,25
7$
871
$40
3$
415
$42
7$
620
$45
6$
469
$48
3$
500
$72
4$
534
$55
0$
10,708
$
Nom
inalCo
stDe
ltaCR
ASCo
stAv
oida
nce
(158
)$
1,81
9$
2,02
5$
2,23
9$
3,14
4$
2,72
1$
3,87
4$
3,59
4$
4,68
4$
4,40
1$
5,36
7$
6,12
9$
6,75
9$
46,599
$
IMPO
RTAN
T:NorthernArea
RASinto
CRAS
willworkandgive
desired
76armingpo
ints.A
standalon
eRA
Scanon
lyaccommod
atethat
manyarmingpo
intsby
tripping
twogene
ratorsat
once.Please
refertoCR
AStestim
onyandworkpape
ronNorthernArea
RASandtheun
desirabiltyof
trying
touseastandalon
eRA
Sapproach.SCE
wou
ldspecify
ane
wtransm
issionbu
ildinsteadof
astandalon
eRA
SifCR
ASwith
RGOOSE
wereno
tavailable.
Standalon
ecostsp
rovide
dforh
ypothe
ticalcostcomparison
purposes
only.
Expe
cted
Savings
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
61
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Conversion
RAS
MojaveDe
sertCR
AS/RGO
OSE
vs.C
ap.U
pgrade
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Num
berS
CEsubstatio
nsassumed
00
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
Num
bero
fexistinggene
rators
00
02
34
56
78
910
1112
1314
Num
bero
fgen
eratorsa
dded
pery
ear
00
01
11
11
11
11
11
11
Stan
dalon
eSCERe
lays
byyear
00
2628
3031
3233
3435
3637
3839
4041
Relaysharingde
ficit
00
00
00
00
20
20
20
20
Stan
dalon
etotalrelaysb
yyear
00
2628
3031
3233
3637
4041
4445
4849
Stan
dalon
eexcess
fieldsupp
ortcostsby
subcoun
t2
22
22
22
22
22
22
Stan
dalon
eexcess
fieldsupp
ort costsby
relaycoun
t0
00
01
11
12
22
23
Excess
fieldsupp
ort
1212
1213
1313
1414
1515
1616
25Du
ratio
nfactor
versus
referenceRA
S1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
1.76
OptionA
Capa
city
upgrad
estan
dalon
eRA
Scosts
2,35
5$
1,05
1$
874
$92
1$
970
$1,56
7$
1,12
1$
1,75
7$
1,28
7$
1,96
5$
1,46
9$
2,19
1$
1,67
6$
19,207
$CR
ASSCErelays
byyear
00
031
3335
3637
3839
4041
4243
4446
OptionB
CRAS
with
RGOOSE
Costs
4,81
5$
367
$37
8$
233
$24
0$
248
$25
5$
263
$27
1$
279
$28
7$
296
$50
8$
8,43
8$
Nom
inalCo
stDe
ltaCR
ASCo
stAv
oida
nce
(2,460
)$
684
$49
6$
688
$73
0$
1,32
0$
866
$1,49
5$
1,01
7$
1,68
6$
1,18
2$
1,89
5$
1,16
8$
10,768
$
Conversion
RAS
Whirlw
indCR
AS/RGO
OSE
vs.C
ap.U
pgrade
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Num
berS
CEsubstatio
nsassumed
00
01
11
11
11
11
11
11
Num
bero
fexistinggene
rators
00
00
012
1314
1516
1718
1920
2122
Num
bero
fgen
eratorsa
dded
pery
ear
00
00
01
11
11
11
11
11
Stan
dalon
eSCERe
lays
byyear
00
08
1012
1314
1516
1718
1920
21Re
laysharingde
ficit
00
00
00
00
00
00
20
22
Stan
dalon
etotalrelaysb
yyear
00
08
810
1213
1415
1617
1821
2225
Stan
dalon
eexcess
fieldsupp
ortcostsby
subcoun
t0
00
00
00
00
00
00
Stan
dalon
eexcess
fieldsupp
ortcostsby
relaycoun
t0
00
00
00
00
00
00
Excess
fieldsupp
ort
00
00
00
00
00
00
Duratio
nfactor
versus
referenceRA
S0
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
OptionA
Capa
city
upgrad
estan
dalon
eRA
Scosts
895
$59
5$
390
$41
4$
439
$46
5$
492
$52
1$
1,14
0$
611
$1,27
0$
7,23
3$
CRAS
SCErelays
byyear
00
00
011
1415
1617
1819
2021
2224
OptionB
CRAS
with
RGOOSE
Costs
4,23
3$
508
$22
6$
233
$24
0$
247
$25
4$
262
$27
0$
278
$47
4$
7,22
3$
Nom
inalCo
stDe
ltaCR
ASCo
stAv
oida
nce
(3,338
)$
87$
164
$18
1$
199
$21
8$
238
$25
9$
870
$33
4$
796
$9
$
Expe
cted
Savings
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
62
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
This page intentionally leftblank.
63
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Nor
ther
n A
rea
RA
S A
void
ed T
rans
mis
sion
Cos
tEl
emen
tQ
uant
ity$/
ea$
sub
Line
term
inat
ion
2.00
11,2
10,0
00$
22
,420
,000
$
Mile
s of
500
kV
tran
smis
sion
line
36.4
54,
578,
000
$
16
6,86
8,10
0$
18
9,28
8,10
0$
1. N
ote:
Thi
s is
a h
igh-
leve
l est
imat
e/eq
uipm
ent o
nly
45,0
00,0
00$
2. C
onse
rvat
ive
figur
e. A
ctua
l lic
ensi
ng c
osts
like
ly
234,
288,
100
$
hig
her.
Uni
t Cos
t Ref
eren
ce In
form
atio
nS
CE
’s 2
016
Fina
l Per
Uni
t Cos
t Gui
de is
pos
ted
at th
is li
nk:
http://w
ww.caiso.com
/Docum
ents/SCE
2016
FinalPerUnitCostGuide
.xlsx
Tota
l not
incl
udin
g lic
ensi
ng c
osts
Hig
h le
vel l
icen
sing
cos
t est
imat
eO
vera
ll To
tal
Met
hodo
logy
Ene
rgy
from
rene
wab
le g
ener
atio
n re
sour
ces
in S
CE
’s N
orth
ern
area
is c
urre
ntly
del
iver
ed s
outh
to th
e LA
Bas
in b
y w
ay o
f a th
ree-
line
500
kV tr
ansm
issi
on c
orrid
or li
nkin
g W
indh
ub, W
hirlw
ind,
Ant
elop
e, a
nd V
ince
nt s
ubst
atio
ns. W
ith
all t
hree
line
s in
ser
vice
, the
max
imum
out
put o
f all
inte
rcon
nect
ed g
ener
atio
n ca
n be
relia
bly
deliv
ered
. Whe
n un
plan
ned
outa
ges
of o
ne o
r mor
e of
thes
e lin
es o
ccur
, the
max
imum
gen
erat
ion
outp
ut e
xcee
ds th
e ca
paci
ty o
f the
re
mai
ning
line
s. In
ord
er to
elim
inat
e da
mag
e to
tran
smis
sion
equ
ipm
ent f
rom
ove
rload
s, a
Rem
edia
l Act
ion
Sch
eme
(RA
S) i
s th
e m
ost c
ost e
ffect
ive
way
to b
ring
gene
ratio
n ou
tput
and
ava
ilabl
e tra
nsm
issi
on c
apac
ity in
to b
alan
ce. A
R
AS
wor
ks b
y au
tom
atic
ally
cal
cula
ting
the
amou
nt o
f gen
erat
ion
that
nee
ds to
be
take
n of
f-lin
e in
ord
er fo
r tot
al o
utpu
t no
t to
exce
ed a
vaila
ble
trans
mis
sion
cap
acity
, mon
itorin
g fo
r unp
lann
ed li
ne o
utag
es, a
nd th
en a
utom
atic
ally
sen
ding
si
gnal
s to
the
gene
rato
rs to
dis
conn
ect t
hem
from
the
grid
the
inst
ant t
he o
utag
e oc
curs
.
With
out a
RA
S, a
dditi
onal
tran
smis
sion
line
cap
acity
bet
wee
n S
CE
’s W
hirlw
ind
and
Vin
cent
sub
stat
ions
will
be
need
ed
to a
ccom
mod
ate
the
high
vol
ume
of re
new
able
gen
erat
ion
outp
ut fr
om p
roje
cts
inte
rcon
nect
ing
in S
CE
’s N
orth
ern
area
. B
y in
stal
ling
a V
ince
nt –
Whi
rlwin
d N
o. 2
500
kV
line
, N-1
and
N-2
con
tinge
ncy
outa
ges
(i.e.
unp
lann
ed tr
ansm
issi
on
line
faul
ts in
volv
ing
any
one
line
or c
ombi
natio
ns tw
o lin
es a
t a ti
me)
will
leav
e en
ough
line
s in
ser
vice
to d
eliv
er th
e m
axim
um g
ener
atio
n ou
tput
with
out o
verlo
ads
that
wou
ld d
amag
e tra
nsm
issi
on e
quip
men
t. Th
e ba
sic
com
pone
nts
of
this
tran
smis
sion
line
are
the
cond
ucto
r and
sup
porti
ng to
wer
s th
at c
ompr
ise
the
line
itsel
f, an
d th
e te
rmin
atin
g eq
uipm
ent t
hat c
onne
ct th
e lin
e to
the
subs
tatio
n sw
itchr
acks
. Ter
min
atin
g eq
uipm
ent i
nclu
des
circ
uit b
reak
ers
(two
at
each
term
inat
ion)
, dis
conn
ect s
witc
hes
(four
at e
ach
term
inat
ion)
, and
oth
er e
quip
men
t, al
l of w
hich
is c
olle
ctiv
ely
refe
rred
to a
s a
“line
term
inat
ing
posi
tion.
For
a s
ingl
e tra
nsm
issi
on li
ne, o
ne li
ne te
rmin
atin
g po
sitio
n is
requ
ired
at
each
of t
he tw
o en
ds o
f the
line
.”
1.NorthernArea
Transm
ission
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
64
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Year
1Ye
ar2
Year
3Ye
ar4
Year
5Ye
ar6
Year
7
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
1.00
%1.00
%1.00
%9.00
%22
.00%
28.00%
23.00%
2,34
2,88
1$
2,34
2,88
1$
2,34
2,88
1$
21,085
,929
$51
,543
,382
$65
,600
,668
$53
,886
,263
$Note:An
nualallocatio
nprovided
byT&
DMPO
andWorkManagem
ent
$
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
$70,000,000
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
RoughTran
smission
Costsb
yYear
1.NorthernArea
Transm
ission
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
65
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
PerA
ndyFree
Tue5/24
/201
67:33
PM
InitialDe
ploymen
tofR
AS:
Desig
nandDe
velopm
ent
Unittestin
gIntegrationTesting
PointtoPo
intT
estin
g3FTE1mon
th0.5FTE1mon
th1FTE1mon
th0.5FTE1mon
th(3*160
*75=$3
6,00
0)(0.5*160
*75=$6
,000
)(1*160
*75=$1
2,00
0)(0.5*160
*75=$6
,000
)
Increm
entalCha
nges
toRA
S(totheRA
Sthat
was
develope
dbe
fore):
Desig
nandDe
velopm
ent
Unittestin
gIntegrationTesting
PointtoPo
intT
estin
g2FTE1mon
th0.0FTE1mon
th0.5FTE1mon
th0.5FTE1mon
th(2*160
*75=$2
4,00
0)(0.0*160
*75=$0
,000
)(0.5*160
*75=$6
,000
)(0.5*160
*75=$6
,000
)
PSC
PSC
2.CR
ASAn
alyticTestingCo
sts
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
66
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Endto
EndTesting
D400
sand
RTU
Total
Contingency
Totalw
ithCo
ntingency
1FTE1mon
th1FTE1mon
th10
0,80
0$
(1*160
*75=$1
2,00
0)(1*160
*75=$1
2,00
0)
Endto
EndTesting
D400
sand
RTU
Total
Contingency
Totalw
ithCo
ntingency
1FTE1mon
th0.5FTE1mon
th64
,800
$(1*160
*75=$1
2,00
0)(0.5*160
*75=$6
,000
)
$84,00
020
%
$54,00
020
%
2.CR
ASAn
alyticTestingCo
sts
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
67
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
SeeCR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ferenceform
oreinform
ation
Gene
ratorS
iteCo
stsfor
ExistingGe
nerators
Gen
erationProject
RAS
#CB
sType
Scop
eCo
stGen
esisI
Colorado
River
2Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$Gen
esisII
Colorado
River
2Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$BlackCree
kCo
lorado
River
4Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$Dracker
Colorado
River
4Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$Alba
MojaveDesert
1Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$Ocaso
MojaveDesert
1Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$LSP220kV
lineatKram
erMojaveDesert
2Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$Avenu
eA
Whirlwind
3Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$Avenu
eB
Whirlwind
2Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$Kingbird
Whirlwind
2Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$Free
bird
Whirlwind
4Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$SolarR
anch
AWhirlwind
1Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$SolarR
anch
Whirlwind
1Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$
Soleil:
Whirlwind
3Standard
1CB
atplant1,2
CBsatplant2
(sep
araterelays
atthetw
oplants,
butthe
ybo
thtripatthesametime)
150,000
$
Astoria:
Whirlwind
7Special
4CB
satplant1,3
CBsatplant2
(sep
araterelays
atthetw
oplants,
butthe
ybo
thtripatthesametime)
Sameapproach
asatTe
ddy
)see
belowand"Ted
dy"tab).
290,000
$
Garland
:Whirlwind
6Special
1CB
atplantA
,5CB
satplantB
/C(sep
araterelays
atthetw
oplants,but
they
both
tripatthesametime).
290,000
$Ro
yWhirlwind
4Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$Tedd
yph
ases
1and2
Whirlwind
4Standard
One
rack
with2relays
150,000
$
Tedd
yWhirlwind
9Special
Multipleph
ases
seeno
teson
"Ted
dy"tab.Ph
ases
3and4:6CB
s.Tedd
yph
ase5willadd3moreCB
s.4racks,6relays
total
540,000
$Total
3,520,000
$Average
perSite
185,263
$
CRAS
ExistingGe
nerators
CRAS
CostStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
68
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Cos
t ele
men
t des
cr.
(Mul
tiple
Item
s)
Sum
of V
alue
Tra
nCur
rFi
scal
Yea
rC
O o
bjec
t nam
eO
bjec
t20
0820
0920
1020
11G
rand
Tot
alEl
Nid
o su
bsta
tion:
Inst
all l
ine
mon
itor
8001
3487
114
5,27
7
59
9,90
4
90
,817
51
3
83
6,51
1
La
Cie
nega
Sub
stat
ion:
Inst
all l
ine
mon
i80
0134
869
95,3
55
648,
627
336,
809
9,16
2
1,08
9,95
4
La F
resa
Sub
stat
ion:
Inst
all l
ine
mon
ito80
0134
868
69,9
54
496,
767
1,66
8
568,
389
Gra
nd T
otal
310,
586
1,74
5,29
9
429,
294
9,67
5
2,49
4,85
4
# of
Rel
ays
El N
ido
6La
Cie
nega
4La
Fre
sa4 14
2008
-201
120
1220
1320
1420
15W
eigh
ted
Cos
t per
Rel
ay17
8,20
4
18
3,55
0
18
9,05
6
19
4,72
8
20
0,57
0
SeeCR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ferenceform
oreinform
ation
StandAlon
eRe
layCo
stCR
ASCo
stStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
69
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Fund
ing
Capital
Sum
ofTotA
mt
YrMth
2012
2013
2014
2015
CWBS/Div
PrjG
rp1
23
45
67
CETOTOTBP
6428
00Substatio
nEngrg,Programs
969,41
11,48
0,470
563,12
324
,141
74,581
127,43
945
8,39
716
0,32
916
0,90
321
5,27
3CE
TOTOTBP
6428
00To
tal
969,41
11,48
0,470
563,12
324
,141
74,581
127,43
945
8,39
716
0,32
916
0,90
321
5,27
3GrandTo
tal
969,41
11,48
0,470
563,12
324
,141
74,581
127,43
945
8,39
716
0,32
916
0,90
321
5,27
3
TotalR
elays
26CR
ASCo
stpe
rRelay
120,715
$SeeCR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ferenceform
oreinform
ation
5.CR
ASRe
layCo
stCR
ASCo
stStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
70
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Fund
ing
Capital
Sum
ofTotA
mt
CWBS/Div
PrjG
rpCE
TOTOTBP
6428
00Substatio
nEngrg,Programs
CETOTOTBP
6428
00To
tal
GrandTotal
SeeCR
ASCo
stStud
yOverviewandRe
ferenceform
oreinform
2015
2015
TotalGrandTo
tal
89
1011
1243
5,76
819
7,39
871
,124
16,534
12,795
1,95
4,68
14,96
7,68
543
5,76
819
7,39
871
,124
16,534
12,795
1,95
4,68
14,96
7,68
543
5,76
819
7,39
871
,124
16,534
12,795
1,95
4,68
14,96
7,68
5
5.CR
ASRe
layCo
stCR
ASCo
stStud
yWorkshe
et.xlsx
71
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Northern Area Arming Points Comparison
72
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ArmNo.
CAISO QUEUE# Project No. CLUSTER
MainTransformer MW
ArmingPoints
Max MWsArmed
Point ofInterconnection
Q643AJ TOT494 Q3 T1 100 WhirlwindQ768 TOT585 Q4 T2 20 AntelopeTBD TOT815 Q9 T1 305 WhirlwindQ746 TOT573 Q4 T1 100 WhirlwindQ768 TOT585 Q4 T3 20 AntelopeTBD TOT819 Q9 T1 300 WindhubQ768 TOT585 Q4 T6 20 AntelopeQ967 TOT668 Q6 T1 60 WhirlwindQ971 TOT672 Q6 T2 100 WhirlwindTBD TOT807 Q9 T1 240 WindhubQ768 TOT585 Q4 T1 60 AntelopeQ971 TOT672 Q6 T1 100 Whirlwind
Q1214 TOT769 Q8 T1 6 WhirlwindTBD TOT821 Q9 T1 24 WhirlwindTBD TOT807 Q9 T2 230 WindhubQ506 TOT411 Q1 T3 86 WhirlwindQ602 TOT455 Q2 T1 110 WhirlwindTBD TOT807 Q9 T3 230 Windhub
Q1215 TOT777 Q8 T1 150 WhirlwindTBD TOT828 Q9 T1 150 WindhubTBD TOT824 Q9 T1 92 WhirlwindQ602 TOT455 Q2 T2 20 WhirlwindQ506 TOT411 Q1 T4 86 WhirlwindQ795 TOT544 Q4 T1 20 Whirlwind
Q1208 TOT762 Q8 T2 225 AntelopeTBD TOT824 Q9 T2 92 WhirlwindQ768 TOT585 Q4 T4 85 Antelope
Q1208 TOT762 Q8 T3 225 AntelopeTBD TOT795 Q9 T1 24 WhirlwindTBD TOT824 Q9 T3 92 WhirlwindQ506 TOT411 Q1 T5 19.6 Whirlwind
Q1208 TOT762 Q8 T1 200 AntelopeTBD TOT826 Q9 T1 200 WhirlwindQ796 TOT545 Q4 T1 20 Whirlwind
Q1209 TOT763 Q8 T1 105 AntelopeTBD TOT791 Q9 T1 200 Highwind
Q1209 TOT763 Q8 T2 105 AntelopeQ643R TOT497 Q3 T1 78 WhirlwindQ746 TOT573 Q4 T2 75 WhirlwindQ768 TOT585 Q4 T7 20 Antelope
Q1074 TOT727 Q7 T1 75 WhirlwindTBD TOT828 Q9 T2 150 WindhubQ768 TOT585 Q4 T9 30 AntelopeQ506 TOT411 Q1 T1 54 WhirlwindQ602 TOT455 Q2 T3 20 Whirlwind
Q643R TOT497 Q3 T2 75 WhirlwindQ768 TOT585 Q4 T5 55 Antelope
Q1076 TOT726 Q7 T1 50 WhirlwindQ1074 TOT727 Q7 T2 50 WhirlwindQ1209 TOT763 Q8 T3 105 AntelopeQ506 TOT411 Q1 T2 54 Whirlwind
Q1211 TOT753 Q8 T1 100 WhirlwindQ1212 TOT754 Q8 T1 100 WhirlwindTBD TOT793 Q9 T1 125 WhirlwindTBD TOT806 Q9 T4 56 WhirlwindQ768 TOT585 Q4 T8 20 Whirlwind
Q1217 TOT778 Q8 T1 100 WhirlwindQ1209 TOT763 Q8 T4 105 AntelopeTBD TOT791 Q9 T2 200 HighwindTBD TOT790 Q9 T2 125 WhirlwindTBD TOT793 Q9 T2 125 WhirlwindTBD TOT823 Q9 T1 110 WhirlwindTBD TOT790 Q9 T1 125 Whirlwind
Arming Points 45Min Arming Size 409Max Arming Size 485Mean 426.5981503Average 426.9066667
15
Table 1RAS Arming Utilzinig Traditional RAS
(15 Total Groups Requiring 45 Arming Points)
9 3 419.6
10
3 426
7 3 423
6 3
425
3
3 4204
3 3 420
426
412
5
14 3 425
3 485
13 3 435
3 40912
3 430
3 42811
8 3
2 420
1 3
Northern Area RAS Arming Points Comparison
73
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
ArmNo.
CAISO QUEUE# Project No. CLUSTER
MainTransformer MW
ArmingPoints
Max MWsArmed
Point ofInterconnection
1 T1 54 3 542 T2 54 3 543 T3 86 3 864 T4 86 3 865 T5 19.6 3 19.66 T1 110 3 1107 T2 20 3 208 T3 20 3 209 Q643AJ TOT494 Q3 T1 100 3 100 Whirlwind10 T1 78 3 7811 T2 75 3 7512 Q795 TOT544 Q4 T1 20 3 20 Whirlwind13 Q796 TOT545 Q4 T1 20 3 20 Whirlwind14 T1 100 3 10015 T2 75 3 7516 Q967 TOT668 Q6 T1 60 3 60 Whirlwind17 T1 100 3 10018 T2 100 3 10019 Q1076 TOT726 Q7 T1 50 3 50 Whirlwind20 T1 75 3 7521 T2 50 3 5022 Q1211 TOT753 Q8 T1 100 3 100 Whirlwind23 Q1212 TOT754 Q8 T1 100 3 100 Whirlwind24 Q1214 TOT769 Q8 T1 6 3 6 Whirlwind25 Q1215 TOT777 Q8 T1 150 3 150 Whirlwind26 Q1217 TOT778 Q8 T1 100 3 100 Whirlwind27 T1 125 3 12528 T2 125 3 12529 T1 125 3 12530 T2 125 3 12531 TBD TOT795 Q9 T1 24 3 24 Whirlwind32 TBD TOT806 Q9 T4 56 3 56 Whirlwind33 TBD TOT815 Q9 T1 305 3 305 Whirlwind34 TBD TOT821 Q9 T1 24 3 24 Whirlwind35 TBD TOT823 Q9 T1 110 3 110 Whirlwind36 T1 92 3 9237 T2 92 3 9238 T3 92 3 9239 TBD TOT826 Q9 T1 200 3 200 Whirlwind40 T1 60 3 6041 T2 20 3 2042 T3 20 3 2043 T4 85 3 8544 T5 55 3 5545 T6 20 3 2046 T7 20 3 2047 T8 20 3 2048 T9 30 3 3049 T1 200 3 20050 T2 225 3 22551 T3 225 3 22552 T1 105 3 10553 T2 105 3 10554 T3 105 3 10555 T4 105 3 10556 T1 200 3 20057 T2 200 3 20058 T1 240 3 24059 T2 230 3 23060 T3 230 3 23061 TBD TOT819 Q9 T1 300 3 300 Windhub62 T1 150 3 15063 T2 150 3 150
Arming Points 189Min Arming Size 6Max Arming Size 305Mean 75.16473132Average 101.6444444
Table 2RAS Arming Utilzinig C RAS
(63 Arming Elements Requiring 189 Arming Points)
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q746
Q971
Q1074
TOT411
TOT455
TOT497
TOT573
TOT672
TOT727
Q506
Q602
Q643R
Whirlwind
Whirlwind
Whirlwind
Whirlwind
Whirlwind
Whirlwind
Whirlwind
Whirlwind
Whirlwind
TOT585
Q9
TOT790
TOT793
TOT824
Antelope
Q1208 TOT762
Q4
Q8 Antelope
Q768
Antelope
Q9TOT791TBD Highwind
Windhub
TBD TOT828 Q9 Windhub
Q6
Q7
Q9
Q9
TBD TOT807 Q9
Q1209 TOT763 Q8
TBD
TBD
TBD
Q4
Northern Area RAS Arming Points Comparison
74
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Evolution of RAS Complexity - Base Data
75
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
N60
InNo.of
Relay
Per
Subscribed
Publish
edLogic
Service
RASNam
eSubstatio
nRe
lays
Type
RelayFunctio
nRe
lay
Total
Bits
Bits
Line
sYear
Commen
tsBishop
RAS
Control
2RX
IL20
Line
Mon
itor
22
1980
sNon
redu
ndantlegacyRA
S1
RFL67
45Transfer
Tripto
Plants3and4
1RFL67
45Transfer
Tripto
Plant2
1RFL67
45Transfer
Tripto
Plants5and6
Blythe
Energy
RAS
JulianHind
s2
GEN60
JulianHind
sMira
geOverlo
ad1
21
557
2010
Armed
atalltim
es2
GEN60
MWDBu
sSectio
nOverlo
ad1
73
101
Colorado
RiverC
orrid
orRA
SRe
dBluff
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g8
1611
1941
320
152
GEN60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g8
1420
406
2GE
N60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g0
3511
433
2GE
N60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g0
2123
432
Colorado
River
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g2
GEN60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g2
GEN60
Bank
Mon
itorin
gDe
vers
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gDe
versRA
SDe
vers
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g10
4814
3042
320
142
GEN60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g10
1328
403
2GE
N60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g11
1325
327
2GE
N60
Tripping/LogicProcessin
g12
3512
476
2GE
N60
Tripping/LogicProcessin
g5
6410
495
Allavailablesubscribed
bitsused
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g0
77
872
GEN60
Line
Mon
itorin
g0
77
87Co
lorado
River
4GE
N60
Gene
ratorInterconn
ectio
nElCasco
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gEtiwanda
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gRe
dBluff
2GE
N60
Gene
ratorInterconn
ectio
nSanBe
rnardino
4GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gVa
lley
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gVista
4GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gElNidoLCRRA
SElNido
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g6
613
838
720
10Re
placed
byCR
ASbu
tstillinservice
2GE
N60
Load
Tripping
02
4107
2GE
N60
Load
Tripping
02
4111
LaCien
ega
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g2
GEN60
Load
Tripping
LaFresa
4GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gElSegund
oRA
SElNido
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g2
25
527
420
13Re
placed
byCR
ASbu
tstillinservice
LaFresa
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gHD
PPRA
SVictor
2SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
g16
2002
2SEL35
1ArmingCo
ntrol
42
SEL35
1ArmingCo
ntrol
42
SEL21
00LogicProcessin
g/ArmingCo
ntrol
8Lugo
2SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
g2
SEL35
1Ba
nkMon
itorin
gInland
Empire
RAS
Valley
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g2
23
324
520
14Serrano
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gIvanpahArea
RAS
Eldo
rado
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g5
510
1838
120
132
GEN60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g18
615
02
G EN60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g11
987
Ivanpah
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g4
GEN60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g
RelayTo
RelayDa
taArmingPo
ints
Evolutionof
RASCo
mplexity
Base
Data
H.Ha
m,5/19/16
Evolutionof
RASCo
mplexity
Base
Data.xlsx
1
76
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
N60
InNo.of
Relay
Per
Subscribed
Publish
edLogic
Service
RASNam
eSubstatio
nRe
lays
Type
RelayFunctio
nRe
lay
Total
Bits
Bits
Line
sYear
Commen
ts
RelayTo
RelayDa
taArmingPo
ints
Evolutionof
RASCo
mplexity
Base
Data
H.Ha
m,5/19/16
2GE
N60
Tripping
Prim
m2
GEN60
Line
Mon
itorin
gKram
erRA
SKram
er1
RXIL20
Line
Mon
itorin
g1
1980
sNon
redu
ndantlegacyRA
SMidway
Vincen
tRAS
Vincen
t2
SEL21
00LogicProcessin
g/ArmingCo
ntrol
1010
2002
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g2
SEL351
Line
Mon
itorInterface
2SEL20
30EM
S/ArmingInterface
Whirlw
ind
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gLa
Cien
ega
2SEL35
1Load
Tripping
Laguna
Bell
2SEL35
1Load
Tripping
Lighthipe
2SEL35
1Load
Tripping
Mesa
2SEL35
1Load
Tripping
Mira
Loma
2SEL35
1Load
Tripping
RioHo
ndo
2SEL35
1Load
Tripping
Valley
2SEL35
1Load
Tripping
Walnu
t2
SEL35
1Load
Tripping
Mira
LomaLVLS
RAS
Mira
Loma
1RFL67
45Transfer
Tripto
Padu
a19
96Non
redu
ndantlegacyRA
S1
RFL67
45Transfer
Tripto
Villa
Park
1RFL67
45Transfer
Tripto
Walnu
t2
RFL97
45Lugo
Rancho
Vistalinestatus
Rancho
Vista
2RFL97
45Lugo
Rancho
Vistalinestatus
Padu
a1
RFL67
45Load
Tripping
Villa
Park
1RFL67
45Load
Tripping
Walnu
t1
RFL67
45Load
Tripping
MojaveDe
sertRA
SKram
er2
GEN60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g1
2944
1332
920
142
GEN60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g12
1116
410
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g12
1117
320
2GE
N60
Tripping/LogicProcessin
g4
816
260
CoolWater
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g2
GEN60
Gene
ratorT
ripping
Lugo
4GE
N60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g2
GEN60
Line
Mon
itorin
gSand
lot
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gRo
adway
4GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gVictor
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gMou
ntainView
RAS
SanBe
rnardino
2SEL21
00LogicProcessor/ArmingCo
ntrol
33
2003
8SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
g4
SEL35
1Overlo
ad/Trip
ping
2SEL20
30EM
S/ArmingInterface
Devers
4SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
gElCasco
4SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
gEtiwanda
2SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
gVista
2SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
gPEFRA
SPastoria
2SEL21
00LogicProcessor/ArmingCo
ntrol
1427
2005
2SEL21
00LogicProcessor/ArmingCo
ntrol
134
GEF35
Line
Mon
itorin
g2
SEL20
30EM
S/ArmingInterface
Antelope
4SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
gMagun
den
2SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
g
Evolutionof
RASCo
mplexity
Base
Data.xlsx
2
77
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
N60
InNo.of
Relay
Per
Subscribed
Publish
edLogic
Service
RASNam
eSubstatio
nRe
lays
Type
RelayFunctio
nRe
lay
Total
Bits
Bits
Line
sYear
Commen
ts
RelayTo
RelayDa
taArmingPo
ints
Evolutionof
RASCo
mplexity
Base
Data
H.Ha
m,5/19/16
Bailey
2SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
gPardee
4SEL351
Line
Mon
itorin
gSanJoaquinVa
lleyRA
SRe
ctor
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g9
4114
2245
420
082
GEN60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g11
1622
473
2GE
N60
LogicProcessin
g10
2411
463
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g11
1426
505
Near5
11lin
elim
it2
GEN60
LogicProcessin
g0
383
132
BigCreek1
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gBigCreek3
4GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gEastwoo
d2
GEN60
Gene
ratorR
unback
andTripping
Mam
mothPo
ol2
GEN60
Gene
ratorR
unback
andTripping
Magun
den
4GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gSprin
gville
4GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gVe
stal
4GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
gLibe
rty
2GE
N60
Load
Tripping
Southof
Lugo
RAS
Mira
Loma
2SEL21
00LogicProcessin
g3
320
052
GEF35
Line
Mon
itorin
g2
SEL35
1Load
Tripping
1SEL20
30EM
S/ArmingInterface
Lugo
2GE
F35
Line
Mon
itorin
g2
SEL351
Line
Mon
itorInterface
Rancho
Vista
2GE
F35
Line
Mon
itor
2SEL351
Line
Mon
itorInterface
Chino
2SEL35
1Load
Tripping
Padu
a2
SEL35
1Load
Tripping
Whirlw
indAA
Bank
RAS
Whirlw
ind
2GE
N60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g10
1010
2046
820
142
GEN60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g28
930
02
GEN60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g4
597
2GE
N60
Bank
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g3
555
NorthernArea
500kVRA
SWhirlw
ind
2GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g/LogicProcessin
g?
88?
??
Exceed
spracticallim
itof
50armingpo
ints
18GE
N60
Gen.Tripping/LogicProcessin
g?
??
?An
telope
4GE
N60
Line
Mon
itorin
g2
GEN60
Gene
ratorT
ripping
Vincen
t2
GEN60
Line
Mon
itorin
g2
GEN60
Gene
ratorT
ripping
Notes:
GEN60
logiclim
itedto
511lines
ofcode
perrelay.
GEN60
limite
dto
12armingpo
intspe
rrelay.
GEN60
limite
dto
64subscribed
and64
publish
edrelayto
relaydata
bits(viaGO
OSE)p
errelay.
Evolutionof
RASCo
mplexity
Base
Data.xlsx
3
78
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Arming Points (Current and Future)
79
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
RAS Current Future TotalKramer 1 0 1Bishop 2 0 2Blythe Ene 2 0 2Inland Emp 2 0 2Mountainv 3 0 3South of Lu 3 0 3Ivanpah Ar 5 0 5Midway Vi 10 0 10High Deser 16 0 16Pastoria En 27 0 27Big Creek/S 41 0 41Whirlwind 10 38 48Devers 48 0 48Colorado R 16 50 66Mojave De 29 39 68Northern A 36 88 124
1 2 2 2 3 3 5 10 1627
41
10
48
1629
36
0 0 0 0 0 0 00
0
0
0
38
050
39
88
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Arming Points (Current & Future)
Current Future
80
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
RASs Nearing or Exceeding Capacity Limits
81
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
RASs Nearing or Exceeding Capacity Limits (Backup for Diagram V-4)
Summary and Recommendations:
TSSA recommends moving forward with work necessary to complete the Colorado River CRAS conversion by Q4 2017, the Mohave Desert CRAS conversion by Q2 2018, the Northern Area CRAS by Q4 2018, and the Whirlwind AA-Bank RAS conversion by Q2 2020. These three CRAS implementations will be required accommodate interconnections whose participation is beyond the technical capability of traditional, "stand-alone" RAS technology. Logic processing in conventional, relay-based RAS schemes is limited to approximately 50 arming points. The numbers of generation projects applying for interconnection in those areas are such that the stand-alone RAS arming point limitation would be exceeded if high-resolution arming/tripping schemes were to be implemented. The work-around for overly complex stand-alone systems is to aggregate blocks of generation output such that they can be tripped en masse. While this allows RAS schemes to function within the capabilities of relay-based logic processing, it risks over-tripping of generation, which translates to interconnection customers as unnecessary curtailment and lost revenue, making their business models less robust. Negative pressure on renewable interconnection customers could potentially lead to withdrawals, which translates to electric utilities as lost opportunities for both capital investment and progress toward aggressive, mandatory Renewable Portfolio Standards.
Given that Gov. Brown has recently signed legislation requiring a 50% renewable energy portfolio by 2030, we can expect the number of potential interconnections to increase above the already high number currently in queue. Transmission projects in flight such as the West of Devers Transmission Project will add substantial capacity to the grid, alleviating a potential hurdle to future interconnections. Considering these factors, it is not unreasonable to expect the current pace of interconnections to not only continue, but potentially to accelerate, creating a situation that is unsustainable under the existing, stand-alone RAS paradigm.
Below are some details on the CRAS deployment projects we propose for the upcoming few years.
Scope Elements and Justification:
Colorado River Corridor RAS Conversion to CRAS The Colorado River Corridor RAS has 42 arming points allocated for projects that either are currently in service, are currently in construction, or are active in the Interconnection Queue and expected to move forward. These projects have expected Operating Dates occurring between now and December 1, 2017. Additionally, there are more projects interconnecting at Colorado River and Red Bluff Substations with executed or pending GIAs that have expected Operating Dates in the Q1 2018 to Q4 2020 time-frame. The traditional Colorado River RAS has 8 arming points available for future use, which have
82
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
been reserved by projects already considered in the design of the RAS. The first two of these, set to come on-line in Q1 and Q3 of 2018, respectively, would require a total of ten arming points, at which point the stand-alone RAS arming point limitation would be exceeded. Looking ahead a bit, the latest Queue Cluster contains no less than seven additional projects seeking interconnection at Colorado River and Red Bluff Substations, with some seeking interconnect by Q3 and Q4 of 2018. Finally, as generation projects along the corridor continue to connect, additional tripping may ultimately be required to mitigate potential future N-1 contingency overloads on the Devers - Valley No. 1 and No. 2 500 kV Lines.
Mojave Desert RAS Conversion to CRAS The Mojave Desert RAS, in its current form, has a total of 29 arming points allocated to existing generation in the area. Several QC8 generation projects in the area are seeking interconnection with Operating Dates beginning in April 2018. These projects would need to participate in the Mojave Desert RAS. The output of these generators also exceeds transmission line and transformer capacity under both normal conditions (making necessary the installation of a third 500/220 kV "AA" transformer bank at Lugo Substation) and contingency outage conditions (requiring the addition of several new N-1 and N-2 contingencies not previously included in the RAS analytic). These factors greatly increase the complexity of the Mojave River RAS. When QC8 generation is considered, the RAS would require 68 arming points, which is well beyond the technical limitations of relay-based logic processing.
One factor that could affect the recommendation for converting the Mojave Desert RAS to CRAS is the status of Coolwater Generating Station. The owner of the station has officially ceased generation activity at the site, but is granted by the applicable tariff a period of three years in which they may elect to repower the facility (this period began in January, 2015). During this period, Coolwater retains the deliverability it was allocated by CAISO. Coolwater also continues to pay for and retain its transmission access rights pursuant to the Radial Lines Agreement (RLA). As long as the agreement is in force, SCE must preserve the interconnection facilities, including the allocation of RAS arming points to Coolwater. The owner may elect to sell the project, in which case the allocated deliverability and transmission access rights retained under the RLA would transfer to the new owner. With the new Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) increasing the state of California’s targeted renewable generation capacity to 50% by 2030, the potential profitability of the site to new developers who could purchase the project has improved, thereby increasing the likelihood that the site would be sold and that the arming points allocated to Coolwater will be unavailable for use by new interconnection customers.
Assuming Coolwater’s owner uses the entirety of the three-year period do decide to repower, there would still be some time required for the necessary study and interconnection agreement processes to take place. In the meantime, the arming points used by Coolwater may not be allocated to new interconnections. An amendment or termination of Coolwater’s RLA would be required in order for SCE to justify going in and pulling relays, etc. Should that come to pass, or should additional detail surface that
83
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
would provide clarity as to the future of Coolwater, the conversion of the Mojave Desert RAS to CRAS would be less time-sensitive.
Northern Area SPS Implementation in CRAS The Northern Area RAS is conceptual in nature, and is needed to accommodate generation projects seeking interconnection in the North of Vincent area of the SCE system. The Northern Area RAS mitigates transmission line contingency overloads by monitoring for four N-2 contingencies and tripping generation at Antelope, Whirlwind, and Windhub Substations. Considering all active interconnection requests in the area, a total of 23 projects would be required to participate in this RAS. These projects cover a span of time from the Serial Interconnection process forward to QC8, and have Operating Dates from mid-2015 to late-2018. A total of 12 of these projects have either filed or executed GIAs or are in execution, and are expected to come on-line in 2015 and 2016. Considering only these latter 12 projects, 47 arming points within the RAS would be allocated. With all active Northern Area generation interconnection requests considered, the technical limitations of a traditional RAS would be exceeded in late 2018.
Whirlwind AA-Bank RAS Conversion to CRAS The Whirlwind AA-Bank RAS trips existing generation projects interconnected at the 230 kV bus of the Whirlwind 500/230 kV substation. The 230 kV bus is connected to the 500 kV bus by way of two 500/230 kV transformers, called “AA-banks.” When one of the two AA-banks experiences a contingency outage, the remaining AA-bank will exceed its rated capacity unless generation is tripped. Currently, there are 12 projects interconnected that are required to participate in the RAS. Each of these projects is assigned an arming point for the loss of either transformer, for a total of 12 arming points. A third AA-bank is scheduled to be in service by early 2017. With three AA-banks in service, the loss of any one of the three will not cause the remaining two banks to be overloaded. However, with two banks out, the remaining bank will exceed its rated capacity. Therefore, when the third AA-bank goes into service, all projects will be assigned another arming point for the simultaneous loss of any two AA-banks. This will double the number of assigned arming points to 24. Additional queued generation projects will be required to assume two additional arming points. By July 2020, the number of participating generators will require a total number of arming points that exceeds stand-alone RAS logic processing, making the conversion of the Whirlwind AA-Bank RAS necessary by Q2 2020.
Methodology Used for Developing Timeline in “Business Driver – RASs Nearing Capacity Limits” (Diagram V-4)
SCE’s Generation Interconnection Planning group maintains a database of all generation projects seeking interconnection to the SCE grid via CAISO’s established interconnection process. This database consists of the project-specific information contained in CAISO’s Interconnection Queue (which is available for download as an Excel spreadsheet at http://www.caiso.com/planning/Pages/GeneratorInterconnection/Default.aspx), as well as additional data fields useful for SCE’s study and contract management processes. The database is periodically filtered by the CRAS sponsoring organization (Transmission
84
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Special Assessments) into subsets of active projects that are seeking interconnection to parts of the grid (called points of interconnection or POIs) where a known congestion issue exists and for which a RAS has been identified to mitigate transmission equipment overloads due to outage contingencies. Projects that have withdrawn from the queue or that do not show acceptable progress in moving forward through the interconnect study, posting, and execution process are disregarded from further consideration. Active projects are then sorted by their proposed commercial operating dates. Each project is assigned arming points in the RAS according to their chosen POI (for example, a project interconnecting to the 230 kV bus of a 500/230 kV substation that is connected to known congested 500 kV transmission lines would be assigned arming points for both 500/230 kV transformer bank outages and 500 kV transmission line outages, while a project interconnecting to the 500 kV bus of the same substation would be assigned arming points for transmission line outages only). A cumulative total of assigned arming points is calculated according to each project’s queue position. The point in time at which the cumulative total of arming points exceeds the capability of existing RAS logic processing is the point at which a conversion of the RAS to CRAS (which has virtually unlimited arming point capacity and logic processing capability) is required. Thus, the more complicated a RAS becomes over time (i.e., the more generation projects are required to participate and the more contingencies the RAS mitigates), the sooner a conversion to CRAS is required. The required conversion dates for the first four RAS to reach this capacity limit are shown in the table “Business Driver – RASs Nearing Capacity Limits.”
85
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Northern Area RAS Arming Points - Base Data
86
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CA
ISO
IDSC
EID
Proj
ectN
ame
Type
Phas
eEx
pect
ed O
DPO
I_ID
Cus
tom
er S
ubM
WG
en T
ype
Req
uire
d A
rmin
g Po
ints
Cum
ulat
ive
Arm
ing
Poin
tsQ
602
TOT4
55C
atal
ina
Sola
rQ
C2
Proj
ectE
xecu
tion
- Pro
ject
In-S
ervi
ce01
-Oct
-12
Whi
rlwin
d 23
0 kV
Bus
Sole
il15
0So
lar P
V4
4Q
643R
TOT4
97N
orth
Ros
amon
dQ
C3
Proj
ectE
xecu
tion
- Eng
inee
ring
& D
esig
n01
-Jun
-15
Whi
rlwin
d 23
0 kV
Bus
Rat
tlesn
ake
153
Sola
r PV
48
Q79
5TO
T544
Kin
gbird
A (f
orm
erly
AV
Sola
r Ran
ch 2
-A)
QC
4Pr
ojec
tExe
cutio
n - P
roje
ct In
-Ser
vice
28-O
ct-1
5W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
usR
oy20
Sola
r PV
412
Q79
6TO
T545
Kin
gbird
B (f
orm
erly
AV
Sola
r Ran
ch 2
-B)
QC
4Pr
ojec
tExe
cutio
n - P
roje
ct In
-Ser
vice
28-O
ct-1
5W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
usR
oy20
Sola
r PV
012
Q74
6TO
T573
RE
Ast
oria
QC
4Pr
ojec
tExe
cutio
n - P
roje
ct In
-Ser
vice
16-A
pr-1
6W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
usD
eser
t Sta
r17
5So
lar P
V4
16Q
971
TOT6
72R
E G
arla
ndQ
C6
Proj
ectE
xecu
tion
- Pro
ject
In-S
ervi
ce30
-May
-16
Whi
rlwin
d 23
0 kV
Bus
200
Sola
r PV
420
Q76
8TO
T585
SP A
ntel
ope
DSR
QC
4Pr
ojec
tExe
cutio
n - E
ngin
eerin
g &
Des
ign
15-A
ug-1
6A
ntel
ope
230
kV B
usB
IG S
KY
330
Sola
r PV
424
Q50
6TO
T411
Ros
amon
d W
est S
olar
Pro
ject
QC
1Pr
ojec
tExe
cutio
n - P
roje
ct In
-Con
stru
ctio
n31
-Oct
-16
Whi
rlwin
d 23
0 kV
Bus
Tedd
y30
0So
lar P
V8
32Q
643A
JTO
T494
Will
ow S
prin
gs 2
QC
3Pr
ojec
tExe
cutio
n - E
ngin
eerin
g &
Des
ign
31-O
ct-1
6W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us10
0So
lar P
V4
36Q
967
TOT6
68O
asis
Sol
ar P
roje
ctQ
C6
TPD
- Pa
rked
01-D
ec-1
5W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us60
Sola
r PV
440
Q12
14TO
T769
Gol
den
Pris
mQ
C8
Phas
e II
- In
Prog
ress
31-J
an-1
8W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us5.
98B
atte
ry S
tora
ge4
44Q
1215
TOT7
77N
orth
Ros
yQ
C8
Phas
e II
- In
Prog
ress
15-A
pr-1
8W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us15
0So
lar P
V4
48Q
1074
TOT7
27G
aske
ll W
est (
form
erly
RE
Gar
land
2)
QC
7M
ovin
g In
to E
xecu
tion
- Agr
eem
ent F
iled
At F
ERC
11-J
un-1
8W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us12
5.02
Hyb
rid4
52Q
1211
TOT7
53R
osam
ond
Sout
h Ea
stQ
C8
Phas
e II
- In
Prog
ress
30-J
un-1
8W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us10
0So
lar P
V4
56Q
1212
TOT7
54G
olde
n Fi
elds
Sol
arQ
C8
Phas
e II
- In
Prog
ress
30-J
un-1
8W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us10
0So
lar P
V4
60Q
1208
TOT7
62A
ntel
ope
2Q
C8
Phas
e II
- In
Prog
ress
01-O
ct-1
8A
ntel
ope
230
kV B
us65
0H
ybrid
464
Q12
17TO
T778
Will
ow S
prin
gs 4
QC
8Ph
ase
II - I
n Pr
ogre
ss01
-Jun
-19
Whi
rlwin
d 23
0 kV
Bus
100
Sola
r PV
468
Q10
76TO
T726
Will
ow S
prin
g So
lar 3
QC
7TP
D -
Park
ed01
-Dec
-19
Whi
rlwin
d 23
0 kV
Bus
50So
lar P
V4
72Q
1209
TOT7
63B
radm
ore
ESQ
C8
Phas
e II
- In
Prog
ress
31-A
ug-2
1A
ntel
ope
230
kV B
us41
2B
atte
ry S
tora
ge4
76TO
T826
Linw
ood
Sol
ar F
arm
QC
9A
pplic
atio
n - D
eem
ed In
com
plet
e30
-Jan
-19
Whi
rlwin
d 23
0 kV
Bus
200
Hyb
rid4
80TO
T828
Can
ella
Sol
ar F
arm
QC
9A
pplic
atio
n - D
eem
ed In
com
plet
e30
-Jan
-19
Win
dhub
230
kV
Bus
300
Hyb
rid4
84TO
T827
Clo
ver S
olar
Far
mQ
C9
App
licat
ion
- Dee
med
Inco
mpl
ete
30-J
an-1
9A
ntel
ope
230
kV B
us30
0S
olar
PV
488
TOT8
15G
olde
n E
veni
ng S
olar
QC
9A
pplic
atio
n - D
eem
ed In
com
plet
e15
-Mar
-19
Whi
rlwin
d 23
0 kV
Bus
304.
87H
ybrid
492
TOT8
06C
yclo
ne S
olar
QC
9A
pplic
atio
n - D
eem
ed In
com
plet
e15
-Mar
-19
Whi
rlwin
d 23
0 kV
Bus
56.6
9S
olar
PV
496
TOT8
24E
ON
Vis
ion
Win
dQ
C9
App
licat
ion
- Dee
med
Inco
mpl
ete
31-O
ct-1
9W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us27
5W
ind
4100
TOT8
19S
ageb
rush
Sol
ar 3
QC
9A
pplic
atio
n - D
eem
ed In
com
plet
e31
-Oct
-19
Win
dhub
230
kV
Bus
300
Sol
ar P
V4
104
TOT8
07C
alifo
rnia
City
Sol
arQ
C9
App
licat
ion
- Dee
med
Inco
mpl
ete
30-A
pr-2
0W
indh
ub 2
30 k
V B
us70
0S
olar
PV
4108
TOT8
21B
ES
2Q
C9
App
licat
ion
- Dee
med
Inco
mpl
ete
01-J
ul-2
0W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us24
Sol
ar P
V4
112
TOT7
90R
osy
9Q
C9
App
licat
ion
- Dee
med
Inco
mpl
ete
31-J
ul-2
0W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us25
0S
olar
PV
4116
TOT7
93W
illy
9Q
C9
App
licat
ion
- Dee
med
Inco
mpl
ete
31-J
ul-2
0W
hirlw
ind
230
kV B
us25
0S
olar
PV
4120
TOT8
23Tr
opic
o S
olar
QC
9A
pplic
atio
n - D
eem
ed In
com
plet
e01
-Oct
-21
Whi
rlwin
d 23
0 kV
Bus
110
Sol
ar P
V4
124
NOTES:
Each
gene
ratortobe
mon
itoredandpo
tentially
trippe
dforfou
rdifferen
tcon
tingencies,so
four
armingpo
intsrequ
iredpe
rgen
erator.
QC8
PhaseIIstud
iestobe
completed
inNovem
ber2
016,GIAne
gotia
tions
tobe
gininearly
2017
.Afterscrub
bing
data,totalrequ
iredarmingpo
intsredu
cedfrom
88to
76(twoprojectsintercon
nectingat
Vincen
tnot
requ
iredto
bepartof
RASplus
onedo
uble
coun
tedproject,allatfou
rarm
ingpo
intseach) .
48=armingpo
intlim
itforstand
alon
eRA
S
NorthernArea
RASArmingPo
ints
Base
Data
Projectsinita
licsa
ssum
edto
participateininitialNACR
ASde
ploymen
t
87
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Stand-Alone RAS Capacity Increase Factors
88
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Stand-Alone Relay Capacity Increase Factors
There are three basic components needed in a GE N60 relay that give it capacity for arming points:
1. “FlexLogic” lines available in memory.
2. Communications channels (limited in version 7.4 relay firmware to 64 bits).
3. “Virtual outputs,” variables used to store intermediate logic results in FlexLogic.
Based on the increases in memory and communications channels in relay firmware version 7.4, as limited by available virtual outputs, Protection Engineering calculates an approximate 31% increase in arming points is feasible.
This increased arming points threshold means we could technically do stand-stand alone RASs longer and delay CRAS, but this is not the recommended technical option:
1. Does not provide the long term architectural and scalability advantages of CRAS.
2. Does not provide the arming point capacity of CRAS and its precise mitigation action, which has potential electric customer impacts over time (unnecessary load sheds) and generation customers (unnecessary overtripping of generation).
Source: Based on notes provided by SCE Protection Engineering.
89
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Cumulative Completion Percentage of Transmission
Interconnection Queue Projects
90
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CumulativeCo
mpletionPe
rcen
tage
ofTran
smission
Intercon
nectionQue
ueProjects,200
620
16Provided
by:
SCESystem
Planning
Basedon
:CaliforniaISOTransm
issionIntercon
nectionQue
ueDa
teof
search:
July11
,201
6Web
reference:
http://w
ww.caiso.com
/plann
ing/Pages/Ge
neratorIn
tercon
nection/De
fault.a
spx
Prop
osed
ODYe
arNum
bero
fAp
plications
Num
bero
fGen
erators
Online
Cumulative
Percen
tage
Applications
Cumulative
Completions
Cumulative
2006
21
50%
21
2007
00
50%
21
2008
20
25%
41
2009
30
14%
71
2010
23
44%
94
2011
41
38%
135
2012
53
44%
188
2013
88
62%
2616
2014
55
68%
3121
2015
15
81%
3226
2016
94
73%
4130
Metho
dology
UsedforD
evelop
ing“Cum
ulativeCo
mpletionPe
rcen
tage
ofTran
smission
Intercon
nectionQue
ueProjects,2006–2016”
TheCaliforniaInde
pend
entS
ystem
Ope
rator(CA
ISO)m
aintains
aqu
eueof
allnew
gene
ratio
nprojectsthat
seek
intercon
nectionto
portions
ofits
intercon
nected
electricgrid.The
curren
tque
ueispo
sted
asado
wnloadableExcelspreadshe
etat
http://w
ww.caiso.com
/plann
ing/Pages/Gen
eratorIntercon
nection/De
fault.a
spx.Thequ
eueissorted
byyear,and
thecumulativenu
mbe
rsof
(1)app
lications
forp
rojectsw
ithprop
osed
commercialop
eratingdatesineach
year
and(2)p
rojectsthatcam
eon
linewith
ineach
year
aretabu
lated.
Thesevalues
areused
tocalculateacumulativepe
rcen
tage
ofapplications
that
moveforw
ardto
completion.Whilethisnu
mbe
rmay
vary
upor
downfrom
year
toyear,the
gene
ral trend
isincreasin
gforb
oththenu
mbe
roftotalapplications
andthenu
mbe
roftho
seapplications
that
moveforw
ardto
completion.Ho
wever,the
seintercon
nections
tend
tobe
concen
trated
inspecificgeograph
icareasthatfavor
theuseof
rene
wablegene
ratio
ntechno
logies
such
aswindandsolar.With
therate
ofintercon
nections
outpacingthespeedat
which
newtransm
issionprojectscanbe
licen
sedandconstructed,Re
med
ialA
ctionSche
mes
(RAS
)have
proven
tobe
themostcoste
ffectiveandtim
elymetho
dform
itigatin
gcongestio
non
theelectricgrid.
91
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
RGOOSE Project
92
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000243
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2017
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year4,500
5,900
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
10,400
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software793
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
RGOOSE Conversion
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
RGOOSE Project
93
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 8)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
RGOOSE Project
94
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
RGOOSE Project Communications Protocol Upgrades to CRAS Central Controllers and Network Gear
B. Initiative Description
The purpose of this project to upgrade the CRAS network and its network components to support the RGOOSEportion of the IEC 61850 90 5 standard, which will convert it into a routable network, providing increasedcommunications efficiency and greater visibility into the network.
RGOOSE is the latest communications standard required to mitigate increasing RAS complexity on SCE’stransmission grid. RGOOSE (Routable GOOSE) changes the existing substation communications protocol(GOOSE, Generic Object Oriented Substation Events, a broadcast protocol) to a routable format that isaddressable (i.e., can be sent to specific devices or groups of devices) and compatible with SCE’s existing WideArea Network (WAN).
Timeline and Scope High Level Diagram
Diagram NotesRAS Complexity and Capacity relate to “arming points”
o The increasing RAS complexity that SCE described in its 2015 filing is being experienced, withfour RASs required in 2018 2019 that have a high complexity level. That complexity iscomposed of a higher number of generators, substations, and lines to protect – and therefore
95
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
more contingency conditions to evaluate and take action on. The best measure of RAS capacityand complexity combines these factors in what are called “arming points:” Arming points arethe specific thresholds where a RAS will arm for a particular generator as it evaluates a specificcontingency (problematic system condition) related to that generator.
Arming Points create additional data volume on the networko Each arming point drives continuous messaging traffic on the network about the conditions
affecting that arming point, such as electric current flow or the status of a transmission line.This data volume requires the certainty of message delivery as well as the rapid diagnostics ofcommunication failure. We can obtain these capabilities by deploying RGOOSE on the CRASnetwork for future RAS deployments.
CRASCRAS is an automated grid control system which responds to grid events that move more swiftly thandispatchers and operators can react to.
CRAS’ primary use is as a Remedial Action Scheme (RAS).RASs protect transmission assets when third party generators hook up to our transmission grid. If notfor a RAS, the only option would be to build very expensive long term transmission each time there isan interconnection request.
CRAS is driven by the growing CISO monitored Generation Interconnection Queue, which comprises large (20megawatt and greater) generation projects that want to hook up to SCE’s transmission grid. Many of theseprojects are renewables like wind and solar which are driven by state mandates. A growing Interconnectionqueue made it an imperative to start CRAS in 2011 mainly due to the growing size of the queue. Besides thesheer volume of interconnections, the trend over the past ten years shows that the RAS complexity hasincreased significantly. When future growth is considered, the upcoming RASs we focus on in testimony(Northern Area, Colorado River, Mojave Desert, and Whirlwind) are too complex to deploy in the stand aloneRAS configuration, which has hard limits on arming point capacity.
The Need for RGOOSEThe initial implementation of CRAS, which heavily relies upon very high speed communications, had to proceedwith the implementation on the available communications protocol, GOOSE. GOOSE was designed for broadcastcommunication only within the substation, where all devices are broadcasting and all other devices hear all themessages whether they need to or not. GOOSE protocol was extended for the CRAS implementation on a widearea network (WAN) while the industry developed the RGOOSE standard.
The industry has now developed the standard for RGOOSE. The standards process was the pacing item on use ofRGOOSE, in that the standard had to be solidified enough to be commercially and technically feasible toimplement. The RGOOSE protocol offers significant improvements in the networking performance and securityover the WAN.
Communications performance and uptime is critical to RAS function – WECC requires very high communicationsavailability and dual redundant communications paths. GOOSE is inherently less able to handle high datavolumes than RGOOSE from a network perspective and this leads to several significant issues:
1. Communications outage risk increases – meaning the RAS does not function. If this occurs, it meansdirect customer impacts from lower transmission line utilization, generator trips, and load sheds.
2. Chances of degraded or inaccurate performance increase, increasing chances of outages or unnecessarygeneration trips or load sheds.
96
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
3. Time to restore can go up dramatically because GOOSE communications is inherently much moredifficult to troubleshoot, which could lengthen grid outages.
4. GOOSE communication is not “hot swappable” on failure – hardware failures can cause reducedvisibility and performance for grid operations.
These risks all potentially lead to a lack of timely action on the grid to mitigate events. Deploying CRAS toupcoming very complex RASs using GOOSE further increases these risks with each deployment.
ScopeUpgrade network gear and central controller software to “RGOOSE” in preparation for upcoming RASdeployments. It is important to note that the upcoming RASs are much more complex than previously deployedRAS’s. They need the RGOOSE network improvements.
The CRAS RGOOSE Conversion will upgrade the capability of the network and its components to supportthe new standard protocol. Implementing the new standard provides improvements to networking andsecurityThere are three basic parts of the CRAS system that are affected by RGOOSE:
o Relays – GE will deliver RGOOSE compatible relayso Network and CRAS central controllers.o Cybersecurity requirements – the project will implement authentication, encryption and other
security measures required to protect this grid critical application.
Since the commercial firmware for the relays will be available in mid 2016, the RGOOSE project willcomplete the first phase of RGOOSE conversion by completing the network and central controllerchanges, and then test end to end functionality and backwards compatibility.
Time criticality with implementing RGOOSEIncreasing RAS complexity in the field makes stand alone RASs either a) provide substandard protection totransmission assets or b) not possible to implement.
RAS complexity is increasing much faster than it was at CRAS project launch or the time of the last GRCfiling. See Arming Points (Current and Future) and Queue Completion charts below.The risks SCE’s System Planning, Protection Engineering, and Telecom Network Services see with GOOSEover WAN networking echo the industry concerns that prompted creation of the RGOOSE standard.The risks of communications outages tend to be HILP (High Impact Low Probability). A key considerationfor whether the project should move forward is the risk of delaying implementation of the newstandard which mitigates the HILP risks.
97
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
98
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Not in Scope
A Test Environment for SAT 1 is already separately funded, so is not in this request.The Colorado River RAS deployment already has approved infrastructure funding and is in the T&Dcapital plan and the Integrated Work Plan.Security key management (GDOI) Centralized security key distribution and related functionality oncethe IEC 61850 90 5 is ratified
C. Business Strategic Alignment
This project will update the CRAS configuration to enable its wider roll out throughout SCE’s territory. The CRASsystem is essential for better compliance with state generation interconnection requirements and RenewablePortfolio Standards, which were recently further modified and signed into law to require 50% renewables by2030.
Company Initiatives and Goals that RGOOSE SupportsOpX Initiative – Reliability
o Operations Productivity CRAS implementations will reduce operating risks on the transmissiongrid by reducing the amount of generation tripped and/or firm load shed. Each CRASdeployment will deliver avoided cost compared to stand alone RAS deployments due to savingson both equipment and labor.
T&D 2015 Goals Alignmento Achieve Reliability Targets – RGOOSE will provide greater stability and reliability to the CRAS
application, which is a critical protection application required to maintain reliability of thetransmission grid. Specifically, RGOOSE reduces the risk of occurrence of communicationsoutages, or the risk of degraded performance, enables faster troubleshooting after a failureminimizing any grid impact and makes the solution more fault tolerant and resilient.
o Bulk System Reliability and Security – In addition to making monitor and control on CRAS morereliable, RGOOSE will secure communications over the WAN to ensure that unauthorizedmessages are detected and blocked.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
Re usable Architecture: RGOOSE opens the door to many potential additional applications of CRASstyle architecture on the grid, whether transmission or distribution – anywhere high speed, ultra highreliability automated control is needed. CRAS is considered a model for this kind of centralizedcontrol, and was designed from the beginning as a true grid controller.Enable CRAS Deployment: This project will deliver the product changes required to enable thedeployment of CRAS to the Colorado River RAS (per T&D System Planning’s RAS deployment plan) inthe RGOOSE configuration. The Colorado River RAS deployment already has approved infrastructurefunding and is in the T&D capital plan and the Integrated Work Plan.Reduced Operating Risks: Implementation of RGOOSE will enable deeper and faster penetration ofCRAS deployment. CRAS implementations will reduce operating risks on the transmission grid byreducing the amount of generation tripped and/or firm load shed.Reduced Operating Costs:
99
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
o Adding new schemes under CRAS will also be less expensive (less relays and less field laborneeded) than stand alone RASs. On average, this computes to a cost avoidance of $900,000per RAS.
o In addition to these equipment savings, CRAS’ relay standardization means that relay testcreation, test execution, and the level of test tech required in the field are all significantlyreduced than for a stand alone RAS, where hundreds of man hours were spent to create andhundreds to thousands of crew man hours in the field to actually test.
o In addition, RGOOSE has O&M savings over time because of its standardized network andrelay testing approach.
Benefits applicable to RAS deployment now apply to CRAS:Given the clear direction of T&D Protection Engineering and System Planning that standalone RAS technology is outmoded and no longer meets the challenges of an increasinglycomplex grid, CRAS is the only technology left that is workable in the long term aside frombuilding new transmission. CRAS, therefore, has the benefits of a RAS approach going forwardand is paid for by cost avoidance of just 20 miles of transmission line.CRAS then saves cost going forward (over time) as new RASs get added to CRAS instead ofbeing added as stand alone RASs.With respect to existing RASs, the majority do not need conversion at this time. Only certainexisting RASs meet the criteria for conversion to CRAS: Complex RASs in high renewablesgrowth areas. Because change costs (such as for generator or transformer bank additions) areso much higher for stand alone RASs (see CRAS cost study work papers), it is possible for astand alone RAS with remaining capacity to still be cost beneficial to bring into CRAS.Regarding cost recovery, RGOOSE is a key enabler of CRAS to deploy further, so SCE’s positionis that CRAS cost avoidances should be used to gain remaining cost recovery for CRAS projectand RGOOSE project.
100
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
E. Business Impact Assessment
Minimal impact on business, should be transparent to core clients/users.Reduced cycle time of preparing & provisioning new RASs will allow business to accelerate rate ofdeployment to substationsEliminates limitations and risks of one off custom stand alone RAS solutionsEliminates limitations and risks of current CRAS network design with its cumbersome manual configurationand scalability and performance risks – the very risks and concerns the RGOOSE standard was intended toresolve.T&D’s SC&M impacts should be minimal in that CRAS system will already be NERC CIP v5 compliant at thetime of this proposed upgrade and relays will already be considered NERC CIP assets.
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
Upgrade CRAS network and its network components to support the RGOOSE IEC 61850 90 5 standard,which will convert it into a routable network, providing increased efficiency and greater visibility into thenetwork.Enhance CRAS component interfaces to support the protocol change at the back end to make the solutionmore efficient by reducing hops and reducing points of failures, and improving the scalability of thearchitecture.
G. Proposed Options
Alternative 1:Do not implement the RGOOSE protocol and do not deploy CRAS further due to the risks of using GOOSEprotocol with significantly more complicated RASs. Instead, implement stand alone relay capacity increaseson 3 of the 4 RASs (Colorado River, Mojave Desert, and Whirlwind) and a new transmission build forNorthern Area, the remaining RAS that is too complex for a stand alone RAS architecture. This combinedalternative is not recommended, as described above in the CRAS testimony. For 3 of the 4 RASs, thisalternative does not provide a long term solution to capacity issues, and is not cost efficient. For NorthernArea RAS, the only other alternative besides CRAS with RGOOSE is building out very expensive and redundanttransmission.
Alternative 2:Do not do RGOOSE Project and, instead, deploy CRAS with existing GOOSE network approach. Thisalternative is not recommended, as complex data volumes make it technically difficult and cumbersome todetermine where a failure occurs without the use of a routable protocol. Though it was necessary to have awide area network approach in order to properly develop and test the CRAS platform, GOOSE is less stablethan RGOOSE, and its non standard usage on the wide area network would be imprudent, given that a betterstandardized approach is now available. SCE has seen a large increase in RAS and required arming pointcomplexity. This increased complexity drives higher data volume requirements and the need for the stronger,more stable, and more precise RGOOSE communications network protocol.
101
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
43%
57%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se2,00
0,00
0$
866,
000
$
1,
134,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
2,00
0,00
0$
V
endo
r Lab
or74
%1,
480,
000
$
640,
840
$
83
9,16
0$
-$
-$
-$
1,48
0,00
0$
S
CE
IT L
abor
90%
1,80
0,00
0$
77
9,40
0$
1,02
0,60
0$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
800,
000
$
SI L
abor
25%
500,
000
$
21
6,50
0$
283,
500
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
50
0,00
0$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n75
%1,
500,
000
$
649,
500
$
85
0,50
0$
-$
-$
-$
1,50
0,00
0$
La
bor S
ubto
tal
7,28
0,00
0$
3,
152,
240
$
4,12
7,76
0$
-
$
-
$
-
$
7,
280,
000
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
19
1,20
0$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
36
0,00
0$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
55
1,20
0$
Har
dwar
e70
%1,
400,
000
$
$606
,200
793,80
0$
$$
$1,
400,
000
$O
S a
ndD
BLi
cens
es0%
-$
$0$
$$
$-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.1,
400,
000
$
606,
200
$
79
3,80
0$
-$
-$
-$
1,40
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t8,
680,
000
$
3,75
8,44
0$
4,
921,
560
$
-$
-$
-$
8,68
0,00
0$
C
ontin
genc
y20
%1,
736,
000
$
751,
688
$
98
4,31
2$
-$
-$
-$
1,73
6,00
0$
TOTA
L10
,416
,000
$
4,
510,
128
$
5,90
5,87
2$
-
$
-
$
-
$
10
,416
,000
$
Te
stim
ony*
4,50
0,00
0$
5,
900,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
10,4
00,0
00$
Assumptions:
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.R
GO
OS
E p
roje
ct is
a s
oftw
are
deve
lopm
ent,
netw
orki
ng d
evel
opm
ent,
and
test
ing
proj
ect o
nly.
Har
dwar
e fo
r RG
OO
SE
pro
ject
is li
mite
d to
a s
mal
l tes
t env
ironm
ent f
or in
itial
test
ing.
No
mai
nten
ance
and
sup
port
is n
eede
d fo
r RG
OO
SE
pro
ject
.Th
ere
are
no d
eplo
ymen
t cos
ts in
clud
ed in
RG
OO
SE
pro
ject
– d
eplo
ymen
t is
hand
led
unde
r ong
oing
RA
S d
eplo
ymen
ts li
ke C
olor
ado
Riv
er th
at u
se s
epar
ate
infra
stru
ctur
e fu
ndin
g.
Rou
tabl
e G
ener
ic O
bjec
t Orie
nted
Sub
stat
ion
Even
ts (R
GO
OSE
)
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
102
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
GOOSE Data Volume Study
103
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
GOOSE
Data
VolumeStud
y1
GO
OSE
Dat
a Vo
lum
e St
udy
Any
RA
S re
quire
s a
larg
e vo
lum
e of
dat
a to
func
tion
effe
ctiv
ely.
Rel
ays,
whe
ther
pro
duci
ng G
OO
SE
or R
GO
OS
E m
essa
ges
(or “
pack
ets”
), pr
oduc
e a
high
vol
ume
of d
ata.
In th
e C
RA
S p
roje
ct, S
CE
test
ed fo
r vol
ume
and
band
wid
th u
sage
und
er s
ever
al d
iffer
ent s
yste
m s
cena
rios
(see
sce
nario
ta
ble
belo
w) a
nd fo
und
that
the
CR
AS
cen
tral c
ontro
llers
and
net
wor
k w
ould
han
dle
the
volu
me
of d
ata
effe
ctiv
ely.
The
con
cern
with
GO
OS
E
prot
ocol
is n
ot d
irect
ly w
ith th
e da
ta v
olum
e its
elf,
but w
ith th
e ne
twor
k ch
ange
s an
d ar
chite
ctur
e th
at n
eed
to b
e pu
t in
plac
e to
use
GO
OS
E o
n a
larg
e ne
twor
k in
volv
ing
man
y su
bsta
tions
(in
othe
r wor
ds, W
ide
Are
a N
etw
ork)
.
CR
AS
sys
tem
per
form
ance
was
test
ed u
sing
a 3
0 R
AS
mod
el (w
hich
was
adj
uste
d to
mat
ch th
e w
orst
cas
e nu
mbe
r of R
AS
s an
ticip
ated
in 5
yea
rs)
unde
r a v
arie
ty o
f sce
nario
s (s
ee b
elow
) and
, usi
ng a
GO
OS
E tu
nnel
arc
hite
ctur
e, C
RA
S a
naly
tics
proc
essi
ng c
apac
ity te
sted
sat
isfa
ctor
ily fo
r dat
a vo
lum
e w
ith m
inim
al le
vels
of C
PU
load
ing.
The
pro
blem
is n
ot th
e vo
lum
e its
elf,
but t
he tu
nnel
arc
hite
ctur
e th
at h
as to
be
used
with
GO
OS
E
prot
ocol
, as
expl
aine
d fu
rther
bel
ow.
CRAS
Performan
ceScen
arios
Base
State:Th
ebase
cond
ition
fora
llscen
ariosisthata
llCR
ASsystem
sand
subsystemsa
refunctio
naland
that
each
CRAS
system
,sub
system
andde
vice
isop
eratingwith
sufficien
tspare
capacity
such
that
ifaCR
AScompo
nent
shou
ldfailthesystem
,sub
system
orde
vice
unde
rtestcan
pick
uptheadditio
nalload
resulting
from
thefailure.Saidanothe
rway,the
system
shallm
eeta
llpe
rformance
requ
iremen
tsintheeven
tofa
nysin
glecompo
nent
failure.
Steady
State:Thesteady
statescen
ariode
fines
norm
alCR
ASop
erationdu
ringhe
avypo
wer
system
loadinglastingfora
perio
dof
3ho
ursw
henanalyticsm
aybe
routinelyarmed
ordisarm
edby
loading,bu
tthe
reareno
triggerin
geven
tsto
mitigate.The
steady
statescen
arioisintend
edto
exercise
theCC
S,commun
icationchanne
ls,ICCP
link,EM
Sscreen
s,andsupp
ortinfrastructuresuch
asthehistorian.Thesteady
statecond
ition
sincorpo
rate
allofthe
base
cond
ition
s,andaddan
additio
nalloadto
each
oftheaforem
enti o
nedsubsystems.An
alogsd
elivered
totheCC
Sby
themon
itorin
gandmitigatio
nrelays
shall
change
valueinsuch
away
andwith
sufficien
tmagnitude
soas
tocauseeach
CCSandCR
ASsubsystem
toprocessn
ewinform
ation.CC
SandCC
Ssubsystems
shallbestim
ulated
tocarryou
tarm
ing,disarm
ing,loggingto
thehistorian,triggerin
g,alarming,etc.Th
etestcond
ition
sare
such
that
atleast2
0%of
the
mon
itorin
gandmitigatio
nanalog
GOOSE
messagesc
hangeevery2second
s.
NormalState:Theno
rmalactiv
ityscen
ariode
fines
ape
riodof
repe
ated
even
tsrequ
iring
CRAS
mitigatio
nlastingfor9
0minutes.The
scen
arioisde
signe
dto
repe
ated
lytesttheability
ofCR
ASto
carryou
tone
RASop
erationwhilesim
ultane
ously
processin
gothe
rsteadystatecond
ition
s.Intheno
rmalactiv
ity,allof
thesteady
statecond
ition
sshallbe
applied.Each
contingencyof
allavailableanalyticsshallbe
triggeredprod
ucingaRA
Smitigatio
nactio
n.Ane
wcontingency
shallbeprocessedandmitigatedevery20
second
sfor
thetotaltestd
uration.Allcon
tingenciesa
ndallanalyticsshallbe
tested
repe
ated
ly.The
loadsshallbe
varie
dinmitigatio
ncircuitsinpseu
dorand
ompattern.Th
eno
rmalactiv
itytestscen
ariosshallbe
restored
toinitialcond
ition
sbetweenrepe
titions.
High
State:Th
ehigh
activ
ityscen
ariode
fines
ape
riodof
heavily
compo
unde
deven
tsrequ
iring
CRAS
mitigatio
n,lastingfor3
0minutes.Inthehigh
activ
ityscen
ario,m
ultip
leRA
Swillbe
triggeredsim
ultane
ously
.Inthehigh
activ
ityscen
ario,allof
thesteady
statecond
ition
sshallbe
applied.Mon
itorin
grelay
outputss
hallchange
sufficien
tlysuch
that
25%of
theavailableRA
Sanalyticsshallmitigate
with
inape
riodof
0.25
second
s.Th
isprocessshallrepe
atwith
adiffe
rent
seto
fanalyticse
very
20second
s.Overthe
duratio
nof
thetest,allmon
itorin
grelays
shallparticipateinthebu
rstin
g.RA
Sanalyticsshallbe
armed
whe
ntriggersarereceived
sothat
they
initiatemitigatio
n.Thehigh
activ
itytestscen
ariosshallbe
restored
toinitialcond
ition
sbetweenrepe
titions.
104
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
GOOSE
Data
VolumeStud
y2
CRAS
Performan
ceScen
arios
Catastroph
icState:Th
ecatastroph
icscen
ariode
fines
ape
riodof
extraordinarydisturbanceandtransie
ntactiv
itylastingfor1
0minutes.The
purposeof
testingthecatastroph
icscen
arioisto
ensure
that
CRAS
isstableun
derstressc
onditio
ns,survivesthe
data
bombardmen
t,andremains
operationalw
ithou
tthene
edforh
uman
interven
tion.Inbo
thcatastroph
icscen
ariosA
&B,
itisno
treq
uiredthat
allperform
ance
requ
iremen
tsbe
met
durin
gthecatastroph
icscen
arios.Ho
wever,CRA
Sshallretainallfun
ctionalityandisinareadystate,availableforresum
ptionof
norm
alprocessin
gactiv
ityandpe
rformance
atthe
conclusio
nof
thetestpe
riodandwith
outh
uman
interven
tion.Inbo
thcatastroph
icscen
ariosA
&B,
allofthe
steady
statecond
ition
sshallbe
applied.Inbo
thcatastroph
icscen
ariosA
&B,
100%
ofmon
itorin
grelays
shallpub
lishcriticalstatusG
OOSE
stream
scon
tainingtriggerswith
inape
riodof
0.1second
s,repe
atingon
ceevery10
second
s.Incatastroph
icscen
arioA,
simulated
GOOSE
cond
ition
sthata
rmallRAS
analyticss
hallbe
appliedpriortotheinitiationof
thetest.Inbo
thcatastroph
ictestscen
ariosA
&B,
thesystem
shallberestored
toinitialcond
ition
sbetweenrepe
titions.Inbo
thcatastroph
icscen
ariosA
&B,
verificationof
GOOSE
processin
g,bo
thinpu
tand
output,and
CPUutilizatio
nam
ongallactivecontrollersaresim
ilar.Incatastroph
icscen
arioB,
simulated
GOOSE
cond
ition
sthatd
isarm
allRAS
analyticss
hallbe
appliedpriortotheinitiationof
thetest.Incatastroph
icscen
arioB,
nomitigatio
ncommands
with
inGO
OSE
messagesshallbe
initiated
.
Bec
ause
GO
OS
E is
a b
road
cast
pro
toco
l, th
e m
essa
ges
go to
eve
ry n
etw
ork
poin
t and
dev
ice
that
they
are
allo
wed
to g
et to
– th
ere
is n
o ta
rget
ing
of in
divi
dual
mes
sage
s as
with
RG
OO
SE
. On
a la
rge
netw
ork,
ther
e is
a s
ever
e ris
k of
“GO
OS
E s
torm
s” u
nder
hig
h or
cat
astro
phic
act
ivity
sc
enar
ios
– in
oth
er w
ords
, a te
mpo
rary
sto
rm o
r glu
t of m
essa
ges
that
fill
or e
xcee
d m
essa
ge b
uffe
r cap
aciti
es a
nd m
essa
ges
are
lost
or t
he
trans
mis
sion
spe
ed is
slo
wed
bey
ond
acce
ptab
le li
mits
.
To m
itiga
te th
e ris
k of
GO
OS
E “s
torm
s,” w
hich
can
occ
ur w
hen
mul
tiple
sub
stat
ions
exp
erie
nce
even
ts o
n th
e tra
nsm
issi
on g
rid a
nd th
e re
lays
in
volv
ed b
egin
to b
road
cast
larg
e am
ount
s of
GO
OS
E d
ata,
SC
E u
sed
a tu
nnel
arc
hite
ctur
e fo
r GO
OS
E to
con
stra
in th
e G
OO
SE
dat
a fro
m a
n in
divi
dual
sub
stat
ion
to o
nly
go to
the
cont
rol c
ente
rs. A
s ex
plai
ned
in th
e te
stim
ony,
this
app
roac
h of
usi
ng tu
nnel
s, th
ough
una
void
able
with
G
OO
SE
, has
som
e dr
awba
cks
that
con
cern
SC
E a
s w
e lo
ok a
head
to m
ore
com
plex
RA
Ss
in th
e ne
ar te
rm. U
sing
GO
OS
E, e
ach
tunn
el is
mad
eup
of i
ndiv
idua
lly c
usto
miz
ed d
evic
es th
at a
re n
ot re
dund
ant o
n fa
ilure
and
do
not h
ave
auto
mat
ed fa
il-ov
er c
apab
ility
. In
addi
tion,
GO
OS
E
com
mun
icat
ions
issu
es a
re m
uch
mor
e di
fficu
lt to
trou
bles
hoot
bec
ause
of t
he la
ck o
f tar
getin
g (b
road
cast
met
hod
whe
re m
essa
ges
go e
very
whe
re
they
are
allo
wed
to g
o).
In th
e re
lativ
ely
shor
t tim
e si
nce
CR
AS
pro
ject
impl
emen
tatio
n (A
pril
7, 2
016
to J
uly
20, 2
016)
, SC
E h
as a
lread
y se
en th
ree
long
dur
atio
n co
mm
unic
atio
ns p
robl
ems
(see
tabl
e be
low
) cau
sed
by th
e vu
lner
abili
ties
inhe
rent
in th
e G
OO
SE
tunn
el a
rchi
tect
ure.
The
CR
AS
cen
tral c
ontro
llers
be
have
d as
exp
ecte
d an
d as
des
igne
d, b
ut in
all
thre
e ca
ses
one
side
of t
he R
AS
was
dis
able
d fo
r ext
ende
d pe
riods
of t
ime.
With
RG
OO
SE
, by
cont
rast
, the
net
wor
k ar
chite
ctur
e w
ould
hav
e en
able
d au
tom
atic
failo
ver w
ith n
o ne
t im
pact
to C
RA
S, i
n ot
her w
ords
, bot
h si
des
of th
e R
AS
wou
ld
have
rem
aine
d fu
nctio
nal.
105
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
GOOSE
Data
VolumeStud
y3
Sl.
No.
Issue
ObservedIm
pactusing
GOOSE
Estim
ated
Impa
ctusingRG
OOSE
Commen
ts
1
Circuitfailure
atHa
waiian
Garden
s
(Req
uestLogite
mELN10
918)
Date:A
pr20
,201
6
RASBno
tavailable
(ResolutionTime:26
Hr.)
Sincethedata
commun
icationisIP
based,ne
tworkcanbe
desig
nedto
addressthe
gap.
(ExpectedRe
solutio
nTime:Minim
al)
Noredu
ndancy
ataggregationrouter
(Lighthipe
(I923
1–Bsid
eRA
S)andLa
Fresa(I9
230–Asid
eRA
S)).Inthiscase
Lighthipefailed.
TheVP
Ntunn
elfrom
substatio
nto
control
center
getsterm
inated
atAS
R10
02router.If
welose
oneof
theseAS
Rs,w
elose
conn
ectiv
ityto
atleasttwosubstatio
ns.
2
Networkcompo
nent
failure
(Req
uestLogite
mGC
C226
16)
Date:A
pr25
,201
6
RASBno
tavailable
(ResolutionTime:6Hr.)
Sincethedata
commun
icationisIP
based,ne
tworkcanbe
desig
nedto
addressthe
gap.
(ExpectedRe
solutio
nTime:Minim
al)
TheVP
Ntunn
elfrom
substatio
nto
control
center
getsterm
inated
atAS
R10
02router.If
welose
oneof
theseAS
Rs,w
elose
conn
ectiv
ityto
atleasttwosubstatio
ns.
3
Networkcompo
nent
failure
(Req
uestLogite
mPM
R452
6)
Date:M
ay28
,201
6
RASBno
tavailable
(ResolutionTime:7Hr.)
Sincethedata
commun
icationisIP
based,ne
tworkcanbe
desig
nedto
addressthe
gap.
(ExpectedRe
solutio
nTime:Minim
al)
TheVP
Ntunn
elfrom
substatio
nto
control
center
getsterm
inated
atAS
R10
02router.If
welose
oneof
theseAS
Rs,w
elose
conn
ectiv
ityto
atleasttwosubstatio
ns.
106
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Energy Management System (EMS) Refresh
107
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,000
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000231
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2018
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year6,210
7,220
2,670
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
16,100
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades790
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
EMS Refresh
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
EMS Refresh
108
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 5)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
EMS Refresh
109
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 5)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Energy Management System (EMS) Refresh
B. Initiative Description
The project is being proposed to perform and support a planned refresh of the EnergyManagement System(EMS) and consolidate the Phasor System. Both Phasor and EMS are Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS)product developed and maintained by General Electric (GE).
The Energy Management System (EMS) is operated by the Grid Control Center (GCC). The GCC monitorsand controls the bulk power system 24/7, using SCE’s EMS and a video wall which graphically depicts thestatus of SCE’s and neighboring utilities’ bulk power systems. GCC personnel use EMS to monitoroperating parameters such as voltage, frequency, power flow, and equipment status. The day to dayoperation of the sub transmission and distribution system is carried out by 14 switching centersgeographically dispersed around the SCE system.
This project will refresh the aging hardware and software components of the EMS system in order tomaintain system availability. In addition to a technical refresh of the EMS hardware and software, thisproject will consolidate the EMS and Phasor systems. The Phasor system collects, stores, and sharesPhasor Measurement Units (PMU) data. Consolidating EMS and Phasor onto a single platform will reducehardware and software costs and simplify the maintenance of both systems. It will also provide a unifiedoperator view, eliminating the need for two separate but related systems.
The primary driver for the EMS Refresh Project is to refresh the aging EMS system, whose current versionwill no longer be supported by the vendor after 2017. The risk of hardware failures continues to rise asthe system ages. By the time of the refresh, the hardware will be 7 years old. Refreshing EMS will allowSCE to maintain system reliability at 99.95% or greater and reduce the risk posed by components reachingend of useful life. System reliability of EMS is important to SCE Grid Operations because EMS systemfailures could result in a direct impact to safety, customer service, operations, and compliance mandates.In addition to the reliability needs, the current EMS configuration is also nearing its maximum capacityand needs expansion.
EMS is used to remotely monitor and control 225,000+ devices at over 1000 Transmission andDistribution Substations using the EMS SCADA – Supervisory Control and Data AcquisitionEMS and Phasor systems are used to manage the planned and emergent outage coordination withCAISO, PEAK RC (Reliability Coordinator for the Western Interconnection) and neighboring utilitiesGCC studies and manages power flow for system reliability to minimize risk of customer serviceimpactsGCC personnel use EMS and Phasor to monitor operating parameters such as voltage, frequency,power flow, and equipment statusDay to day operation of the sub transmission and distribution system using EMS is carried out byswitching centers geographically dispersed around the SCE system
110
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 5)
Scope
The EMS Refresh scope will replace aging computing hardware and network equipment critical tomaintain communications with field devices. It will also enhance existing test environments to providemore effective testing prior to deployment. In addition, the refresh project will upgrade system andapplication software and expand user capacity to meet projected future growth.The EMS and Phasor consolidation will migrate the separate instances of the GE solution to a sharedinfrastructure. This consolidation will substantially reduce the total number of components in the systemthereby reducing maintenance and support costs.This project was launched in June 2016 and is expect to complete in mid 2018.
Criticality of Refreshing EMSSome of the system components are reaching end of life at the end of 2017 which will causesupport issues as well as compliance issuesThe risk of hardware failures continues to rise as the system ages. The system hardware andsoftware are from 2010 and will be 7 years old at the time of deploymentConsolidation will offer the obvious benefit of optimizing the IT portfolio, align with thecompletion of the 5 year maintenance cycle of the Phasor system, thereby avoiding the cost of acostly Phasor system refreshUnifying the view of Phasor and EMS for the users will improve user adoption, thereby improvingrealization of benefits on the investments made in the Phasor system
EMS Out of Scope are:Enhanced Business Resiliency for EMS
111
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 5)
C. Business Strategic Alignment
Consolidating Phasor and Refreshing EMS supports NERC and PEAK RC Reliability standards.
Compliance GuidelinesRefreshing EMS will allow SCE to maintain system reliability at 99.95% or greater and reduce the risk posed bycomponents reaching end of useful life. System reliability of EMS is important to SCE Grid Operations becauseEMS system failures could result in a direct impact to safety, customer service, operations, and compliancemandates. In addition to the reliability needs, the current EMS configuration is also nearing its maximumcapacity and needs expansion.
EMS data must be shared with CAISO Peak RC and adjacent entities to ensure overall situational awareness inthe western interconnection.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
Maintain system reliability at 99.95%. EMS system failures could result in a direct impact to Safety,Customer Service, Operations and Compliance mandates.Improved efficiency through centralization of configuration management of critical networkinginfrastructure.Quicker recognition of potential system vulnerabilities through integration of phasor data in EMS.Achieve IT Portfolio Optimization by consolidating EMS and Phasor platforms into a single instance,providing unified operator view.Amore robust QA environment will enable greater testing effectiveness and reduce quality risk as wellas the risk of cost and schedule overruns.Reduce the risk of system failures and business impact events, which have a direct impact tocustomers, operations and compliance mandates.
E. Business Impact Assessment
Since all the existing functionalities and capabilities in EMS and Phasor will be retained, the Grid Operators willnot only retain all existing functionality, but will also receive incremental functions, which will help themperform their job more effectively.
Grid Control Operators and Dispatchers will be trained with the updated features to ensure compliance trainingis completed.
Compliance and Training and Substation System Operators will be directly involved in testing to ensure SystemOperator Training Compliance requirements are met. Grid Operators are properly trained on changes made tothe system.
There will also be impacts to the Grid Operators during the cutover, which will be managed through detailedcutover and communication planning to ensure the right level of engagement with all user groups.
112
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(4 of 5)
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
Some of the system components are reaching end of life at the end of 2017 which will cause support acompliance issues.The risk of hardware failures continues to rise as the system ages. The system hardware and softwareare from 2010 and will be 7 years old at the time of deployment.Consolidation will offer the benefit of optimizing the IT portfolio, align with the completion of the 5 yearmaintenance cycle of the Phasor system, thereby avoiding the cost of a costly Phasor system refresh.Unifying the view of Phasor and EMS for the users will improve user adoption, thereby improvingrealization of benefits on the investments made in the Phasor systemConsolidating Phasor with EMS will help SCE optimally manage the transmission grid in a reliable securemanner.The technology will increase overall transmission reliability, proactively minimizing blackouts and helpSCE meet stringent security requirements.Business will derive greater benefit through a consolidated system (EMS, Phasor) so they can have aunified view of the data and a single origination point of control commands. To do this, SCE’s systemoperators and engineers must be able to accurately identify transmission stress and measure how closethe grid is to failure.
RTU -Installed atgeneration plants andsubstations to gatherdata and control devices
Master Station (DAC) Part of the SCADAsystem that initiate data gathering fromRTUs every few seconds
CommunicationTelecommunication facilities suchas, telephone lines, Microwave,Radio, or Satellite
User Interface (UI)User Interface forAlarms, Events andGraphical Mimic of
113
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(5 of 5)
G. Proposed Options
Alternative 1: Do not perform the refresh and consolidation project.Alternative 2: Perform refresh of EMS hardware and software now, but do not consolidate thePhasor and EMS systems.Alternative 3: Perform EMS hardware refresh without upgrading software and not consolidate thePhasor and EMS systems.Alternative 4: (Recommended) – Upgrade EMS Hardware and Software, as well as consolidate EMSwith Phasor
114
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
39%
45%
17%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se3,
200,
000
$
1,23
5,20
0$
1,
435,
200
$
529,
600
$
-
$
-
$
3,
200,
000
$
Ven
dor L
abor
75%
2,40
0,00
0$
92
6,40
0$
1,07
6,40
0$
39
7,20
0$
-$
-$
2,40
0,00
0$
S
CE
IT L
abor
100%
3,20
0,00
0$
1,
235,
200
$
1,43
5,20
0$
52
9,60
0$
-$
-$
3,20
0,00
0$
S
I Lab
or25
%80
0,00
0$
308,
800
$
35
8,80
0$
132,
400
$
-
$
-
$
80
0,00
0$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n69
%2,
208,
000
$
852,
288
$99
0,28
8$
365,
424
$
-
$-
$
2,
208,
000
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
11,8
08,0
00$
4,55
7,88
8$
5,
295,
888
$
1,95
4,22
4$
-
$
-
$
11
,808
,000
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
31
2,32
0$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
576,
000
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
88
8,32
0$
Har
dwar
e50
%1,
600,
000
$
617,
600
$71
7,60
0$
264,
800
$
-
$-
$
1,
600,
000
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
1,60
0,00
0$
61
7,60
0$
717,
600
$
26
4,80
0$
-$
-$
1,60
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t13
,408
,000
$
5,
175,
488
$
6,01
3,48
8$
2,
219,
024
$
-$
-$
13,4
08,0
00$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
2,68
1,60
0$
1,
035,
098
$
1,20
2,69
8$
44
3,80
5$
-$
-$
2,68
1,60
0$
TOTA
L16
,089
,600
$
6,
210,
586
$7,
216,
186
$2,
662,
829
$
-$
-$
16,0
89,6
00$
Test
imon
y*6,
210,
000
$7,
220,
000
$2,
670,
000
$
-$
-$
16,1
00,0
00$
Assumptions:
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.Mainten
ance
andSupp
ortS
ervicesc
ostsareno
tinlcude
dintheestim
ates
Noadditio
nalCOTS
licen
secostsh
avebe
enconsidered
Hardwarecostsinclude
both
compu
tingandtelecommun
icationinfrastructure,how
ever,exclude
controldevices
with
intheSubstatio
n.
Ener
gy M
anag
emen
t Sys
tem
(EM
S) R
efre
sh
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
115
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Outage Management System (OMS) Refresh
116
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,000
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000050
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 7/1/2017
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year6,800
3,500
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
10,300
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades780
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Outage Management System Refresh (OMS)
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Outage Management System Refresh (OMS)
117
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 5)
Outage Management System (OMS) RefreshA. Requested Committee Decision / Feedback
The project will request approval from Planning & Performance Reporting (P&PR), and/or Capital PrioritizationTeam (CPT) approval and Treasurers review prior to commencement.
B. Project Overview
This project has been established to perform and support a planned refresh of our Outage Management System(OMS). OMS is a Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) product developed and maintained by CGI. OMS is the systemused by the T&DGrid Operations Department tomonitor, identify, andmanage electrical system outages on SCE’sdistribution network. It provides critical information for the identification and restoration of electrical serviceoutages down to the meter level. In addition, OMS is the source of outage information for many internal andexternal facing applications such as Customer Service System (CSS), Outage Database & Reliability Metrics System(ODRM), and SCE.com.
Existing SCE software assets are typically on a 5 year refresh cycle in order to avoid obsolescence. However, thelast OMS version refresh was implemented in 2008 and was based on a product version that was commerciallyreleased in 2004, thus making the core components of the current tool over 10 years old. Planned refresh of thissystem is important to ensure SCE maintains a stable and reliable outage management tool that can successfullyintegrate with other critical support systems. Refreshing the OMS application and staying within one version ofthe vendor’s most current product also supports our ability to secure more reliable maintenance and support,whether through CGI or a third party vendor certified to support the application. Additionally, the previoussoftware refresh from version 2 to version 5 did not include a system re architecture.
The OMS Refresh will deliver a systemwith the vendor’s most current software and hardware in order to improvethe level of system availability, usability, and reliability required to support the needs of our businessorganizations and customers, and comply with regulatory mandates concerning capabilities around OutageManagement.
The project will be executed in a three phased approach: 1) upgrade the current application (CGI) to its latestversion, 2) implement a series of enhancements, and 3) implement a Transmission Substation (Trans Sub) model.
OMS Refresh scope includes:
Implementation of the standard suite of products of CGI’s outage management application based on theCGI OMS version 6.5Improvements to the Outage Alert Notes and to the OMS CSS interface to keep Outage Alert Notes insync with OMS InformationWeb access version of OMS for non essential users to lessen the impact on the OMS production databaseNewmodule provides enhanced graphic functions including improved circuit and substation visualizationEnhancements to the usability of the Outage Management Dashboard for effective decision making andsituational awarenessImplementation of the Incident Priority Scoring Algorithm for prioritization of outagesA range of SmartConnect functionality including: Integrated ability to check and report instantaneousline side voltage on SmartConnect meters, including groups of meters
118
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(2 of 5)
Modeling of Substation, Transmission, and Sub Transmission systems, which will enable outage/incidentgrouping to these asset levels
OMS Refresh scope excludes:Some enhancement/modifications that were assessed but determined to be out of scope for the OMS Refreshinclude:
Modification or replacement of ODRM in OMSReal time SAIDI/SAIFI reporting from OMSSubstation Outage Request Log (SORL) AutomationExpanded use of Pragma Switch module for unplanned and emergent outage switching and execution
The following assumptions and dependencies are applicable to the OMS system in regards to the RefreshProject:
1. SCE’s Energy Management System will be the source for all Transmission, Sub Transmission, andSubstation model data;
Impact if not correct: Alternate source of model data will need to be located or created, potentiallyextending project timeline and increasing cost;
2. All existing interfaces will be used as is, except CSS interface, which will be re designed into a morestable architecture;
3. Existing EMS SCADA functions will continue to be available;
4. Existing DMS SCADA functions will continue to be available;
5. OMS system will continue to be the primary system for updating and processing trouble call & outageinformation after a call is taken in CSS or received via SmartConnect/AMI notification;
6. Smallworld GIS application will continue to be used for creation and maintenance of the distributionnetwork model;
7. Training will be consistent with T&D standards and procedures. All training material, approach andschedule will need to be evaluated and approved by the core team and project SMEs; and
8. OMS disaster Recovery components shall be available and operational prior to project testing andimplementation phase.
OMS Interfaces with:Consolidated Mobile Solution (CMS)Click ScheduleCustomer Service System (CSS)GE Small World (GESW)SCE.COMSAPEnergy Management System (EMS)Distribution Management System (DMS)Outage Data Reliability Metrics (ODRM)Business ObjectsSmartConnect Network Management System
119
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(3 of 5)
Where does the proposed solution fit on the IT roadmap and within existing technologies?
This OMS Refresh has been established as a core part of the T&D Capability Roadmap since it was last filed inthe GRC. OMS also serves many of CS’s business capabilities. Enterprise Architecture was a key part indeveloping the roadmap and evaluating the need and timing of an OMS technical refresh vs. the option ofseeking a full replacement or doing nothing. It was determined that a technical refresh at this point on theCapability Roadmap would be supportive of recently implemented/implementing solutions such as cGIS andCMS, as well as setting the stage for successor efforts such as the Scheduling Refresh and Storm Managementand Analytics capabilities.
A core component of this project is a technical refresh of CGI’s OMS application, which is currentlyimplemented at SCE. Additionally, there are a moderate number of enhancements. This technical refreshprovides a foundation for the following:
Utilization of an industry standard, vendor supported interface solutionTighter integration with SmartConnect data and functionality
C. Implementation Overview
2014• Gather Business Requirements• Business Process Workshops• Capital Review Team (CRT) Approval
2015• Interface Workshops• Design and Build –Technical Refresh• Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) – Technical Refresh
2016
120
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(4 of 5)
• Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) – Enhancements• Site Acceptance Testing (SAT) – Technical Refresh• Implementation for Technical Refresh
2017• Site Acceptance Testing (SAT) – Trans/Sub Connectivity Model• Site Acceptance Testing (SAT) – Enhancements• Implementation for Enhancements• Implementation of Trans/Sub Connectivity Model
D. Project Rationale
The Outage Management System (OMS) is a critical system that needs a version refresh to the latest OMSsoftware release to maintain the current level of system availability, usability, and reliability.
The OMS Refresh will enhance system performance and reduce the potential for a repeat of past storm andsubstation event impacts such as:
1. Poor production performance during 2011 storm that resulted in extended customer outages. TheCorporate Storm Performance Improvement Program (CSPIP) evaluation concluded that improvementsneeded to be undertaken to improve our performance in areas of storm operations, management, andrestoration. This includes key enhancements based on that evaluation that will further SCE’s ability toprovide real time situational awareness to SCE storm personnel.
2. Assessment of OMS performance during Substation outages (including Rector 66kv and Santa Monica16kv/4kv) identified the benefits of improved OMS performance and enhanced use of the networkconnectivity model as part of Outage Alert Notes, Predictive Grouping, and Outage Prioritizationprocesses.
Consequences of not Implementing the Project
SCE’s OMS software version will become obsolete and there is a risk it will not be supported by thevendorWithout hardware and software improvements, OMS performance will continue to be compromisedduring major system and storm eventsOMS improvements identified during CSPIP evaluation will not be implementedImprovements identified during Rector and Santa Monica root cause analysis will not be implementedImproved integration and efficiencies between OMS and SmartConnect meters will not be achieved
E. Project Benefits
Benefits Overview
Qualitative Benefits:
Highlights of Benefits Associated with the Technology Refresh:• Mitigates OMS performance issues during system events
Creates parallel database for web use which ensures impacts to the production system areminimized in times of heavy useReporting and analytics also utilizes non production database
• Replace OMS CSS InterfaceAlleviates main contributor to OMS related planned and unplanned outagesPI outages affect vital data going to CSS and AOC/SCE.COM, EMS SCADA data to OMS
121
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(5 of 5)
Highlights of Benefits Associated with the Enhancements:• SmartConnect Integration:
Voltage checks minimize the use of multiple systems to perform the same function, simplifyingprocess and improving efficiency of dispatcher processAuto energizing PRNs allows for accurate energize times and lessens dependency on multiple touchmanual processes; also contributes to resolution of the ERT metric issue
• Incident Prioritization:Key initiative of Corporate Storm project based on CPUC direction to provide comprehensiveprioritization solution for outage responseProvides automated methodology for prioritizing incidents during highly complex and time sensitivestorm events
• Enhanced Connectivity Model:Perform end to end outage modeling through the use of a Transmission, Sub Transmission, andSubstation As Is connectivity modelQuicker identification of event magnitudeEffective outage grouping above the distribution level
• Miscellaneous Enhancements:See presentation for a full description and associated benefit of each enhancement
Quantitative (Budget savings must be quantified)• Primarily a technical refresh to avoid obsolescence, thus quantitative benefits are N/A
G. Alternatives
There are 3 potential alternatives to the Outage Management System Refresh:
Alternative No. 1 (Recommended): Deliver the following 3 releases: 1) Upgrade the current application (CGI) toits latest version; 2) Implement a series of modest enhancements 3) Implement an end to end outage modelingthrough the use of a Transmission, Sub Transmission, and Substation as is connectivity model.
OMS is a mission critical Level 1 Application that supports the Grid Control and Operations. CGI is the currentvendor for the OMS function, and is a proven industry leading vendor. CGI technology is aligned with SCE’sapproved IT Standards and Road Map. Requirements cannot be met with a manual work around, and no otherexisting SCE applications can be leveraged. Additionally, other major utilities have the same business need andutilize an OMS solution for their Outage Management needs.
Alternative No. 2: Do not upgrade or implement enhancements, and keep the current application as is. Thisalternative has significant risk to a) system availability as the product will be unsupported by the vendor, b)Reliability and public safety while SCE operates manually during times of OMS system outage. Furthermore, anyassociated benefits related to enhancements and the Trans Sub Connectivity model will not be realized.
Alternative No. 3: Refresh the current application to its latest version (technology upgrade only). Selecting thisoption, would prohibit SCE from realizing previously identified benefits from storm response and Smart Meterintegration, as well as any associated benefits related to enhancements and the Trans Sub Connectivity model.
122
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%
CO
TS L
icen
se25
4,74
6$
-$
254,
746
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-$
-$
254,
746
$
V
endo
r Lab
or9,
582,
948
$
1,00
0,36
7$
1,23
4,39
6$
4,79
8,18
5$
2,55
0,00
0$
-$
-
$
-
$
9,
582,
948
$S
CE
IT L
abor
1,60
2,92
9$
40
,254
$
42
2,98
8$
809,
063
$
33
0,62
4$
-$
-
$
-
$
1,
602,
929
$S
I Lab
or-
$
-
$
-$
-$
-$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
129,
335
$
5,
078
$23
,757
$64
,000
$36
,500
$
-
$
-$
-$
129,
335
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
11,5
69,9
57$
1,04
5,69
8$
1,93
5,88
8$
5,67
1,24
8$
2,91
7,12
4$
-$
-
$
-
$
11
,569
,957
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s45
,854
$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
45,8
54$
Har
dwar
e-
$
-
$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-
$
-
$
-
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t11
,569
,957
$
1,
045,
698
$1,
935,
888
$5,
671,
248
$2,
917,
124
$-
$
-$
-$
11,5
69,9
57$
Con
tinge
ncy
1,71
2,67
4$
-$
-$
1,13
0,25
0$
582,
425
$
-
$
-$
-$
1,71
2,67
4$
TOTA
L13
,282
,632
$
1,
045,
698
$ 1,
935,
888
$ 6,
801,
498
$ 3,
499,
549
$ -
$-
$
-
$
13
,282
,632
$Te
stim
ony*
1,04
6,00
0$
1,93
6,00
0$
6,80
0,00
0$
3,50
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
13,2
82,0
00$
Assumptions:
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.CO
TSLicencewillbe
extend
edwith
noadditio
nalcoststo
existingapplication
Capitalestim
ates
includ
e5yearso
fmainten
ance
andsupp
ortservicesfor
theprod
uctv
endo
r.
Out
age
Man
agem
ent S
yste
m (O
MS)
Ref
resh
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
123
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Distributed Management System (DMS)
124
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0200400600800
1,0001,2001,4001,600
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 6425
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000140
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 9/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year1,500
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
1,500
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades794
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Distribution Management System (DMS) Refresh
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
DMS
125
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
1. Assumes 10% discount rate; ignores taxes
Distribution Management System (DMS) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (1 of 2)
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Buy or build: [X]Leverage current capabilities: [ ]
Description:
Distribution Management System (DMS) is the centralized computing system that allows SCE to gather data from various distribution automation devices and facilitate automated operation and control of the distribution system as a whole. The project strategy is to leverage new technology and features that have been commercially developed and replace SCE’s custom-built Distribution Management System.
This system replacement will include installation of software, hardware, and data storage equipment. This new system will allow advanced remote control, monitoring, and analysis of distribution system devices to improve reliability and optimize voltage to reduce SCE’s annual energy costs.
The upgraded DMS is being implemented in two phases:
1. Phase 1 – Perform analysis and detailed system design, and install new DMS hardware platforms and software to replace the currently obsolete DMS; and
2. Phase 2 - Implement DMS advanced engineering applications to improve the electric distribution system capabilities for conservation voltage reduction. An advanced training simulator will provide “real world” training for system operators. Phase 2 will be implemented in 3 releases.
PROJECT RATIONALE
Discretionary / Non-negotiable: Discretionary
Justification:
The existing DMS is at the end of its useful life and the replacement is needed to manage grid reliability. DMS is an essential system to operate SCE’s system and maintain its reliability. Loss of automation would result in customers experiencing more and longer outages.
Rate impact:
Increase
Business needs:
Replacing the existing DMS addresses the following technical shortcomings:
1. Software obsolescence; 2. Insufficient data management capability; 3. Insufficient security; 4. No Operator Training System; and 5. No Advanced Distribution Grid Control and Analysis
Applications.
Urgency:
The existing DMS is at the end of its useful life and the replacement is needed to manage grid reliability. DMS is an essential system to operate SCE’s system and maintain its reliability. Loss of automation would result in customers experiencing more and longer outages.
The new DMS system is required to enable SCE future vision and is foundational to the deployment of Smart Grid technologies. It is also required for implementing and realizing the benefits.
126
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
1. Assumes 10% discount rate; ignores taxes
Distribution Management System (DMS) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (2 of 2)
KEY BENEFITS
Benefits:
1. Switches from in-house-built to COTS system, which provides full vendor support for defect resolution and future upgrades;
2. Handles new automated devices added to the distribution network to better analyze circuits, which leads to better planning and remediation of system problems;
3. Improved capabilities of meeting security requirements, for authentication of user-command and control data;
4. Provides an operator training-simulation feature for all switching center operators, which provides a realistic behind-the-wheel training experience that tests the operator’s capabilities to perform under a real-world stress situation; and
5. Provides advanced control and analysis capabilities allowing SCE to implement self-healing security, which provides automated responses to system problems.
Justification of Benefits:
N/A
KEY ISSUES / RISKS
Key risk factors for this multi-year project include:
1. Program management; 2. Turnover in SCE project team; 3. Business ownership from client sponsors; 4. Lack of issue resolution and decision-making; 5. Business processes not aligned with software capabilities; 6. Lack of communication between all parties; 7. Unrealistic goals and timeframes; 8. High caliber end-users; and 9. Strong OCM planning and execution.
ALTERNATIVES
Alternative No. 1: Do nothing is an option in this case as the current software is obsolete and no longer supported by the vendor. The current application is reaching capacity limit of the current equipment database which will limit future substation automation. The current tool set has lack of advanced engineering applications and also lacks Operator training simulation tools;
Alternative No. 2: Discontinue the Phase 1 DMS replacement effort resulting in a $0.9M contract penalty and risking a $19.4M write-off for costs already incurred. This would lead to issues with system availability and performance, along with extended customer outages; and
Alternative No. 3: Complete the Phase 1 DMS replacement and not implement the Phase 2 Advanced Engineering Applications resulting in a $0.9M contract penalty and $6.2M write-off for costs already incurred. This would not allow AVVC benefits to be realized.
127
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
1
Distribution Management System A. Implementation Overview
DMS Phase 1 was implemented in April, 2012. Phase 2 was planned to be implemented in three releases. Release 1 was implemented in 2014 for AVVC (Advanced Voltage VAR control) capability Release 2 was implemented in 2015 for Operation Training Simulation capability. Release 3 is being implemented in 2016 for advanced control and analysis capabilities.
B. Project Rationale
Distribution Management System addresses the following business needs:
1. Software obsolescence: The existing DMS relies on third party software that is no longer produced or supported by the vendor. The existing DMS uses Sybase for database management, which is no longer supported by the Information Technology group. Factorylink for AIX, a software product from USDATA, was used for the SCADA communications interface in our DMS and this software package is no longer supported by USDATA, now named UGS. As hardware continues to evolve, our obsolete software will limit future hardware upgrades and the total system will become obsolete;
2. Insufficient data management capability: Over the years, SCE’s efforts to automate the distribution grid have resulted in more field equipment communicating more information back to SCE’s back office systems. The internal database for DMS was originally limited to 10,000 devices. Modifications to the software, patches, have extended its capabilities, but it is limited. We currently have over 15,000 field devices in our system and within six years the current system will no longer be capable of handling the anticipated growth;
3. Insufficient security: The existing DMS system suffers from several security shortcomings such as: (1) the inability to authenticate command and control data associated with remote equipment operation, (2) inadequate mechanisms to detect and report anomalous or inappropriate system use, (3) and the inability to perform auditable system administration mechanisms. The lack of system and application support for the existing DMS system makes integrating adequate mitigating measures extremely difficult. The latest generation security features need to be designed into the system from the start to be most effective. SCE requires a DMS that has security architected into the system during the design phases. SCE’s system was designed over a decade ago, and we now live in a post 9/11 environment were the electric grid is a plausible target for cyber terrorists;
4. No Operator Training System: The existing DMS lacks the ability to support operator training simulations that we currently need in light of the demands that we must place on our switching center operators. Existing training for switching center operators consist of training and emergency drills presented in a scripted, paper-based overview method. Simulation training is significantly more powerful than on paper overview-type training. In order to keep our system operators at a sufficient level of readiness to operate a growing distribution grid, it is necessary to provide realistic “behind the wheel” training that can only be provided by an Operator Training Simulator in an upgraded DMS. The difference is akin to classroom Driver’s Ed versus behind-the wheel Driver’s Training; and
5. No Advanced Distribution Grid Control and Analysis Applications: The existing DMS was designed to be a distribution grid remote control and monitoring system, not an automatic control system. It is not designed to take any automatic control actions based on circuit field conditions; rather, the distribution grid operator is required to evaluate all field device information presented on the DMS and then remotely control each field device to mitigate the problem. New generation DMS systems include advanced control and analysis software to provide the grid operator with automatic control functions that can assist the operator in responding to emergencies.
The existing DMS is at the end of its useful life and the replacement is needed to manage grid reliability. DMS is an essential system to operate SCE’s system and maintain its reliability. Loss of automation would result in customers experiencing more and longer outages.
128
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2
The new DMS system is required to enable SCE future vision and is foundational to the deployment of Smart Grid technologies. It is also required for implementing and realizing the benefits.
C. Key Benefits
Distribution Management System provides 5 key benefits:
1. Switches from in-house-built to “Commercial-Off-the-Shelf” system, which provides full vendor support for defect resolution and future upgrades;
2. Handles new automated devices added to the distribution network to better analyze circuits, which leads to better planning and remediation of system problems;
3. Improved capabilities of meeting security requirements, for authentication of user-command and control data;
4. Provides an operator training-simulation feature for all switching center operators, which provides a realistic behind-the-wheel training experience that tests the operator’s capabilities to perform under a real-world stress situation; and
5. Provides advanced control and analysis capabilities allowing SCE to implement self-healing security, which provides automated responses to system problems.
D. Key Issues / Risks
Distribution Management System provides 4 key issues/risks:1. Business ownership from client sponsors need to be maintained for overall project acceptance; 2. Informed and rapid issue resolution and decision-making is required; 3. Business processes aligned with software capabilities; and 4. Constant open and candid communication between all parties through strong OCM planning and
execution is required.
E. Alternatives
Distribution Management System provides 3 alternatives:
Alternative No. 1: Do nothing is an option in this case as the current software is obsolete and no longer supported by the vendor. The current application is reaching capacity limit of the current equipment database which will limit future substation automation. The current tool set has lack of advanced engineering applications and also lacks Operator training simulation tools;
Alternative No. 2: Discontinue the Phase 1 DMS replacement effort resulting in a $0.9M contract penalty and risking a $19.4M write-off for costs already incurred. This would lead to issues with system availability and performance, along with extended customer outages; and
Alternative No. 3: Complete the Phase 1 DMS replacement and not implement the phase 2 Advanced Engineering Applications resulting in a $0.9M contract penalty and $6.2M write-off for costs already incurred. This would not allow AVVC benefits to be realized.
129
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Cos
t Cat
egor
ies
2009
-201
220
1320
1420
1520
1620
17To
tal
Ong
oing
O&
M0%
0%0%
0%0%
0%0%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$5,
037,
193
$-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
5,03
7,19
3$
Ven
dor L
abor
4,42
9,46
5$
3,75
1,31
9$
604,
927
$
26
6,99
7$
990,
630
$
-
$
10,0
43,3
38$
SC
E IT
Lab
or3,
647,
969
$1,
552,
739
$85
1,71
6$
738,
683
$
50
9,76
8$
-$
7,
300,
875
$S
I Lab
or16
6,62
3$
238,
453
$
4,
057,
672
$-
$
4,46
2,74
8$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n3,
894,
512
$31
,082
$6,
556
$28
,311
$-
$ 3,
960,
461
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
-$
17,0
09,1
39$
5,50
1,76
3$
1,70
1,65
2$
5,09
1,66
3$
1,50
0,39
8$
-$
30
,804
,615
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
-$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
-$
Har
dwar
e2,
457,
208
$11
5,20
7$
28,2
45$
1,93
5$
-$
-$
2,60
2,59
5$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s-
$-
$-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$ -
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.-
$2,
457,
208
$11
5,20
7$
28,2
45$
1,93
5$
-
$
-
$
2,60
2,59
5$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t-
$19
,466
,347
$5,
616,
970
$1,
729,
897
$5,
093,
598
$1,
500,
398
$-
$
33,4
07,2
10$
Con
tinge
ncy
-$
-$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$-
$
TOTA
L-
$19
,466
,347
$ 5,
616,
970
$ 1,
729,
897
$ 5,
093,
598
$ 1,
500,
398
$ -
$ 33
,407
,210
$Te
stim
ony*
19,4
75,0
00$
5,62
0,00
0$
1,73
0,00
0$
5,09
0,00
0$
1,50
0,00
0$
-$
33,4
15,0
00$
Assumptions:
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.DM
Sprojectisc
ompletingin20
16.
Dis
trib
utio
n M
anag
emen
t Sys
tem
(DM
S)
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
130
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Grid Interconnection Processing Tool
131
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,000
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: NETWORK SERVICES
Pin #: 7963
WBS Element: CIT-00-OP-NS-000520
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2018
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year459
6,901
6,318
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
13,678
Program Group: OPERATIONS - IT
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software777
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Grid Interconnection Processing Tool
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Grid Interconnection Processing Tool
132
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
3%50
%46
%10
0%P
roje
ct D
urat
ion
2000
hour
sFT
ES
CE
FTE
($70
)26
3,59
4,87
4$
12
2,34
4$
1,84
0,27
2$
1,
684,
794
$
-$
-$
3,64
7,40
9$
B
usin
ess
Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)2
735,
181
$
24
,660
$
37
0,93
0$
339,
591
$
-
$
-
$
73
5,18
1$
Tech
nica
l Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)12
4,83
0,61
2$
139,
740
$2,
101,
935
$1,
924,
350
$-
$-
$
4,16
6,02
5$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l9,
160,
668
$
286,
744
$
4,
313,
137
$
3,94
8,73
5$
-
$
-
$
8,
548,
616
$
Labo
r Sup
port
Cos
t4%
-$
143,
795
$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
212,
322
$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
356,
117
$
Har
dwar
e1,
123,
398
$
38,2
32$
575,
085
$
52
6,49
8$
-$
-$
1,13
9,81
5$
E
mbe
dded
CO
TS L
icen
se1,
179,
568
$
40,1
44$
603,
839
$
55
2,82
3$
-$
-$
1,19
6,80
6$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
505,
529
$
17,2
05$
258,
788
$
236,
924
$
-$
-
$
512,
917
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.2,
808,
496
$
95,5
81$
1,43
7,71
2$
1,
316,
245
$
-$
-$
2,84
9,53
9$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t11
,969
,163
$
38
2,32
5$
5,
750,
849
$
5,
264,
980
$
-
$
-$
11,3
98,1
54$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
2,39
3,83
3$
76
,465
$
1,
150,
170
$
1,05
2,99
6$
-
$
-
$
2,
279,
631
$
TOTA
L R
EQU
EST
14,3
62,9
96$
458,
790
$
6,90
1,01
9$
6,31
7,97
6$
-$
-$
13,6
77,7
85$
Test
imon
y*46
0,00
0$
6,
900,
000
$
6,
320,
000
$
-
$
-
$
13
,680
,000
$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
SC
E w
ill d
evel
op/c
o-de
velo
p G
IPT
with
lead
ing
vend
or(s
) in
this
fiel
dS
CE
will
use
ent
erpr
ise
softw
are
solu
tions
as
appl
icab
leS
CE
will
per
form
inte
grat
ion
with
oth
er fo
unda
tiona
l tec
hnic
al s
olut
ions
SC
E w
ill im
plem
ent i
n ph
ases
(NE
M/R
ule
21, W
DA
T, T
OT)
Grid
Inte
rcon
nect
ion
Proc
essi
ng T
ool
App
licat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
ject
Tota
l Cos
t of P
roje
ctFT
E E
stim
atio
n
133
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Grid Analytics Applications (GAA)
134
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 7963
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000247
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2020
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year3,744
12,732
356
367
SCE $
392
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
17,590
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software799
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Grid Analytics Applications
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Grid Analytics Applications
135
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
21%
72%
2%2%
2%10
0%P
roje
ct D
urat
ion
4000
hour
sFT
ES
CE
FTE
($70
)17
4,69
0,72
9$
99
8,32
6$
3,39
5,07
5$
94
,947
$
97
,961
$
10
4,42
0$
4,69
0,72
9$
B
usin
ess
Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)1
945,
475
$
20
1,22
5$
684,
320
$
19
,138
$
19
,745
$
21
,047
$
94
5,47
5$
Tech
nica
l Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)7
5,35
7,69
3$
1,
140,
276
$3,
877,
813
$10
8,44
7$
111,
890
$11
9,26
7$
5,35
7,69
3$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l10
,993
,897
$
2,
339,
828
$
7,95
7,20
8$
22
2,53
2$
229,
596
$
24
4,73
3$
10,9
93,8
97$
Labo
r Sup
port
Cos
t4%
-$
187,
629
$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
277,
046
$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
464,
675
$
Har
dwar
e1,
465,
853
$
311,
977
$
1,
060,
961
$
29,6
71$
30,6
13$
32,6
31$
1,46
5,85
3$
E
mbe
dded
CO
TS L
icen
se1,
539,
146
$
327,
576
$
1,
114,
009
$
31,1
54$
32,1
43$
34,2
63$
1,53
9,14
6$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
659,
634
$
14
0,39
0$
477,
432
$13
,352
$13
,776
$14
,684
$65
9,63
4$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
3,66
4,63
2$
77
9,94
3$
2,65
2,40
3$
74
,177
$
76
,532
$
81
,578
$
3,
664,
632
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t14
,658
,530
$
3,
119,
770
$
10
,609
,611
$
29
6,70
9$
30
6,12
8$
32
6,31
1$
14,6
58,5
30$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
2,93
1,70
6$
62
3,95
4$
2,12
1,92
2$
59
,342
$
61
,226
$
65
,262
$
2,
931,
706
$
TOTA
L R
EQU
EST
17,5
90,2
36$
3,74
3,72
4$
12,7
31,5
33$
356,
051
$
367,
353
$
391,
573
$
17,5
90,2
36$
Test
imon
y *3,
740,
000
$
12
,730
,000
$
36
0,00
0$
37
0,00
0$
39
0,00
0$
17
,590
,000
$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
SC
E w
ill le
vera
ge it
s en
terp
rise
anal
ytic
s pl
atfo
rm to
sto
re th
e fo
unda
tiona
l grid
dat
a ac
cess
ed b
y th
ese
grid
ana
lytic
s ap
plic
atio
nsS
CE
will
co-
deve
lop
anal
ytic
s w
ith le
adin
g ve
ndor
(s) o
r con
sulta
nt(s
) in
this
fiel
dS
CE
will
impl
emen
t ana
lytic
s so
lutio
n in
mul
tiple
pha
ses
(Loa
d/V
olta
ge, W
eath
er, T
LM a
nd P
hase
Iden
tific
atio
n)A
n ex
ampl
e of
an
embe
dded
CO
TS li
cens
e w
ould
be
for s
peci
aliz
ed a
naly
tics
algo
rithm
(s)
Grid
Ana
lytic
s A
pplic
atio
ns
App
licat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
ject
Tota
l Cos
t of P
roje
ctFT
E E
stim
atio
n
136
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Long-Term Planning Tools
137
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: NETWORK SERVICES
Pin #: 7963
WBS Element: CIT-00-OP-NS-000519
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2019
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year459
6,323
6,029
2,260
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
15,070
Program Group: OPERATIONS - IT
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software776
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Long Term Planning Tool
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Long Term Planning Tool
138
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
3%42
%40
%15
%0%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se1,
318,
636
$
40,1
44$
553,
225
$
52
7,49
9$
197,
768
$
-
$
1,
318,
636
$
Ven
dor L
abor
200%
2,63
7,27
2$
80
,288
$
1,
106,
450
$
1,05
4,99
7$
39
5,53
7$
-$
2,63
7,27
2$
S
CE
IT L
abor
305%
4,01
8,70
0$
12
2,34
4$
1,68
6,01
8$
1,
607,
615
$
602,
723
$
-
$
4,
018,
700
$
SI L
abor
57%
753,
506
$
22
,939
$
31
6,12
8$
301,
428
$
11
3,01
1$
-$
753,
506
$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
152%
2,00
9,35
0$
61
,172
$84
3,00
9$
803,
808
$
30
1,36
1$
-$
2,00
9,35
0$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l10
,737
,464
$
32
6,88
8$
4,50
4,83
1$
4,
295,
346
$
1,61
0,40
0$
-
$
10
,737
,464
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
34
6,61
3$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
23
7,35
4$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
58
3,96
7$
Har
dwar
e95
%1,
255,
844
$
38,2
32$
526,
881
$
502,
380
$
18
8,35
1$
-
$
1,
255,
844
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
43%
565,
130
$
17
,205
$
23
7,09
6$
22
6,07
1$
84,7
58$
-$
565,
130
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.1,
820,
973
$
55,4
37$
763,
977
$
72
8,45
1$
273,
109
$
-
$
1,
820,
973
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t12
,558
,438
$
38
2,32
5$
5,26
8,80
8$
5,
023,
797
$
1,88
3,50
8$
-
$
12
,558
,438
$
C
ontin
genc
y20
%2,
511,
688
$
76,4
65$
1,05
3,76
2$
1,
004,
759
$
376,
702
$
-
$
2,
511,
688
$
TOTA
L15
,070
,125
$
45
8,79
0$
6,
322,
569
$
6,
028,
556
$
2,26
0,21
0$
-$
15,0
70,1
25$
Test
imon
y *46
0,00
0$
6,
320,
000
$
6,
030,
000
$
2,26
0,00
0$
-$
15,0
70,0
00$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
LTP
T co
nsis
ts o
f var
ious
func
tions
suc
h as
For
ecas
ting,
Cap
acity
Ana
lytic
s, R
isk
Ana
lysi
s an
d P
rote
ctio
n A
naly
sis.
SC
E w
ill p
rocu
re s
ever
al C
OTS
pro
duct
sS
CE
may
enh
ance
or c
usto
miz
e th
e pr
oduc
ts
SC
E w
ill p
erfo
rm in
tegr
atio
n be
twee
n th
ose
prod
ucts
SC
E w
ill im
plem
ent i
n m
ultip
le p
hase
s (e
.g.,
Foun
datio
nal,
Inte
grat
ed, A
dvan
ced
& O
ptim
ized
)Th
e ha
rdw
are
com
pone
nts
for t
he L
TPT
incl
udes
: App
licat
ion
Ser
ver,
Web
Ser
ver,
and
Dat
abas
e S
erve
r. Th
ese
serv
ers
will
be
mad
e av
aila
ble
in tw
o da
ta c
ente
rs (P
rimar
y-A
lham
bra
Dat
a C
ente
r and
Fai
love
r-Irv
ine
Ope
ratio
ns C
ente
r). S
CE
exp
ects
to h
ave
Win
dow
s-ba
sed
appl
icat
ion
serv
er a
nd T
OM
CA
T/IIS
bas
ed w
eb s
erve
rs.
Ora
cle
Exa
data
will
be
used
as
data
base
ser
ver.
>$5M
Long
-Ter
m P
lann
ing
Tool
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct
139
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Grid Connectivity Model
140
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: NETWORK SERVICES
Pin #: 7963
WBS Element: CIT-00-OP-NS-000521
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2019
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year3,440
5,025
5,049
1,432
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
14,946
Program Group: OPERATIONS - IT
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software778
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Grid Connectivity Model
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Grid Connectivity Model
141
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
23%
33%
34%
10%
0%10
0%P
roje
ct D
urat
ion
2000
hour
sFT
ES
CE
FTE
($70
)28
3,98
5,70
0$
91
7,33
5$
1,33
9,96
1$
1,
346,
411
$
381,
993
$
-
$
3,
985,
700
$
Bus
ines
s C
onsu
ltant
s ($
200)
280
3,36
8$
184,
900
$
27
0,08
6$
271,
386
$
76
,996
$
-
$
80
3,36
8$
Tech
nica
l Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)11
4,55
2,41
7$
1,
047,
768
$1,
530,
486
$1,
537,
854
$43
6,30
8$
-$
4,
552,
417
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
9,34
1,48
5$
2,
150,
003
$
3,14
0,53
3$
3,
155,
652
$
895,
297
$
-
$
9,34
1,48
5$
Labo
r Sup
port
Cos
t4%
-$
159,
428
$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
235,
405
$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
394,
833
$
Har
dwar
e1,
245,
531
$
286,
667
$
41
8,73
8$
420,
754
$
11
9,37
3$
-$
1,24
5,53
1$
E
mbe
dded
CO
TS L
icen
se1,
307,
808
$
301,
000
$
43
9,67
5$
441,
791
$
12
5,34
2$
-$
1,30
7,80
8$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
560,
489
$
12
9,00
0$
188,
432
$18
9,33
9$
53,7
18$
-$
560,
489
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.3,
113,
828
$
716,
668
$
1,
046,
844
$
1,05
1,88
4$
29
8,43
2$
-$
3,11
3,82
8$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t12
,455
,313
$
2,
866,
671
$
4,
187,
377
$
4,
207,
536
$
1,
193,
729
$
-
$12
,455
,313
$C
ontin
genc
y20
%2,
491,
063
$
573,
334
$
83
7,47
5$
841,
507
$
23
8,74
6$
-$
2,49
1,06
3$
TOTA
L R
EQU
EST
14,9
46,3
75$
3,44
0,00
6$
5,02
4,85
3$
5,04
9,04
3$
1,43
2,47
4$
-$
14,9
46,3
75$
Test
imon
y *3,
440,
000
$
5,
020,
000
$
5,
050,
000
$
1,
430,
000
$
14
,940
,000
$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
The
Grid
Con
nect
ivity
Mod
el (G
CM
) will
incl
ude
both
ele
ctric
al a
nd s
truct
ural
con
nect
ivity
info
rmat
ion.
S
CE
will
co-
deve
lop
the
GC
M w
ith le
adin
g ve
ndor
(s) o
r con
sulta
nt(s
) in
this
fiel
dS
CE
will
dev
elop
com
mon
ser
vice
s to
sup
port
othe
r wor
k st
ream
s
Grid
Con
nect
ivity
Mod
el
App
licat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
ject
Tota
l Cos
t of P
roje
ctFT
E E
stim
atio
n
142
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Transmission and Distribution Projects less than $3 Million
143
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000187
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2018
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
2,600
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,600
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software788
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Substation Health Assessment Tool (previously Asset Mgmt)
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Substation Health Assessment Tool
144
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Substation HealthAssessment Tool
145
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Substation Health Assessment Tool INVESTMENT MEMO
(1 of 3)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameSubstation Health Assessment (Previously Asset Management)B. Initiative DescriptionThis business initiative is driven by the need to incorporate operational excellence, OpX into SC&M’scurrent Condition BasedMaintenance (CBM) programs (i.e. PredictiveMaintenance Assessment (PMA),Circuit Breaker Analysis (CBA), Dissolved Gas Analysis (DGA), Oil Circuit Breaker Analysis (OCBA), Oil TapChanger Analysis (OTA)) which use a methodology and set of tools designed to determine conditionand/or performance of an asset. This initiative seeks to enhance the Condition Based Maintenanceprograms by utilizing a new tool to perform trending based upon complex algorithms specific to SCE’sassets. As a result of the asset health; there is an opportunity to offset existing maintenance cycleswhich could result in a reduction in unnecessary O&M spending; improve reliability of assets and a riskof catastrophic events.
The overall scope of this project is to reduce O&M costs and improve SC&M’s financially drivenmaintenance decisions through the development of an integrated tool that can assess maintenanceneeds based on equipment condition and probability of failure.
The aim is to acquire a tool, with a common data platform that will integrate predictive maintenancepractices and overcome deficiencies in the health assessment for major critical substation equipmentsuch as transformers, circuit breakers, and protection systems and to accurately monitor, track, andassess the equipment’s performance and lifecycle based upon a calculated assessment of data. It willemploy industry best practices as to enhance themaintenance program, offset maintenance dollars andextend maintenance cycles.
In addition, the new tool should provide a common platform and improved tracking, trending, analysis,and standardized reporting. This process will be accomplished through quantifiable failure analysismetrics, using algorithms developed specifically for SCE equipment, based on industry standards.C. Business Strategic AlignmentOne of the main components of delivering reliable electric power delivery is the capital budgeting andoperation and maintenance of facilities. For the most part, the cost for purchasing equipment andconstructing facilities is fixed; therefore, O&M is the primary candidate for reducing costs. As theequipment continues to age and gradually deteriorate, the probability of service interruption due toequipment failure increases. In order to gain operational and service excellence through affordability,SC&M’s goal is to reduce O&M spending through financial driven maintenance decisions whilemaintaining high reliability. Therefore, an effective maintenance strategy is essential for safe, reliable,and economical delivery of electricity. The Substation Health Assessment tool aligns to this businessstrategy.
The goal of this effort is to acquire an integrated tool designed to perform failure and trending analysisbased on data from operational, historical, test results and industry trends. Once the data is on a commonplatform, assessments of equipment health and performance can be analyzed based on industrystandards. The ability to determine equipment health, utilizing an automated, centralized, data analysisengine, can be determined based on age, maintenance history, and past performance. Through this, theability to perform trending with the use of complex algorithms specific to SCE can begin. It is essential to
146
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
understand of the criticality of our assets within the system, and to possibly eliminate catastrophic inservice failures. The information gathered will be used to maintain and monitor the health of theequipment. In addition, it will provide the potential effects on the predictive maintenance assessment ofwork, through forecasting.D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & BenefitsIn order to achieve affordability for our customers, part of OpX is to gain operational and serviceexcellence of affordability through the reduction of Operation Maintenance (O&M) spending. The O&Mbudget includes maintenance of apparatus equipment; such as transformers, circuit breakers, protectionequipment, etc. In addition, this also includes planned work, unforeseen work, costs associated withemployees, and sunken costs.
As part of OpX, the goal is not only to reduce O&M spending, but also to use prudent judgment inspending; not to risk our reliability, specifically through increased System Average Interruption DurationIndex (SAIDI), and System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI).
Through the use of this integrated tool, the purpose is to evaluate equipment health within the substationby using a combination of historical data, maintenance records, and trending results analysis. This data,along with a developed complex algorithm, will be used to determine the overall health index of theequipment. Once an evaluation is complete and the equipment is deemed healthy, and not at risk, thereis an opportunity to offset the maintenance cycle. Conversely, if the equipment is proven unhealthythrough the analysis, appropriate steps may be taken to address issues. This practice will allow SC&M toallocate the proper dollars and resources to equipment that truly needs maintenance and reducespending on healthy operating equipment.
The Dissolved Gas Analysis for example; samples are performed at the Material Test Laboratory inWestminster and the cost to evaluate the dissolved gas within a transformer is $157 per sample. Basedon asset management system, currently there are 2,647 B bank transformers on line. Therefore, if thetrending results state that 50 percent of our B bank transformers are performing well and we offset theirmaintenance cycle by one year, this could result in a cost savings of more than $208 thousand annually.
147
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
E. Business Impact AssessmentThe technology solution would be impactful to SC&M’s existing Infrastructure Replacement (IR) programand its condition based maintenance programs (Predictive Maintenance Assessment (PMA), CircuitBreaker Analysis (CBA), Dissolved Gas Analysis (DGA), Oil Circuit Breaker Analysis (OCBA), and Oil TapChanger Analysis (OTA)).
Through the use of this integrated tool, with the ability to more accurately evaluate equipment healthwithin the substation using a combination of historical data, maintenance records, and trending resultsanalysis and the SCE specific complex algorithm; SCE would have the ability to better determine theoverall health index of the equipment. Once an evaluation is completed and the equipment is deemedhealthy, and not at risk, there is an opportunity to offset the maintenance cycle or if proven unhealthythrough the analysis; appropriate steps would be taken to address any issues. Additionally, the technologysolutions report findings can be impactful to the replacement strategy.G. Proposed Options
1. Option No. 1: Do nothing and not move forward with a technology proposal. Currently, SC&M usesthe Infrastructure Replacement, IR program, MS Access databases and SAP’s Condition BasedMaintenance (CBM) programs to facilitate the maintenance effort. To not move forward with a newtechnology solution; means missed opportunity to address more critical asset first and missedopportunity to achieve possible reduction in O&M spend through extending maintenance cycles.
2. Option 2: COTS Solution – Perform an Industry Search and procure and implement the installation andconfiguration of a COTS tool. This includes taking time to analyze and document the requirements inmore detail and to go through the RFI/RFP process. It could require new interfaces, licensing of a newapplication, and additional ongoing maintenance cost with the introduction of a new application.
o Doble Risk Assessment Management, dobleARMS is a COT’s solution; an analytical toolinfused with Doble’s expertise in asset life cycle and associated risk. Providing the ability tomake more informed decisions between times of crisis and long range operational planning.
o Accenture solution – is a COT’s solution; advanced analytics applications with end to endanalytics solution with flexible apps, quickly designed and fully integrated into the workflowprocesses
3. Option 3: SAP solution; continuing with our existing Enterprise SAP solution and building on itsfoundation to extend functionality as required to enhance existing maintenance planning capabilitiesfor SC&M.
148
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
100%
0%0%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se50
0,00
0$
-$
-$
500,
000
$
-
$
-
$
50
0,00
0$
Ven
dor L
abor
50%
250,
000
$
-
$
-
$
25
0,00
0$
-$
-$
250,
000
$
S
CE
IT L
abor
50%
250,
000
$
-
$
-
$
25
0,00
0$
-$
-$
250,
000
$
S
I Lab
or65
%32
5,00
0$
-$
-$
325,
000
$
-
$
-
$
32
5,00
0$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n10
0%50
0,00
0$
-$
-$
500,
000
$
-
$-
$50
0,00
0$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l1,
825,
000
$
-$
-$
1,82
5,00
0$
-
$
-
$
1,
825,
000
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
40
,000
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
12
5,00
0$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
16
5,00
0$
Har
dwar
e50
%25
0,00
0$
-$
-$
250,
000
$
-
$
-
$
25
0,00
0$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s20
%10
0,00
0$
-$
-$
100,
000
$
-
$
-
$
10
0,00
0$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
350,
000
$
-
$
-
$
35
0,00
0$
-$
-$
350,
000
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t2,
175,
000
$
-$
-$
2,17
5,00
0$
-
$
-
$
2,
175,
000
$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
435,
000
$
-
$
-
$
43
5,00
0$
-$
-$
435,
000
$
TOTA
L2,
610,
000
$
-$
-$
2,61
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
2,
610,
000
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
-$
2,60
0,00
0$
2,
600,
000
$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Leve
rage
indu
stry
sta
ndar
d C
OTS
pro
duct
Inte
grat
e w
ith S
CE
Ent
erpr
ise
syst
ems
(SA
P E
AM
, CM
S, A
UD
)
Subs
tatio
n H
ealth
Ass
essm
ent
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
149
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000206
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2019
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
1,260
720
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
1,980
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software789
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Substation 3D Design
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Substation 3D Design
150
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Investment MemoSubstation 3D Design
Project
151
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 3)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameSubstation 3D Design
B. Initiative DescriptionCurrently, Substation Engineering designs are 2D, which are just lines on paper with very minimal notations.There is no meta data stored in the drawings that provide any valuable information such as features, attributesand more. Additionally due to the lack of integration, it is easy to make changes on one drawing and forget tomake the appropriate changes to the other affected drawings.
The goal of the Substation 3D Design project is to utilize a 3 Dimensional design versus a 2 Dimensional design.The 3D model will increase work efficiency, visualization and leverage the data collected to mitigate futureimpacts for Substation Construction and Infrastructure Replacement activities. The project will help SCEEngineers to efficiently create designs internally and review the designs received from contracted engineeringfirms. With additional standardization, the project will facilitate the communication of a design to seniorleadership and regulatory agencies and customers.
The 3D technology is another step forward to get away from paper drawings. By switching to a 3D CAD system,the engineer would no longer have just lines on paper, but instead would have blocks and features that arefilled with meta data about what exactly it is and why they’re using it. Through the development of associatinginformation, modifying one drawing would update other drawings with associated assets without requiring theadditional drawing to be opened. In a 3D environment, the designs and calculations would be on a correct scalethat will allow the engineers to make a better decision on clearance checks, and identify layout mistakes likebuilding a fence where equipment doors would open. It would also help reduce time in preparing material billsas everything will be associated with meta data, and each block would already know the material required for it,thus, the engineer could associate the SAP numbers with that material giving them a print of everything theyneeded for DM.
The proposed project will deliver a solution set that addresses the needs of the Substation Engineering groupand will help in the efficiency of future designs.
C. Business Capabilities MappedThe following Level 2 Business Capabilities are mapped for this effort :
1. Enterprise Asset Management – Asset Planning – Engineering Drawing2. Work Management – Work Planning – Graphic Design
D. Business Strategic AlignmentThe solution set is expected to implement a change in tools and process to facilitate the utilization of 3D versusa 2D CAD designs. The 3D design technology would augment and enhance SCE’s modular design and align withcommon design for our substations. The solution set is expected to be useful with visualization and utilization ofmeta data across various organizations. The whole idea with the 3 dimensional software is about the efficiencyand visualization of future project conceptualization.
152
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
E. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
The purpose of this project is to address inefficiencies inherent in the current work process. It is also possibleto address the technology conundrum by leveraging/updating SCE’s existing technology stack. This projectwill allow SCE substation designers and engineers to:
Enable visualizations for project conceptualization and drawing reviews.Eliminate the manual process and be able to see blocks that are filled with Meta data instead of justlines on a paper with no data values.Automatically update other drawings after one drawing is modified without having to open each ofthem separately to update them.The drawing scale would be more accurate in a 3D environment which will help with makingclearance checks or obstructions that may require additional work. For example, allowing users toidentify layout mistakes such as building a fence where equipment doors would open.Reduce time in preparing material bills. For example, each block will have the ability to determinematerial information with Meta data association.Create efficient designs with the ability to rotate 360 degrees, zoom in on the object to seephotorealistic images and quickly generate exploded views for technical illustrations.Integrate with other systems such as SAP and DM to avoid redundancy of data entry and increaseefficiency. E.g. Ability to associate the SAP numbers with material bills to allow users to print thematerial information required in Design Manager (DM).
By meeting these objectives, SCE will improve efficiencies and move towards a more dynamic and productivedesign process.F. Business Impact Assessment
The proposed solution will provide the business with new capability for visualization of project concepts. It willenable a rich content review with the executives and 3rd parties. This project will address the aforementionedissues that we identified in the Project Initiative Description section. While there are no anticipatedorganizational changes associated with this project, there will be some process changes associated with thisproject. These changes primarily will affect the tools and methodology for designing projects, projectcoordination and communication between SCE Senior Leadership, Substation Engineers, EngineeringContractors, and Field Personnel. It is expected these activities will be done by the current groups performingthem with no change in AORs among SCE organizations. Some anticipated business impacts include (not acomplete list):
For IT:o A new infrastructure may be requiredo Incremental cost/token in future years
For the Business Units (e.g. Substation Engineering)o Process change for Substation Engineers when creating new drawings/design for the new
substations and infrastructure replacement.o Impact the current business process of reviewing designs for Substation Engineering. For
example, Q&A review process of drawings received from a 3rd party engineering firm.
153
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
G. Technology/Automation Rationale
Technology will enable a broader realistic visualization and integration of tools to craft conceptual designs.Automating 2D manual paper drawing to a 3D drawing will provide a more dynamic view of the designs that canbe easily shared among all the stakeholders across the construction and design of the project lifecycle.
The solution set is expected to help with creating more efficient designs with a greater level of detail and getaway from paper drawings. The broader context of the visualization will allow engineers and managers toprovide a new perspective on progress.
H. Proposed Options
Three alternatives were considered for this project:
Alternative No.1: Do nothing and not move forward with a technology proposal. Continue with themanual work process and degradation of data quality. Currently, SC&M uses 2D designs with no Metadata stored in the drawings that provide valuable information such as features, attributes and nointegration to other systems. To not move forward with a new technology solution means missedopportunity to optimize the current work process and enable visualization of future substation projectconceptualization; and missed opportunity to enhance SCE’s modular design and align with commondesign for our substations to facilitate the communication of a design to senior leadership, regulatoryagencies and customers.
Alternative No.2: New COTS Expanding Portfolio, new COTS considered would likely be Bentley SystemsMicro station. Considered a more costly and complex option as this would require procuring newlicenses, creating a new maintenance support model, and build all new interfaces to incorporate a newtool.
Alternative No. 3: Leverage Existing Portfolio and Expand Capabilities (Recommended): Currently haveAutodesk in house. Develop integration with Autodesk InfraWorks with Autodesk Inventor. Considered alower cost, lower complexity model. This option is recommend to utilize existing Autodesk products as asolution for this project. The combination of Autodesk InfraWorks, Autodesk Inventor, and AutoCADElectrical will help generate all the electrical wiring drawings to create the engineering designs. Thisproject will be leveraging the enterprise licenses. SCE will continue the use of Autodesk design productsand functionalities to align with the existing tools currently in use including AutoCAD, AUD and Map 3D.
154
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
64%
36%
0%10
0%
CO
TS L
icen
se50
0,00
0$
-$
-$
319,
000
$
18
1,00
0$
-$
500,
000
$
V
endo
r Lab
or30
%15
0,00
0$
-$
-$
95,7
00$
54,3
00$
-$
150,
000
$
S
CE
IT L
abor
50%
250,
000
$
-
$
-
$
15
9,50
0$
90,5
00$
-$
250,
000
$
S
I Lab
or40
%20
0,00
0$
-$
-$
127,
600
$
72
,400
$
-
$
20
0,00
0$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n50
%25
0,00
0$
-$
-$
159,
500
$
90
,500
$-
$25
0,00
0$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l1,
350,
000
$
-$
-$
861,
300
$
48
8,70
0$
-$
1,35
0,00
0$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
26
,000
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
12
5,00
0$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
15
1,00
0$
Har
dwar
e50
%25
0,00
0$
-$
-$
159,
500
$
90
,500
$
-
$
25
0,00
0$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s10
%50
,000
$
-
$
-
$
31
,900
$
18
,100
$
-
$
50
,000
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.30
0,00
0$
-$
-$
191,
400
$
10
8,60
0$
-$
300,
000
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
650,
000
$
-$
-$
1,05
2,70
0$
59
7,30
0$
-$
1,65
0,00
0$
C
ontin
genc
y20
%33
0,00
0$
-$
-$
210,
540
$
11
9,46
0$
-$
330,
000
$
TOTA
L1,
980,
000
$
-$
-$
1,26
3,24
0$
71
6,76
0$
-
$
1,
980,
000
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
-$
1,26
0,00
0$
72
0,00
0$
1,
980,
000
$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Leve
rage
an
indu
stry
sta
ndar
d C
OTS
pro
duct
Inte
grat
e w
ith S
CE
Ent
erpr
ise
syst
ems
(SA
P E
AM
, CM
S, A
UD
)H
W e
stim
ate
conf
igur
ed fo
r spe
cial
ized
use
r pop
ulat
ion
Subs
tatio
n 3D
Des
ign
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
155
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000233
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2020
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
0
0
SCE $
1,000
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
1,000
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software791
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Electronic WO Package Automation (e-WOP)
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Electronic WO Package Automation (e-WOP
156
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Electronic Work OrderPackage (EWOP)
157
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(1 of 3)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Electronic Work Order Package (EWOP)B. Initiative Description
Electronic Work Order Package (EWOP) project will utilize a work management, a document managementsystem, and work flow allowing users to store, access, and update Capital Related Order (CRO) documentselectronically, utilizing new and existing systems. Phase 1 will move paper work order jackets to scannedimages stored in EDMRM and accessed through SAP to better track documents and reduce hold times. Phase 2will move work order jackets from scanned images to electronic formats from their source applications enablingreal or near real time status.C. Business Strategic Alignment
The EWOP project is in direct support of two OpX initiatives;Work Order Documentation RedesignT&D Work Order Management
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
EWOP will be delivered in two phases. Phase 1, delivered in 2015, reduced work order hold times byproviding a method to quickly recognize and reproduce missing work order jacket forms.Benefits included:Reducing the average number of work orders held in FAO with “Missing Requirements” status, indicating keydocumentation required to close the work order is missing or incomplete, by 50% from 1300 to 650 annuallyor lessReduce the average hold time of orders in the “Missing Requirements” category from 82 days to less than 40days thereby reducing closing times from an average of 3 months to 1.5 months thereby acceleratingunitization into account 101 and decreasing the risk of AFUDC ThrowbacksReduce the average monthly value of held orders (impact to be verified)Reduce annual cost associated with finding, copying, reproducing, missing work order jacket forms by anestimated to be as much as $300,000 per districtReduce annual vendor, scoping, and permitting costs associated with Structure Inventory Assessments by asmuch as 30% or 2 3 million per year. (Realization of benefits are in flight as new process matures)Phase 2 is expected to further accelerate work order unitization process and reduce costs associated withmissing forms. Extent of benefits from Phase 2 requires further analysis, however benefits will be gatheredaround the following areas:Reduce the time required to scan and save Work Order imagesReduce the costs associated with forms ordering, shipping, storingReduce risks associated with manual handling of boxed paperReducing the number of work order paper copies required to be held in district.Reduce the transport costs associated with offsite storageFurther improve our ability to track and manage WO information or details.
158
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
E. Business Impact Assessment
EWOP Phase 1 – Document Repository: The OU will have the capability to scan the WO Jacket throughoutits lifecycle to ensure completeness from beginning to end. Documents will be scanned into an electronicformat and accessible by various groups in SAP at the work order. Phase 1 includes
o Develop design folder structure in eDMRMo Design taxonomy and meta data as foundation for storage, scanning methodology, and Phase 2
integrated designo Develop SAP Business Work Space (BWS) functionality to intake scanned forms and load into
appropriate eDMRM folder(s)o BWS will allow existing documents to be stored electronically and linked to SAP Work Orders and
FLOCs providing a centralized searchable storage locationo Provide high speed scanners to quickly scan and store large work order jacket forms
EWOP Phase 2 – Electronic Formso Coordinate document consolidation and convert existing documents into a standardized file format;o Design electronic storage process to utilize eDMRM folder structure created in phase 1;o Existing and new systems will produce electronic documents to support the CRO work flow;o System interfaces will transfer documents according to designated work flows;o Key user groups will receive and provide electronic updates to documents;o Systems will be automatically updated based on user updates;o Leverage a fully functioning Document Management System (eDMRM);o CMS integration with Edison contractors; ando CMS enhancements to support a fully electronic CRO work flow.
Organizational – None
Processo EWOP Phase 1 was a foundational project to establish document repository and taxonomy to house
end state electronic Work Order Forms. Phase 01 provided immediate relief to the costly use ofcopying paper forms by allowing current forms to be scanned and stored in EDMRM through SAP’sBusiness Work Space (BWS) functionality. BWS will allow existing documents to be storedelectronically and linked to SAP Work Orders and FLOCs providing a centralized searchable storagelocation. Phase 01 will provide scan and store functionality with immediate benefits to bettermanage work order packages, structure designs, and right of way documents. The scan and storecapabilities included in phase 01 will improve the work order closure process by reducing workorder hold times and provide immediate cost reducing benefits by reducing SCE and contractor timespent tracking paper forms in the Work Management, Technical Planning and Land Management.
o EWOP Phase 2 – Electronic Forms: Planners will trigger electronic documents which willautomatically attach to an Electric Distribution Service Request (EDSR) work order. Thesedocuments may be read only or require updates by field personnel. Once field work is completeand field personnel update the documents using existing field tools, transmission of those updatesto back office systems should occur in near real time. In addition, by virtue of digitizing CRO relateddata field and utilizing work flow management, some CRO related documents may no longer berequired to support the work flow. Data would be passed and updated electronically.
o EWOP designed to support a critical process improvement needed under the Work OrderDocumentation Redesign OpEx initiatives
159
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
Phase 1: Ability for Districts to scan and store Work Order Jacket forms prior to and throughout theconstruction process to quickly identify and correct or replace missing documentation after workcompletionAbility for Technical Planning to scan and store Structure Inventory prior to and after work completion toavoid future vendor costsAbility for Land Management to scan Rights documents
Phase 2’s technology must achieve the ability to reduce the need to initiate work on a paper form.Must reduce the need to manually document information on paper forms, when the requiredinformation can be gathered and utilized electronically.Must enable work to flow to various participants in the work order process via electronic access, withoutrequiring information to be manually documented on paper to continue the workflow.Data must be stored for future access and reference to the specific work order that invoked the work.Needs to ensure customer, billing, asset, and location information are updated electronically accordingto the life cycle of the work order.
G. Proposed Options
Option 1 is to leverage existing SCE technology including SAP and EDRMR for Phase 1 and expand toinclude Design Manager, Consolidated Mobile Solution, and other applications in Phase 2Option2 would include an independent application to integrate with existing SCE technologyOption 3 Do Nothing
160
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
100%
0%0%
0%0%
100%
Pro
ject
Dur
atio
n20
00ho
urs
FTE
SC
E F
TE ($
70)
2.25
315,
000
$
31
5,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
315,
000
$
B
usin
ess
Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)0.
520
0,00
0$
200,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
20
0,00
0$
Tech
nica
l Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)0.
624
0,00
0$
240,
000
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$24
0,00
0$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l75
5,00
0$
755,
000
$
-
$
-$
-
$
-$
75
5,00
0$
Labo
r Sup
port
Cos
t4%
-$
12,6
00$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
12,6
00$
Har
dwar
e10
0200
100,
200
$-
$-
$-
$-
$10
0,20
0$
Em
bedd
ed C
OTS
Lic
ense
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.10
0,20
0$
100,
200
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
10
0,20
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t85
5,20
0$
855,
200
$
-$
-
$
-$
-
$85
5,20
0$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
171,
040
$
17
1,04
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
171,
040
$
TOTA
L R
EQU
EST
1,02
6,24
0$
1,
026,
240
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
026,
240
$Te
stim
ony *
1,00
0,00
0$
-$
-$
1,00
0,00
0$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Enh
ance
DM
to in
clud
e a
new
cap
abili
ty o
f tem
plat
e ba
sed
cost
ing
for c
onst
ruct
ion
and
maj
or p
roje
cts
Elec
tron
ic W
ork
Ord
er -
Phas
e 2
App
licat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
ject
Tota
l Cos
t of P
roje
ctFT
E E
stim
atio
n
161
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000234
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year630
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
630
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software792
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Fast Response Energy Storage
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Fast Response Energy Storage
162
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Fast Response EnergyStorage
163
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameFast Response Energy StorageB. Initiative DescriptionIn October 2013, the CPUC adopted an energy storage procurement framework and established an energy storagetarget for utility companies including SCE. The decision requires SCE to procure energy storage by 2020, withinstallations required no later than the end of 2024. The drivers for this initiative to be implemented by June 2016are as follows
1. The Fast Response deployment will provide basic functionalities towards the long term goal to complywith the CPUC Energy Storage Mandate
2. This deployment will provide an opportunity to use energy storage to mitigate distribution circuit impactsbefore start of the 2016 Distribution Planning cycle.
This first wave deployment includes procurement and installation of Energy Storage Systems between 5 – 10locations.
This project will deploy an energy storage solution that mitigates short term circuit impacts due to variable loadsand distributed energy resources (DERs). The following are the high level requirements:
1. Providing Network Connectivity to monitor the Energy Storage System via EMS/DMS.2. Provide EMS/Display for Grid Operators to monitor the system.3. Providing remote access to the system for SCE personnel to monitor and to do routine maintenance.4. Provide data historian for data collection and archiving.5. Allow limited and controlled remote access to external party (vendor) for the purpose of maintenance,
troubleshooting and warranty. C. Business Capabilities MappedThe following Business Capabilities are mapped for this effort :
1. Load Flow Management2. Power/Load Forecasting Analytics3. Power Integration Analytics (Integration Capacity Analytics)4. Device Management5. Asset Management
D. Desired Business Outcomes
Proactively integrate and manage Energy Storage Systems into electric grid operations toenhance grid reliability by implementing network infrastructure and leveraging SCE’sDistribution management system to operate the Energy Storage System.Position SCE to adapt and thrive as the utility industry changes through the use of connected,advanced technologies that will enable System Operators to determine whether the EnergyStorage System is acting as a load or a generation asset on the grid.Meet energy policy objectives while growing customer and shareholder value by increasingdistribution network capabilities through capital investments that align Energy Storage owners’economic interests with reliability interests in a framework that is fair to all SCE stakeholders
164
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(2 of 2)
E. Business Priorities & ConcernsThese are key priorities and concerns
Deploy an energy storage solution that mitigates short term circuit impacts due to variable loads anddistributed energy resources (DER’s)The desired outcome is that service reliability is maintained and that this is a cost effective mitigationstrategy.Deploy 5 – 10 systems on distribution circuits by June 1st, 2016 (before start of the 2016 DistributionPlanning cycle)The Energy storage solution should monitor and respond to circuit conditions, obey pre definedschedules and charge/discharge thresholds.
F. Business Strategic AlignmentAs renewable energy sources (Solar, Wind etc.) are finding higher penetration in the customer segments, SCEneeds to be prepared to have the electric grid respond to the sudden and frequent changes in distributedgeneration from these renewable sources. These are some long term alignment strategies
Fully integrated with SCE vision of the grid of the futureControl architecture and software application based on the Integrated Grid Project (IGP)Aligned with the current Grid Modernization effortFirst wave of Energy Storage deployment provides basic functionalities towards the long termgoal to comply with the Energy Storage Mandate
G. Identified Options There were three different options being explored:
Option 1
Implement the architecture currently being designed for IGP project. This architecture will not readyon time to deploy the Energy Storage system by June 2016.
Option 2 (Recommended)Integrate with existing IT infrastructure. This option leverages existing system infrastructure and willenable SCE to meet the proposed timeline.
Option 3Leverage System architecture that was implemented on the DESI 1 project. This is a pilot projectthat leverages a private Verizon Network and is not integrated with EMS/DMS thus providing nocapability for Grid Operations to monitor the Energy Storage System
165
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
100%
0%0%
0%0%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or19
5,00
0$
195,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
19
5,00
0$
SC
E IT
Lab
or18
0,00
0$
180,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
18
0,00
0$
SI L
abor
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n-
$
-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
375,
000
$
37
5,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
375,
000
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
15
,000
$
Ann
ual M
aint
enan
ce &
Sup
port
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
15,0
00$
Har
dwar
e15
0,00
0$
150,
000
$-
$-
$-
$-
$15
0,00
0$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s-
$
-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.15
0,00
0$
150,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
15
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t52
5,00
0$
525,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
52
5,00
0$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
105,
000
$10
5,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
105,
000
$
TOTA
L63
0,00
0$
630,
000
$-
$-
$-
$-
$63
0,00
0$
Test
imon
y*63
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
63
0,00
0$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.A
ssum
ptio
ns:
Con
trol a
nd d
ata
stor
age
syst
ems
for A
lham
bra
data
cen
ter
Ass
umes
ven
dor i
nsta
llatio
n an
d in
tegr
atio
n of
new
har
dwar
e to
the
cont
rol s
yste
ms.
Fast
Res
pons
e En
ergy
Sto
rage
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
166
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1. WITNESS: Glenn Haddox
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000076
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2017
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year1,200
330
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
1,530
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software712
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Transient Devices (HW for TSFT)
The following Level 2 Business Capabilities are mapped for this effort : 1. Enterprise Asset Management – Asset Planning – Engineering Drawing 2. Compliance Management – Compliance Assurance – Regulation Management
T&D’s current transient cyber assets (test technician end of life laptops E6430) that connect to BESCyber Assets are not positioned to meet the upcoming NERC CIP-010-2 R4 standards. This can potentially create a risk to the reliability of the BES and a reportable noncompliance of the NERC CIP Reliability Standards. To meet NERC CIP compliance, SC&M Test Technicians require a transient device to be used as Test Only Device (TOD) and training in the use of the device prior to performing work on BES Cyber Assets at NERC Impacted Facilities.
Transient Devices (HW for TSFT)
167
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Transient Device
168
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 3)SCE and Accenture Confidential
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameTransient Device – Secondary DeviceB. Initiative DescriptionOn July 1, 2016 NERC V5 CIP 007 6 R3.1 will be in effect imposing stringent requirements around MaliciousCode Prevention on BES (Bulk Electric System) Cyber Systems. This will bring into scope approximately 50 T&DNERC facilities and around 3,000 T&D managed Cyber Assets consisting mostly of protection relays.
On April 1, 2017 NERC CIP 010 2 R4 will be in effect imposing additional standards on transient cyber assets andremovable media as defined below:
Transient Cyber Asset:A Cyber Asset that (i) is capable of transmitting or transferring executable code, (ii) is notincluded in a BES Cyber System, (iii) is not a Protected Cyber Asset (PCA), and (iv) isdirectly connected (e.g., using Ethernet, serial, Universal Serial Bus, or wireless, includingnear field or Bluetooth communication) for 30 consecutive calendar days or less to a BESCyber Asset, a network within an ESP, or a PCA. Examples include, but are not limited to,Cyber Assets used for data transfer, vulnerability assessment, maintenance, or troubleshootingpurposes.
Removable Media:Storage media that (i) are not Cyber Assets, (ii) are capable of transferring executablecode, (iii) can be used to store, copy, move, or access data, and (iv) are directly connectedfor 30 consecutive calendar days or less to a BES Cyber Asset, a network within an ESP, ora Protected Cyber Asset. Examples include, but are not limited to, floppy disks, compactdisks, USB flash drives, external hard drives, and other flash memory cards/drives thatcontain nonvolatile memory.
To meet NERC CIP compliance, SCE’s approach is to provide SC&M Test Technicians a secondary device to beused as Test Only Device (TOD). Technicians will receive training in the use of the device prior to performingwork on BES Cyber Assets at NERC Impacted Facilities. These devices will be used during their daily jobresponsibilities of testing and maintaining substation assets.
T&D’s current transient cyber assets, Test Technician’s TOD, while recently deployed, are over three years oldand have reached end of life. These devices that connect to BES Cyber Assets are not positioned to meet theupcoming NERC CIP 010 2 R4 and pose an operation risk if not replaced. This can potentially create a risk to thereliability of the BES and a reportable noncompliance of the NERC CIP Reliability Standards.C. Business Strategic AlignmentThe following Level 2 Business Capabilities are mapped for this effort :
1. Enterprise Asset Management – Asset Planning – Engineering Drawing2. Compliance Management – Compliance Assurance – Regulation Management
The Transient Device would assist in achieving two business goals:Compliance:
Be compliant with no significant non compliance event.Be in compliance of the following CIP Reliability Standards:
169
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
While these are new compliance standards, non compliant events of a similar standards have resulted inpenalties ranging from 250k – 325K.
CIP 010 2 R4 Transient Cyber Asset Malicious Code April 1, 2017
CIP 010 2 Attachment 1 Section 1: Transient Cyber AssetManagement, Transient Cyber Asset Authorization,Software Vulnerability Mitigation, Introduction of MaliciousCode Mitigation, Unauthorized User Mitigation
April 1, 2017
CIP 010 2 Attachment 1 Section 3 : Removable MediaAuthorization, Malicious Code Mitigation April 1, 2017
Operational Excellence: ReliabilityProtecting our critical infrastructure with:
o No significant intrusion affecting critical infrastructure.o No malicious code introduction comprising critical infrastructure.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & BenefitsThe current short term solution utilizing existing Dell Laptops ensured compliance with mandated date of July1, 2016. As these laptops are over three years old, they need to be replaced in order to enable a long termsolution for operations and need to be deployed by mid Q1 2107 to ensure compliance with the April 1,2017 date and the reliability of our BES by mitigating the following risks;
Unauthorized access to BES Cyber System via Electronic Access Point by Transient DeviceExposure to Malicious Code on BES Cyber System/Assets by Transient DeviceUnauthorized users access to Transient DeviceDetection and prevention of malicious code propagation onto BES Cyber Systems
E. Business Impact AssessmentThe scope of this effort will impact nearly 200 users in the T&D Substation Construction & Maintenance (SC&M)Organization and IT Organization.
Test TechniciansTest SupervisorsTS&S (Technical Support & Strategy) Technical SpecialistTelecommPower Automation
The impacted users are required to utilized the transient devices to perform all work activities on over 3,000T&D managed BES Cyber Assets or associated Protected Cyber Assets (PCA):
InspectionsMaintenanceInstallationsRemovalsModifications
170
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
F. Technology/Automation RationaleSCE’s approach to ensure compliance is to deploy a device with primary and secondary technologicalcontrols as well as process and reporting controls. The device will be hardened with the followingattributes and policies set to deter, detect or prevent malicious code
All wireless is disabledAll Bluetooth is disabledAll USB ports are disabled for unauthorized mass storage devicesSet accounts for individual usersSet password policy per IT Cyber Security StandardAll non essential services are disabledSession logging enabled
o User/ Device informationo CRS (Clean Room Script) script execution timestampo Last connection time to a BCA,o Last connection to Admin network,o Anti virus/malware scan success/fail.
Email or internet capabilities are disabled.Only applications deemed necessary for test technician work process are installed.Device must never act as an Electronic Access Point (EAP) when connected to a BES Cyber Asset.Only one Ethernet connection is available on the device.Device can be connected to the SCE Admin network at any SCE location.Removal of Device before Clean Room Script is complete will make the Transient DeviceinoperableDevice is disabled and locked if detection of malware, virus or failure in cleaningLogs centrally stored to be analyzed by T&D personnelUsers can download and upload data and test results to appropriate systems (PSMP, TSFT, etc.)
G. Proposed OptionsThere are 3 options under considerations to fulfill the need for a Transient Device:
Option 1: Semi rugged Dell Laptops as secondary device with all required Test Technicianapplications and hardened to meet NERC CIP V5 and NERC CIP 010 2 R4.
Option 2: DUC (Doble Universal Controller) test data controller with all necessary Test Technicianapplications, hardened to NERC CIP standards ( CIP V5, CIP 010 2 R4), training and ongoing 24x7support
Option 3: Deploy a shared device(s) at the approximately 50 affected locations.
171
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
78%
22%
0%0%
0%10
0%P
roje
ct D
urat
ion
1000
hour
sFT
ES
CE
FTE
($70
)4
280,
000
$
21
9,24
0$
60,7
60$
-$
-$
-$
280,
000
$
B
usin
ess
Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)0
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tech
nica
l Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)0
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l28
0,00
0$
219,
240
$
60
,760
$
-
$
-$
-
$
280,
000
$
Labo
r Sup
port
Cos
t4%
-$
11,2
00$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
11,2
00$
Har
dwar
e1,
000,
000
$
783,
000
$
217,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
1,00
0,00
0$
Em
bedd
ed C
OTS
Lic
ense
-$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
-$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.1,
000,
000
$
783,
000
$
21
7,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
1,00
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
280,
000
$
1,00
2,24
0$
277,
760
$
-$
-
$
-$
1,28
0,00
0$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
256,
000
$
20
0,44
8$
55,5
52$
-$
-$
-$
256,
000
$
TOTA
L R
EQU
EST
1,53
6,00
0$
1,
202,
688
$
33
3,31
2$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
536,
000
$Te
stim
ony *
1,20
0,00
0$
330,
000
$
1,53
0,00
0$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Tran
sien
t Dev
ices
App
licat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
ject
Tota
l Cos
t of P
roje
ctFT
E E
stim
atio
n
172
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000083
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2020
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
0
1,000
SCE $
1,000
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,000
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software782
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
High-Z Impedance Fault Detection
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
High-Z Impedance Fault Detection
173
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
High Impedance FaultDetection Project
174
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
High Impedance Fault Detection ProjectB. Initiative Description
T&D is actively evaluating and piloting multiple high impedance fault detection technologies. Work in this spacebegan in June 2014, and is expected to conclude in December 2017.
One potential solution option is based on Spread Spectrum Time Domain Reflectometry (SSTDR) techniques.The SSTDR High Impedance Detector Project involves the development of an anomaly detection system. Thedetection system will have the ability to identify anomaly (high) impedances on electrical distribution lines andtheir corresponding location. In addition to refining the SSTDR techniques, this project includes thedevelopment of supporting subsystems and algorithms to bring a fully functional, stand alone, and fielddeployable detector to production.
By the end of 2017, T&D will be able to finalize their technology solution decision and proceed with systemwide implementation as a capital project.C. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
The system will provide:Reflection sequences of the circuit when it does not have any anomaly (high) impedancecondition and correlate that to a GIS map of the circuitRegularly send signals down the line and compare these reflections to the reflection map to lookfor anomalies
o Identification of a foreign object (e.g. tree branch, or Mylar balloon) contacting theconductor.
o Detection of failing conductor splices.o Detection of failing equipment.o Identification of a blown or failing primary fuse.o Detection of un authorized electrical tap.o Verification of conductor lengths and sizes.
DMS State Estimator future DER Integration improvements
D. Business Impact Assessment
Usability: LOW – The users will not be impacted by the change. The data needed will provide softwarealgorithms needed for the engineering departmentApplication: LOW The application will be low impact
175
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(2 of 2)
E. Technology/Automation Rationale
To support the SSTDR technology, additional subsystems are required for pre and post data processing. Thedetector system utilizes SCE’s existing Geographical Information System (GIS) database to retrieve circuittopology and device information. The system’s Preparation Module (pre operation) converts SCE’s GIS data intoa workable data structure, and a predictive SSTDR waveform, used by the Operation Module for signalcorrelation.
The Operation Module sends and receives signals; matching the received reflections to a known “good”impedance model (established during system initialization); eliminates known impedance mismatches; and, ifpresent, identifies the existence of impedance anomalies. Upon detection of an anomaly, the Reporting Moduleis responsible for identifying the circuit branch containing the anomaly; identifying the upstream (last knowngood point) and downstream devices containing the anomaly; and, calculating the distance between theanomaly and the upstream device.
The high impedance detector leverages SCE’s existing management systems (e.g. DMS or OMS) to provide GridOperations with a visual feedback of detected anomalies; and, to receive notifications of circuit topologychanges. Upon the completion of the detector’s process flow, when an anomaly is detected, the system willsend the anomaly’s location information generated by the Reporting Module to SCE’s management system(s) viaSupervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) communication paths. The expected result is that thedetector system will be able to identify high impedance fault within .02% accuracy and will identify the distanceof the fault to the nearest equipment or pole.
F. Proposed Options
1. Equipment sensing techniques using voltage and current monitoring.
2. Spread Spectrum Time Domain Reflectometry (SSTDR) technology
a. Commonly found in the Telecommunications and Aerospace industries, Spread SpectrumTime Domain Reflectometry (SSTDR) technology is typically used to find discontinuity incommunication and control systems lines. For this demonstration project, the detector willintroduce a low power SSTDR signal operating at a frequency between 2 MHz – 40 MHz ontoan energized electrical distribution conductor. The signal will propagate through thedistribution system creating signal reflections back to the origin at points where animpedance mismatch exists. Ultimately, the detector’s hardware will process thereflections, using the signal’s elapsed time to calculate the traveled distance, and type ofimpedance mismatch.
176
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%50
%50
%10
0%
CO
TS L
icen
se40
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
200,
000
$
20
0,00
0$
400,
000
$
V
endo
r Lab
or10
0%40
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
200,
000
$
20
0,00
0$
400,
000
$
S
CE
IT L
abor
50%
200,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
10
0,00
0$
100,
000
$
20
0,00
0$
SI L
abor
40%
160,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
80
,000
$
80
,000
$
16
0,00
0$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n40
%16
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
80,0
00$
80,0
00$
160,
000
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
1,32
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
-
$
66
0,00
0$
660,
000
$
1,
320,
000
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
30
,400
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
72
,000
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
10
2,40
0$
Har
dwar
e75
%30
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
150,
000
$
150,
000
$
300,
000
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
15%
60,0
00$
-$
-$
-$
30,0
00$
30,0
00$
60,0
00$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
360,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
18
0,00
0$
180,
000
$
36
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
680,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
840,
000
$
84
0,00
0$
1,68
0,00
0$
C
ontin
genc
y20
%33
6,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
168,
000
$
16
8,00
0$
336,
000
$
TOTA
L2,
016,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
1,00
8,00
0$
1,00
8,00
0$
2,01
6,00
0$
Test
imon
y *-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
000,
000
$
1,
000,
000
$
2,
000,
000
$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Pro
cure
indu
stry
sta
ndar
d im
peda
nce
algo
rithm
/sof
twar
eIn
tegr
ate
with
sta
ndar
d vi
sual
izat
ion
softw
are
Hig
h-Z
Impe
danc
e Fa
ult D
etec
tion
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
177
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000084
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2019
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
0
1,000
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
1,000
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades783
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Secure DNP Ver5 Support for EMS
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Secure DNP Ver5 Support for EMS
178
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 1)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Secure DNP Ver5 Supportfor EMS
179
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 1)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Secure DNP Ver5 Support for EMSB. Initiative Description
Secure DNP ver5 provides application level security for SCADA traffic between the Energy Management System(EMS) and substation assets. Currently SCE's compliance for EMS SACDA traffic relies on the "Serial Exemption"loophole of NERC. It is widely expected that NERC will fix this exemption in the next version of their standards.Long term, though SCE plans on implementing the Common Substation Platform (CSP) to provide security forSCADA traffic, there are several RTU only substation’s that would require this capability.
This project is in support of the NERC CIP Standard applicable to High and Medium Impact Bulk ElectricSystem (“BES”) Cyber Systems.
C. Business Strategic Alignment
o Operations Productivityo Use of Grid Datao Grid Infrastructureo IT Portfolio Optimization
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
Implementation of Secure DNP will enable to secure SCADA traffic as we migrate to an IP basedcommunication between substations and the control center.The BID will be in collaboration with Cyber Security to ensure this project is in compliance.
E. Proposed Options
1. Enable Secure DNP2. Continue with current Serial based communication.
180
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%10
0%0%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se10
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
100,
000
$
-
$
10
0,00
0$
Ven
dor L
abor
100%
100,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
10
0,00
0$
-$
100,
000
$
S
CE
IT L
abor
75%
75,0
00$
-$
-$
-$
75,0
00$
-$
75,0
00$
SI L
abor
0%-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
25%
25,0
00$
-$
-$
-$
25,0
00$
-$
25,0
00$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l30
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
300,
000
$
-
$
30
0,00
0$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
8,
000
$
Ann
ual M
aint
enan
ce &
Sup
port
-$
18,0
00$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
26,0
00$
Har
dwar
e50
0%50
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
500,
000
$
-$
500,
000
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
25%
25,0
00$
-$
-$
-$
25,0
00$
-$
25,0
00$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
525,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
52
5,00
0$
-$
525,
000
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t82
5,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
825,
000
$
-
$
82
5,00
0$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
165,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
16
5,00
0$
-$
165,
000
$
TOTA
L99
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
990,
000
$
-$
990,
000
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
-$
-$
1,00
0,00
0$
-$
1,00
0,00
0$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Ann
ual m
aint
enan
ce c
over
s lic
ense
s on
ly.
Har
dwar
e co
sts
incl
udes
5-y
ear m
aint
enan
ce.
Doe
s no
t inc
lude
refre
sh.
Pro
cure
cer
tific
ate
licen
seIn
tegr
ate
with
fiel
d de
vice
sC
ompl
y w
ith N
ER
C/C
IP s
tand
ards
Secu
re D
NP
Ver5
Sup
port
for E
MS
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
181
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000086
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2017
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
2,000
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,000
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades785
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Grid Management Dashboards
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
Grid Management Dashboards
182
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Grid Ops ManagementDashboard & Reporting
Phase 3
183
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Grid Ops Management Dashboard & Reporting Phase 3B. Initiative Description
Phase 3 of the Grid Ops Management Reporting / Dashboard requirements will provide Grid Ops with theautomation and integration of key data elements for reporting and planning purposes. To implement theserequirements, data from various sources needs to be integrated in a single data warehouse platform. Primarily,there are needs for integrating OMS (Outage Management system) data with data from Telogis, GIS, SAP, ORL,and CMS. One of the key objectives of the project is to reduce the considerable manual effort for Grid Ops toproduce these reports on a frequent and timely basis.
The Grid Ops Phase 3 Reporting and Analytics requirements can be broadly categorized as below:
Resource Utilization view – To visualize the capacity utilization of resources in each sector along withthe work, to enable better resource planningEnd to end outage view – To visualize and measure trouble men and crew effectiveness by breakingdown trouble men dispatching, working and traveling times for outagesWork Management Reporting – Reporting and visualization to monitor planned Grid Ops work. This iscurrently being maintained in the SORL and ORL applicationsSector, Region and Substation Metrics – Automated reporting of metrics for Safety, compliancetrainings, overtime pay and financial metrics(capital versus O&M) by sector, region and substationsIntegrated work plan for MPO projects by sector– This is currently being done manually in the ScheduleCost Management(SCMT) tool
The earlier phases of Grid Ops Management reporting, Phase 1 and 2 are already implemented or in progress:Phase 1: Display Existing Reports (Manu matic dashboard) in Grid Ops Control Rooms & PIV3 monitor –ImplementedPhase 2 – Create new BOBJ dashboard using OMS data to replace the current iDashboard – In progress
C. Business Strategic Alignment
Having the management reporting and visualization will help to enable long term efficiency through automationof manual work, and improved outage monitoring and management
Aligning the Grid Ops analytics needs with the SCE IT EBI (Enterprise Business Intelligence) framework,whose principles include:
Improve the accuracy, integrity, accessibility and security of information assetsEnsure current, complete and consistent information to enable fact based business decisionsIdentify information which improves operational efficiency, promotes transparency and enablesbusiness insight
184
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
Having the Grid Ops Management Reports automated and available will help T&D Grid Ops achieve:
Operational effectiveness Better decision making during emergency situations to enable fasterresponse timeResource planning – Moving resources from an area with additional resources to area whereresources are needed. Also the day to day monitoring and of resource allocation and resourceeffectiveness.Management strategies – To mitigate high level emergencies situation by being able to visualize andmonitor overall capacity utilization in each SCE sectorSingle integrated platform for OMS and related systems’ data – Will enable ease ofreporting/visualization and self service for Grid Ops businessEnd to End view of data for business These reports will provide metrics and visibility for all the workin the system as well as resource availability and how the resources are performing.
E. Business Impact Assessment
Since the requirements are around reporting and visualization and the reports are expected to use a datawarehousing platform, this implementation of this project will have a relatively low impact to day to dayoperational activities that Grid Ops users carry out.The users will likely need to be trained to use the new reporting tools to be able view the reports and beable to perform self service reporting using the data warehouse.
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
T&D Grid Ops currently performs a significant amount of manual work to meet their reporting and analyticsneeds, pulling in data from different systems and compiling it manually.There is a need to have a single platform which can integrate data from outage management and associatedsystems and make it available for reporting.This outage data warehouse will provide the foundational capability for future analytics needs within GridOps.IT will be able to better manage an integrated data warehouse using the proposed SCE Enterprise Analyticsplatform.
G. Proposed Options
Option 1: Use the OMS Oracle Exadata environment in combination with the SAP Business Objectsenvironment to enable these reporting and visualization needs.
Option 2 [RECOMMENDED]: Create an outage data warehouse on the new Enterprise AnalyticsHANA/Hadoop platform. Integrate related data from other applications with the OMS data, and make itavailable for reporting using SCE Enterprise reporting tools, such as Business Objects.
185
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%10
0%0%
0%0%
100%
Pro
ject
Dur
atio
n20
00ho
urs
FTE
SC
E F
TE ($
70)
570
0,00
0$
-$
700,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
70
0,00
0$
Bus
ines
s C
onsu
ltant
s ($
200)
140
0,00
0$
-$
400,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
40
0,00
0$
Tech
nica
l Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)1
400,
000
$
-
$40
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
400,
000
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
1,50
0,00
0$
-
$
1,50
0,00
0$
-
$
-$
-
$
1,50
0,00
0$
Labo
r Sup
port
Cos
t4%
-$
28,0
00$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
28,0
00$
Har
dwar
e10
0,00
0$
-$
100,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
10
0,00
0$
Em
bedd
ed C
OTS
Lic
ense
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s50
,000
$-
$50
,000
$-
$-
$-
$50
,000
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.15
0,00
0$
-$
150,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
15
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
650,
000
$
-$
1,
650,
000
$
-
$
-$
-
$1,
650,
000
$C
ontin
genc
y20
%33
0,00
0$
-$
330,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
33
0,00
0$
TOTA
L R
EQU
EST
1,98
0,00
0$
-
$
1,
980,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
980,
000
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
2,00
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
2,00
0,00
0$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Leve
rage
s ex
istin
g S
CE
ent
erpr
ise
repo
rting
tool
sS
ome
inte
rface
dev
elop
men
t req
uire
d
Grid
Man
agem
ent D
ashb
oard
s
App
licat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
ject
Tota
l Cos
t of P
roje
ctFT
E E
stim
atio
n
186
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1. WITNESS: Tim Boucher
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000090
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2019
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
1,000
1,000
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,000
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades786
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
PSMP 2.0
See Testimony.
See Testimony.
PSMP 2.0
187
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
PSMP 2.0 Apparatus
188
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 3)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
PSMP 2.0 (Apparatus)B. Initiative Description
The PSMP (Protection System Maintenance Program) program for the maintenance of all Protection System, asrequired by NERC PRC 005 2, would need to incorporate Distribution Apparatus users and new asset type aspart of Grid Modernization (new assets expected to be mostly automatic re closers and remote interrupterswitches).
The current interfaces with PSMP solution (Doble Protection Suite and Protection Web), SAP and Aspen wouldbe modified to add the Apparatus users and asset type allowing use of test plans, capturing test results,documentation and reporting against those assets.C. Business Strategic Alignment
The following Level 1 Business Capabilities are mapped for this effort :1. Enterprise Asset Management – Asset Planning2. Compliance Management – Compliance Assurance – Regulation Management
The proposed solution would ensure reliability of our BES and mitigate the risk of non compliance torequirements of NERC PRC 005 2:
R1. Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider shall establish a Protection SystemMaintenance Program (PSMP) for its Protection Systems.
The PSMP shall:1.1. Identify which maintenance method (time based, performance based per PRC 005Attachment A, or a combination) is used to address each Protection System ComponentType. All batteries associated with the station dc supply Component Type of a ProtectionSystem shall be included in a time based program as described in Table 1 4 and Table 3.
1.2. Include the applicable monitored Component attributes applied to each Protection SystemComponent Type consistent with the maintenance intervals specified in Tables 1 1 through 1 5, Table 2,and Table 3 where monitoring is used to extend the maintenance intervals beyond those specified forunmonitored Protection System Components.
R2. Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider that uses performance basedmaintenance intervals in its PSMP shall follow the procedure established in PRC 005 Attachment A to establishand maintain its performance based intervals.
R3. Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider that utilizes time basedmaintenance program(s) shall maintain its Protection System Components that are included within the timebased maintenance program in accordance with the minimum maintenance activities and maximummaintenance intervals prescribed.
189
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
R4. Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider that utilizes performance basedmaintenance program(s) in accordance with Requirement R2 shall implement and follow its PSMP for itsProtection System Components that are included within the performance based program(s).
R5. Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider shall demonstrate efforts to correctidentified Unresolved Maintenance Issues.D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
The integration of Aspen, SAP, and PSMP solution systems with the Apparatus asset type will effectivelymanage the PSMP process from initiation to completion. This will ensure that Distribution Apparatus isprepared to be in compliance with NERC PRC 005 2.
PSMP 2.0 solution will ensure Distribution Apparatus will have available metrics to manage all BES and nonBES assets and produce the necessary documentation and traceability for auditing.
E. Business Impact Assessment
The solution set would impact the work management process for users in the T&D Apparatus Division:Distribution Apparatus ForemenDistribution Apparatus TechniciansTS&S (Technical Support & Strategy) Technical Specialist
The impacted users are required to utilized the solution set to perform all work activities on T&D managed BESCyber Assets or associated Protected Cyber Assets (PCA):
InspectionsMaintenanceInstallationsRemovalsModifications
190
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
• Improve accuracy, security, and ensure the entire process from initiation to completion can be viewed• Establish and/or verify that all required assets that need to be tested are contained in one of SCE’s asset
repositories.• Migrate existing Protest data to a solution set that supports PRC 005 2.• Application interface between Aspen, SAP, and Solution Set.• Results will be uploaded via the solution set, then specified data will be synced with SAP.• Verify the ability to proactively schedule all required testing within the required frequency of testing in order
to be in compliance.• Controlled centralized repository to place completed as left settings for NERC PRC 005 2 compliance audits;
retain all historical data for a minimum of 30 years.• Verify that a well documented maintenance program exists that performs all required testing of the
protection system components at the required intervals and frequencies specified in NERC and otherstandards.
• Establish and/or verify that in the case of failure of a test, corrective measures are initiated and tracked toreplace or repair the faulty components as needed.
• Establish the ability to generate reports to show that all required PSMP components are in compliance perthe required standards.
G. Proposed Options
The following options are under consideration for the solution set:• Option 1: Do nothing and continue use of legacy application, Protest. Does not support ETO initiative of
reducing footprint. Believe ProTest will not support all moving forward needs. Costs to modify and/orupgrade expected to be significant.
• Option 2: Pursue other 3rd party COTS solution with same functionalities as PSMP. Considered highest costand complexity option. Would require new licensing, new maintenance agreements, configuration ofapplications to integrate and new interfaces. This option not in alignment with ETO direction of reducingtechnology footprint.
• Option 3: Modify PSMP and interface with SAP, Aspen to accommodate Apparatus users and asset type.
Considered optimal approach as PSMP is an industry leader. Also, PSMP is already an in houseapplication.
191
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
50%
50%
0%10
0%P
roje
ct D
urat
ion
2000
hour
sFT
ES
CE
FTE
($70
)4
560,
000
$
-
$
-
$
28
0,00
0$
280,
000
$
-
$
56
0,00
0$
Bus
ines
s C
onsu
ltant
s ($
200)
140
0,00
0$
-$
-$
200,
000
$
20
0,00
0$
-$
400,
000
$
Te
chni
cal C
onsu
ltant
s ($
200)
140
0,00
0$
-$
-$
200,
000
$20
0,00
0$
-$
400,
000
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
1,36
0,00
0$
-
$
-$
68
0,00
0$
680,
000
$
-
$
1,36
0,00
0$
Labo
r Sup
port
Cos
t4%
-$
22,4
00$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
22,4
00$
Har
dwar
e31
0,00
0$
-$
-$
155,
000
$
155,
000
$
-$
310,
000
$E
mbe
dded
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s-
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
310,
000
$
-
$
-
$
15
5,00
0$
155,
000
$
-
$
31
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
670,
000
$
-$
-
$
835,
000
$
835,
000
$
-$
1,67
0,00
0$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
334,
000
$
-
$
-
$
16
7,00
0$
167,
000
$
-
$
33
4,00
0$
TOTA
L R
EQU
EST
2,00
4,00
0$
-
$
-
$
1,
002,
000
$
1,
002,
000
$
-
$
2,
004,
000
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
-$
1,00
0,00
0$
1,00
0,00
0$
2,00
0,00
0$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Ass
umes
no
sign
ifica
nt c
usto
miz
atio
n re
quire
d.
Ass
umes
no
new
lice
nsin
g, w
ill b
e ab
le to
util
ize
exis
ting
ente
rpris
e lic
ense
Ass
umes
any
new
requ
irem
ents
to a
ddre
ss D
istri
butio
n A
ppar
atus
rela
ted
to P
RC
005
-02
can
be a
ddre
ssed
with
in S
AP
/AS
PE
N/P
SM
P c
onfig
urat
ion.
A
ssum
es o
nce
impl
emen
ted,
dep
loye
d an
d st
abili
zed,
SC
E c
an d
ecom
mis
sion
Pro
Test
. PSM
P 2.
0
App
licat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
ject
Tota
l Cos
t of P
roje
ctFT
E E
stim
atio
n
192
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Power Supply Software Projects
193
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CAPITAL WORKPAPERS - ITSouthern California Edison Company
OU SUMMARY, BY WITNESS, BY EXHIBIT(Nominal $000)
Forecast Capital Expenditures
TotalTestimony DescriptionItem
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
12,225 12,440 14,200 8,000 5,000 51,8651 Joanne Tran
SCE-04, Vol. 02 12,225 12,440 14,200 8,000 5,000 51,8651.1
2,185 0 0 0 0 2,185CIT-00-SD-PM-0001481.1.1
0 0 500 1,000 1,000 2,500CIT-00-DM-DM-0000791.1.2
0 0 2,000 2,000 0 4,000CIT-00-DM-DM-0000781.1.3
0 3,000 3,500 1,000 0 7,500CIT-00-DM-DM-0000421.1.4
0 0 1,200 0 0 1,200CIT-00-DM-DM-0000281.1.5
400 1,570 600 0 0 2,570CIT-00-SD-PM-0002301.1.6
0 3,000 2,400 0 0 5,400CIT-00-SD-PM-0002261.1.7
3,750 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 19,750CIT-00-SD-PM-0002251.1.8
2,590 870 0 0 0 3,460CIT-00-SD-PM-0001821.1.9
200 0 0 0 0 200CIT-00-SD-PM-0001621.1.10
250 0 0 0 0 250CIT-00-SD-PM-0001491.1.11
2,850 0 0 0 0 2,850CIT-00-SD-PM-0001121.1.12
194
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CAPITAL WORKPAPERS - ITSouthern California Edison Company
OU SUMMARY, BY WITNESS, BY EXHIBIT(Nominal $000)
Forecast Capital Expenditures
TotalTestimony DescriptionItem
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
1,000 4,000 4,000 3,000 3,500 15,5001 Timothy Condit
SCE-04, Vol. 02 1,000 4,000 4,000 3,000 3,500 15,5001.1
0 1,000 2,000 1,500 1,000 5,500CIT-00-SD-PM-0002281.1.1
1,000 3,000 2,000 1,500 2,500 10,000CIT-00-SD-PM-0002271.1.2
195
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Generation Automation Upgrade & Control Systems
Refresh
196
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
1. WITNESS: Timothy Condit
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000227
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: Specific Blanket
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year1,000
3,000
2,000
1,500
SCE $
2,500
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
10,000
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software800
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
The control systems at the Hydro facilities have historically been sourced from multiple vendors andlack of equipment standardization has caused problems with inter-operability between the different Hydro operating regions and maintainability as components approach the end of their life-cycle. SCE’s direction for future plant control systems is the standardization of equipment and software from a single vendor; part of which has already been completed.
This project continues the Automation standardization efforts which includes implementation of enhanced business capabilities and replacement of existing automation systems as they become obsolete. The automation project will deploy advanced data archiving, monitoring, reporting, and remote diagnostics with secure, NERC Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) compliant software and servers for viewing of Ovation screens, data trending and reporting on the administration network. This project is driven by three business needs: (1) standardization of equipment, (2) replacement of aged equipment in use, and (3) addition of new equipment to those areas not automated which will allow for remote monitoring and control of Hydro facilities.
Performing the Automation upgrade will add additional business capabilities to SCE’s Hydro facilities, which include: (1) Enhancing the responsiveness of the Big Creek plant to CAISO control signals by moving existing custom-developed code into the control systems. This will enable Big Creek to offer more capacity into the CAISO regulation market, which will benefit the integration of renewable generation into SCE’s grid, (2) Upgrading the control systems at Big Creek to avoid generator rough loading zones (i.e. output ranges where the mechanical construction of the generating unit causes excessive vibration) and (3) Providing a common test environment and enabling the interoperability of the control systems in the different hydro operating regions to facilitate data exchange and preparedness for enhanced disaster recovery capabilities between the regions. Upgrades to the existing Automation system will enable Hydro to meet mandates from
Generation Automation Upgrade & Control Systems Refresh
197
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
FERC and other governmental entities to monitor water release capabilities and also maintain dam surveillance. The overall benefit will be increased water control, system reliability, and regulatory compliance. The Dam sites are important because they are points of mandated FERC Instream Releases critical to FERC license compliance.
198
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
10%
30%
20%
15%
25%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se99
5,00
0$
99,5
00$
298,
500
$
19
9,00
0$
149,
250
$
24
8,75
0$
995,
000
$
V
endo
r Lab
or15
0%1,
492,
500
$
149,
250
$
44
7,75
0$
298,
500
$
22
3,87
5$
373,
125
$
1,
492,
500
$
SC
E IT
Lab
or90
%89
5,50
0$
89,5
50$
268,
650
$
17
9,10
0$
134,
325
$
22
3,87
5$
895,
500
$
S
I Lab
or25
%24
8,75
0$
24,8
75$
74,6
25$
49,7
50$
37,3
13$
62,1
88$
248,
750
$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
60%
597,
000
$
59
,700
$17
9,10
0$
119,
400
$
89
,550
$14
9,25
0$
597,
000
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
4,22
8,75
0$
42
2,87
5$
1,26
8,62
5$
84
5,75
0$
634,
313
$
1,
057,
188
$
4,22
8,75
0$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
11
9,40
0$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
11
9,40
0$
Har
dwar
e40
0%3,
980,
000
$
398,
000
$
1,19
4,00
0$
796,
000
$
59
7,00
0$
99
5,00
0$
3,
980,
000
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
15%
149,
250
$
14
,925
$
44
,775
$
29
,850
$
22
,388
$
37
,313
$
14
9,25
0$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
4,12
9,25
0$
41
2,92
5$
1,23
8,77
5$
82
5,85
0$
619,
388
$
1,
032,
313
$
4,12
9,25
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t8,
358,
000
$
835,
800
$
2,
507,
400
$
1,67
1,60
0$
1,
253,
700
$
2,08
9,50
0$
8,
358,
000
$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
1,67
1,60
0$
16
7,16
0$
501,
480
$
33
4,32
0$
250,
740
$
41
7,90
0$
1,67
1,60
0$
TOTA
L10
,029
,600
$
1,
002,
960
$
3,
008,
880
$
2,
005,
920
$
1,50
4,44
0$
2,50
7,40
0$
10,0
29,6
00$
Test
imon
y*1,
000,
000
$
3,00
0,00
0$
2,
000,
000
$
1,50
0,00
0$
2,
500,
000
$
10,0
00,0
00$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Cat
alin
a P
roce
ss A
utom
atio
n im
prov
emen
ts w
ill b
e no
t be
incl
uded
in th
is s
cope
Em
erso
n O
vatio
n w
ill c
ontin
ue a
s st
anda
rd fo
r all
refre
sh a
nd re
trofit
wor
k on
an
oppo
runi
ty b
asis
Gen
erat
ion
will
be
a be
nefic
iary
of t
elec
omm
unic
atio
n in
frast
ruct
ure
impr
ovem
ents
for G
rid M
oder
niza
tion
(par
ticul
arly
Hyd
ro)
Net
wor
k di
vers
ity a
nd c
apac
ity w
ill b
e su
ffici
ent f
or d
eplo
ymen
t of c
omm
on s
ervi
ces
rem
ote
from
gen
erat
ion
equi
pmen
tS
CE
's U
tility
Ow
ned
Gen
erat
ion
(UO
G) f
ootp
rint w
ill n
ot s
igni
fican
tly c
hang
e in
term
s of
meg
awat
t out
put c
apab
ility
Cor
e co
ntro
l (di
spat
ch) l
ocat
ions
will
rem
ain
as B
ig C
reek
Dis
patc
h an
d G
as/S
olar
at M
ount
ain
Vie
wH
ighe
r wei
ghtin
g th
an c
onve
ntio
nal I
T pr
ojec
ts fo
r har
dwar
e
Gen
erat
ion
Aut
omat
ion
Upg
rade
& C
ontr
ol S
yste
ms
Ref
resh
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
199
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Dam Monitoring and Surveillance
200
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
1. WITNESS: Timothy Condit
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000228
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2020
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
1,000
2,000
1,500
SCE $
1,000
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
5,500
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software801
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Hydro operates and maintains 22 dams considered by FERC to be large and/or high-hazard dams, and many are in mountainous terrain at elevations over 7,000 feet above sea level. These locations are often remote and difficult places to work. SCE’s dams are under FERC jurisdiction and FERC has an ongoing effort to increase the safety of dams across the US by improving the monitoring of the dams and by improving the dams’ ability to withstand natural disasters, including seismic events (earthquakes) and severe storms. Several of our dams, especially in the Eastern Hydro region, are both high-risk and time-sensitive. Time-sensitive means there is not enough time to notify emergency services in case of a dam failure with sufficient lead time to evacuate downstream towns. SCE monitors its dams through remote sensors that measure water levels and water flows. When a sensor returns an unexpected or abnormal reading (which frequently occurs), an operator must travel to the dam to perform a visual inspect. Often the travel time required can exceed two hours, which in an emergency condition is not adequate.
This project captures the IT components of the Dam Monitoring and Surveillance (e.g. cameras andcommunications equipment) Project. The project scope at each dam will be similar and includes thepurchase and installation of cameras and communications infrastructure. Cameras require the ability to capture periodic still images (e.g. 5 frames per minute) and remotely capture a still image on demand (sometimes infrared vision will be required to capture images at night or in snowy conditions. Cameras and communications equipment must remain operable in remote areas and under harsh weather conditions. In addition, not all dams have electric power and necessary communications infrastructure so this will be provided via solar and/or wind generation and satellite and/or microwave communications. Installation will occur according to the risk priority assigned to each dam and some installations may span multiple years (i.e., project may commence in the fall ofthe first year and conclude in the second).
SCE’s dams are under FERC jurisdiction and FERC has an ongoing effort to increase the safety of
Dam Monitoring and Surveillance
201
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
dams across the US through improved monitoring and improvements to a dams’ ability to withstand natural disasters, including seismic events (earthquakes) and severe storms. The primary benefit for this project is improved response time to a pending or developing dam failure by adding visual surveillance capabilities to high-risk dams, and to remove the need to send operations personnel to perform visual inspections when abnormal sensor readings are received.
202
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%18
%36
%28
%18
%10
0%
CO
TS L
icen
se49
9,00
0$
-$
89,8
20$
179,
640
$
13
9,72
0$
89,8
20$
499,
000
$
V
endo
r Lab
or20
0%99
8,00
0$
-$
179,
640
$
35
9,28
0$
279,
440
$
17
9,64
0$
998,
000
$
S
CE
IT L
abor
100%
499,
000
$
-
$
89
,820
$
17
9,64
0$
139,
720
$
89
,820
$
49
9,00
0$
SI L
abor
15%
74,8
50$
-$
13,4
73$
26,9
46$
20,9
58$
13,4
73$
74,8
50$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n15
%74
,850
$
-
$13
,473
$26
,946
$
20
,958
$13
,473
$74
,850
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
2,14
5,70
0$
-
$
38
6,22
6$
772,
452
$
60
0,79
6$
386,
226
$
2,
145,
700
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
62
,874
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
62
,874
$
Har
dwar
e47
5%2,
370,
250
$
-$
426,
645
$
853,
290
$
66
3,67
0$
42
6,64
5$
2,
370,
250
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
15%
74,8
50$
-$
13,4
73$
26,9
46$
20,9
58$
13,4
73$
74,8
50$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
2,44
5,10
0$
-
$
44
0,11
8$
880,
236
$
68
4,62
8$
440,
118
$
2,
445,
100
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t4,
590,
800
$
-$
826,
344
$
1,
652,
688
$
1,28
5,42
4$
82
6,34
4$
4,59
0,80
0$
C
ontin
genc
y20
%91
8,16
0$
-$
165,
269
$
33
0,53
8$
257,
085
$
16
5,26
9$
918,
160
$
TOTA
L5,
508,
960
$
-$
991,
613
$1,
983,
226
$
1,54
2,50
9$
991,
613
$5,
508,
960
$Te
stim
ony*
-$
1,00
0,00
0$
2,
000,
000
$
1,50
0,00
0$
1,
000,
000
$
5,50
0,00
0$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Alte
rnat
ive
tech
nolo
gies
suc
h as
dro
ne b
ased
sur
veill
ance
will
not
real
ize
unan
ticia
pted
adv
ance
s fro
m b
oth
tech
nolo
gy a
nd re
gula
tory
per
spec
tives
No
tele
com
mun
catio
n ca
pabi
lity
will
be
intro
duce
d pr
ior t
o 20
20 a
llow
ing
for m
ore
cost
effe
ctiv
e de
ploy
men
t int
o re
mot
e an
d m
inm
ally
pop
ulat
ed a
reas
Per
mitt
ing
and
regu
lato
ry la
ndsc
ape
will
not
intro
duce
new
cha
lleng
es fo
r dep
oloy
ing
infra
stru
ctur
e in
Nat
iona
l For
est a
nd W
ilder
ness
Are
as (f
orm
al la
nd u
se d
esig
natio
ns)
Tele
com
mun
catio
ns in
frast
ruct
ure
will
be
a m
ix o
f iD
irect
sat
ellit
e (S
CE
sta
ndar
d), m
icro
wav
e, a
nd o
ptic
al fi
ber t
o es
tabl
ish
netw
ork
core
to re
mot
e si
tes
Ext
endi
ng th
e ne
twor
k fro
m c
ore
tele
com
mun
icat
ions
infra
stru
ctur
e w
ill b
e do
ne w
ith w
irele
ss ra
dios
Fiel
d A
rea
Net
wor
k (F
AN
) Ini
tiativ
e w
ill o
ffer l
ittle
ben
efit
for t
hese
rem
ote
and
spar
sely
pop
ulat
ed a
reas
FER
C o
r Cal
iforn
ia D
ivis
ion
of S
afet
y of
Dam
s (D
SO
D) w
ill n
ot in
trodu
ce n
ew re
quire
men
ts o
r dem
ands
rela
tive
to re
gula
tory
com
plia
nce
for E
mer
genc
y-A
ctio
n-P
lan
(EA
P) a
nd T
ime-
to-R
espo
nd s
ensi
Dam
Mon
itorin
g an
d Su
rvei
llanc
e
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
203
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CAISO Market Enhancements Program (IMEP)
204
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
50
100
150
200
250
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 7337
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000162
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 5/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year200
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
200
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software758
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
IMEP CAISO Market Enhancements (2015)
See workpaper for details
See workpaper for details
IMEP CAISO Market Enhancements (2015)
205
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
3,6003,6503,7003,7503,8003,8503,9003,9504,0004,050
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000225
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: Specific Blanket
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year3,750
4,000
4,000
4,000
SCE $
4,000
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
19,750
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software755
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
CAISO Market Enhancements (2016-2017)
The objective of the CAISO Market Enhancements 2016-2017 project is to enhance existing systems and processes to implement CAISO 2014-2017 market initiatives in order to meet SCE’s CAISO Scheduling Coordinator obligations. CAISO has several ongoing enhancement projects that are scheduled to be implemented during 2016-2017.
This project will allow SCE to be in compliance with CAISO MRTU market changes between 2016 through 2017.
CAISO Market Enhancements (2016-2017)
206
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
IMEP 2017 2020
207
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 3)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameIMEP 2017 2020B. Initiative Description
IMEP 2017 2020 is the ISOMarket Enhancement Project from 2017 2020. IMEP 2017 2020will implementthe market changes required by CAISO during 2017 2020 timeframe. The objective of the IMEP 20172020 project is to enhance existing systems and processes to implement CAISO 2017 through 2020initiatives.
SCE is required to implement themarket design enhancements in order tomaintain regulatory complianceas part of our CAISO Scheduling Coordinator obligations. The California Independent System Operator(CAISO) is the entity that manages the California high voltage electricity grid. CAISO also operates variousmarkets for energy and ancillary services.
SCE is also required to bid all our generation into the CAISO markets and buy our entire load from theCAISO markets. SCE transacts in the CAISO market on a 24/7/365 basis. The CAISO process for marketenhancements starts with the policy change proposals and other proposed market enhancements. Theseproposals go through the CAISO market design process, in which SCE is a stakeholder. This processincludes the design of enhancements to the markets, including products and services provided by CAISO.
Once the CAISO board approves the policy change proposals, CAISO will finalize the external businessrequirements and the technical specifications for the market participants to implement the marketenhancement initiative. CAISO usually plans releases in spring, fall and independent releases.
Details on CAISO 2017 2020 initiatives listed in Section IV B.C. Business Strategic Alignment
The implementation of this CAISO market enhancement is to meet SCE’s CAISO Scheduling Coordinator’sobligations and maintain the regulatory compliance.The implementation of each of the market enhancement initiative is to meet CAISO’s tariff changes ornew tariff requirements.Continued ability to transact in the CAISO markets.Ability to comply with least cost dispatch.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
SCE is required to bid all our generation into the CAISO markets and buy our entire load from the CAISOmarkets. SCE transacts in the CAISO market on a 24/7/365 basis. The objective of the IMEP 2017 2020project is to enhance existing systems and processes to implement CAISO 2017 2020 initiatives. SCE isrequired to implement the market design enhancements in order to maintain regulatory compliance aspart of our CAISO Scheduling Coordinator obligations.
Compliance with CAISO tariff.Continued ability to transact in the CAISO markets.
208
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
The CAISO market enhancement initiatives address specific business requirements and theneeds. The scope of each market enhancement initiative has been approved by theparticipants, and the CAISO governing board.No quantifiable hard benefits.
E. Business Impact Assessment
The impacted systems include PCI, CDS/PDR, SettleCore, CYCG, CASIO Price tool and internally developedUser Developed Applications (UDA).ON a high level the IMEP 2017 2020 initiatives will impact following business capabilities:
Meter Data Management Meter Data ManagementPortfolio Planning and Analysis Demand and Price ForecastingPortfolio Planning and Analysis Portfolio Development and ValuationPortfolio Planning and Analysis Fundamental Modeling and analysisPortfolio Planning and Analysis Portfolio ReportingEnergy Procurement andManagement
Resource and Water Optimization
Energy Procurement andManagement
Energy Gas and Emission trading
Energy Procurement andManagement
Energy Operations
Contracts Management Contract Origination andManagement
Contracts Management SettlementsOperation Services Business Process ServicesOperation Services Information and Data ManagementOperation Services Power Supply Administration
Each of the market enhancements brings changes to one or more of the following business areas:• Modeling of generation resources• Forecasting and planning load and generation assets• Managing generation outages• Self scheduled and economic bids and loads submitted to CAISO• Prices and awards received from CAISO• Settlement statements and invoices received from CAISO• Allocation of the invoices received.
209
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
The expectation is that IMEP 2017 2020 will leverage the existing Power Procurement technology andapplications which automate the following business functions:
Modeling of generation resourcesForecasting and planning load and generation assetsManaging generation outagesSelf scheduled and economic bids and loads submitted to CAISOPrices and awards received from CAISOSettlement statements and invoices received from CAISO
G. Proposed Options
The proposed solution is to enhance the existing Power Procurement applications.
As long as SCE remains a CAISO participant we cannot wholesale and opt out of the CAISO tariff andoperating procedures.
210
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
20%
20%
20%
20%
20%
100%
Pro
ject
Dur
atio
n20
00ho
urs
FTE
SC
E F
TE ($
70)
100
14,0
00,0
00$
2,80
0,00
0$
2,
800,
000
$
2,80
0,00
0$
2,
800,
000
$
2,80
0,00
0$
14
,000
,000
$
B
usin
ess
Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)2
800,
000
$
16
0,00
0$
160,
000
$
16
0,00
0$
160,
000
$
16
0,00
0$
800,
000
$
Te
chni
cal C
onsu
ltant
s ($
200)
280
0,00
0$
160,
000
$16
0,00
0$
160,
000
$16
0,00
0$
160,
000
$80
0,00
0$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l15
,600
,000
$
3,
120,
000
$
3,12
0,00
0$
3,
120,
000
$
3,12
0,00
0$
3,
120,
000
$
15,6
00,0
00$
Labo
r Sup
port
Cos
t4%
-$
560,
000
$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
560,
000
$
Har
dwar
e16
5,00
0$
15,0
00$
40,0
00$
40,0
00$
40,0
00$
30,0
00$
165,
000
$
E
mbe
dded
CO
TS L
icen
se76
5,00
0$
135,
000
$
15
5,00
0$
155,
000
$
15
5,00
0$
165,
000
$
76
5,00
0$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s95
,000
$15
,000
$20
,000
$20
,000
$20
,000
$20
,000
$95
,000
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.1,
025,
000
$
165,
000
$
21
5,00
0$
215,
000
$
21
5,00
0$
215,
000
$
1,
025,
000
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t16
,625
,000
$
3,
285,
000
$
3,
335,
000
$
3,
335,
000
$
3,
335,
000
$
3,
335,
000
$16
,625
,000
$C
ontin
genc
y20
%3,
325,
000
$
665,
000
$
66
5,00
0$
665,
000
$
66
5,00
0$
665,
000
$
3,
325,
000
$
TOTA
L R
EQU
EST
19,9
50,0
00$
3,95
0,00
0$
4,00
0,00
0$
4,00
0,00
0$
4,00
0,00
0$
4,00
0,00
0$
19,9
50,0
00$
Test
imon
y *3,
950,
000
$
4,
000,
000
$
4,
000,
000
$
4,
000,
000
$
4,
000,
000
$
19
,950
,000
$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Usi
ng e
xist
ing
envi
ronm
ent
19.8
0%20
.05%
20.0
5%20
.05%
20.0
5%10
0%Th
e P
CI R
epla
cem
ent p
roje
ct w
ill b
e im
plem
ente
d in
201
9. T
he c
ost f
or H
ardw
are,
CO
TS, O
S a
nd D
B li
cenc
es is
cou
nted
in th
at p
roje
ct.
CA
ISO
Mar
ket E
nhan
cem
ents
App
licat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
ject
Tota
l Cos
t of P
roje
ctFT
E E
stim
atio
n
211
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Energy Planning Platform Upgrade (EPP)
212
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000078
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2019
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
2,000
2,000
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
4,000
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades750
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Energy Planning Platform (EPP) Upgrade
Enhance the Energy Planning Platform (EPP) system to add additional analytical capabilities to be able to better optimize SCE’s portfolio of assets. EPP enables a range of forecasts and optimizationroutines to be performed based on SCE’s portfolio of assets. In addition, the platform will be used to forecast energy supply needs in future years, and will also include analytical applications to support Power Supply’s competitive solicitations for power and natural gas
As SCE’s portfolio continues to change, so does its reporting requirements. With the Distribution Resources Plan, SCE is expected to add dispatchable distributed energy resources (DERs) to its portfolio. DERs may include energy storage, electrical vehicle integration, various demand response products, distributed generation and energy efficiency. DERs can be dispatched based onnodal prices and/or circuits level requirements where their primary role will be system reliability and their secondary role is providing market services. DERs may also communicate with one to increase system efficiency through voltage support.
Energy Planning Platform (EPP) Upgrade
213
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Energy Planning PlatformUpgrade
214
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 3)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Energy Planning Platform UpgradeB. Initiative Description
• The Energy Planning Platform (EPP) was developed by SCE’s Energy Planning group to supportportfolio analysis, regulatory reporting and provide advanced analytics for SCEs hedgingprogram
• This tool is used to:– Measure Time to Expiry Value at Risk (TEVaR) for use in the monthly CPUC risk reports– Measure risk impacts of incremental hedges (i.e. energy transactions made to control or
reduce risk) on SCE’s portfolio– Support the development of short term and long term hedging strategies– Measure Procurement Cost at Risk (PC@R) for use in Risk Management Committee
(RMC) approved long term hedging strategy– Inform forward hedging product decisions by calculating hedge effectiveness/hedge
cost– Calculate optimal portfolio based gas volumes when executing forward spark spread
hedges (e.g. selling power and buying gas)– Perform Request For Offer (RFO) and bi lateral power contract valuations– Perform long term risk and portfolio analysis for Long Term Procurement Plan (LTPP)
filings– Compile monthly and yearly Resource Adequacy and Supply Plan filings– Compile long term capacity position forecasts for RFOs and Procurement Review Group
(PRG) quarterly reporting and ad hoc data requests– Compile the annual and ad hoc Energy Resources Recovery Account (ERRA) forecasts
and perform variance analysis– Assess SCE’s procurement related collateral obligations under stress case conditions– Evaluate gas transportation bid offers using a monthly spread option pricing model
• The platform is hosted in the SCE IT environment and leverages IT’s data access controls andtesting and release protocols and has grown from a single risk reporting module to severalcomplex analytical modules
– Reduces the need for custom User Developed Applications (UDAs)– Utilizes centralized database and servers including disaster recovery provisions– Utilizes grid computing technology
C. Business Strategic Alignment
As SCE’s portfolio continues to change, so does its reporting requirements. With the DistributionResources Plan, SCE is expected to add dispatchable distributed energy resources (DERs) to its portfolio.DERs may include energy storage, electrical vehicle integration, various demand response products,distributed generation and energy efficiency. DERs can be dispatched based on nodal prices and/orcircuits level requirements where their primary role will be system reliability and their secondary role isproviding market services. DERs may also communicate with one to increase system efficiency throughvoltage support.
215
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
The aggregation small CAISO connected DERs adds to the complexity of SCE portfolio. To accuratelycapture the position, monitor the market sensitive financial exposure and be able to value all of the newDER types, SCE requires a refresh of its analytic platform.Furthermore, SCE is also seeking to retire some of its older applications such as its position reportingplatform, EPIC. This project will reduce the number of applications in Portfolio Planning and Analysis(PPA). This will create a more robust data management process and will also reduce PPA’s ITmaintenance need.D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
The application will support all of SCE’s power procurement activities, including Request for Offer (RFO)solicitations, procurement strategy decision and trading activities. Potential decommissioning EnergyProcurement Information Center (EPIC).E. Business Impact Assessment
Below are the following business capability that will be impacted by the project:
Portfolio Planning and Analysis Demand and Price ForecastingPortfolio Planning and Analysis Portfolio Development and ValuationPortfolio Planning and Analysis Fundamental Modeling and analysisPortfolio Planning and Analysis Portfolio ReportingEnergy Procurement andManagement
Resource and Water Optimization
Energy Procurement andManagement
Energy, Gas and Emission trading
Energy Procurement andManagement
Energy Operations
Contracts Management Contract Origination andManagement
Operation Services Business Process ServicesOperation Services Information and Data Management
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
The proposed project will enable and support following business functions:Assessing Portfolio RiskEvaluate Gas ProposalsEvaluate Energy ContractsManage Hedging Strategy and Valuation FrameworkManage Portfolio Development ModelsForecast Commodity PricesForecast VolatilityForecast Ancillary Services PricesCongestion Revenue Rights (CRR )Procurement and Analysis
216
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
G. Proposed Options
Alternative 1: Don’t pursue the project. This will not address any of the current issues.
Alternative 2 (recommended): Enhance the existing Power Procurement applications. The proposedsolution is to upgrade the existing Power Procurement application using the current SCE technology andstandards, including but not limited to Oracle Exadata, .NET and SAS.
217
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
50%
50%
0%10
0%P
roje
ct D
urat
ion
2000
hour
sFT
ES
CE
FTE
($70
)11
1,54
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
77
0,00
0$
770,
000
$
-
$
1,
540,
000
$
Bus
ines
s C
onsu
ltant
s ($
200)
280
0,00
0$
-$
-$
400,
000
$
40
0,00
0$
-$
800,
000
$
Te
chni
cal C
onsu
ltant
s ($
200)
280
0,00
0$
-$
-$
400,
000
$40
0,00
0$
-$
800,
000
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
3,14
0,00
0$
-
$
-$
1,
570,
000
$
1,57
0,00
0$
-
$
3,14
0,00
0$
Labo
r Sup
port
Cos
t4%
-$
61,6
00$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
61,6
00$
Har
dwar
e10
0,00
0$
-$
-$
50,0
00$
50,0
00$
-$
100,
000
$
E
mbe
dded
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
100,
000
$
-
$-
$
50
,000
$50
,000
$-
$10
0,00
0$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
200,
000
$
-
$
-
$
10
0,00
0$
100,
000
$
-
$
20
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t3,
340,
000
$
-$
-
$
1,67
0,00
0$
1,67
0,00
0$
-$
3,34
0,00
0$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
668,
000
$
-
$
-
$
33
4,00
0$
334,
000
$
-
$
66
8,00
0$
TOTA
L R
EQU
EST
4,00
8,00
0$
-
$
-
$
2,
004,
000
$
2,
004,
000
$
-
$
4,
008,
000
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
-$
2,00
0,00
0$
2,00
0,00
0$
-$
4,00
0,00
0$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Inte
rnal
Dev
elop
men
tIn
terg
ratio
n w
ith th
e P
ower
Pro
cure
men
t leg
acy
appl
icat
ions
The
portf
olio
ana
lysi
s an
d re
porti
ng w
ill u
tiliz
e th
e S
CE
sta
ndar
d te
chno
logi
es s
uch
as S
AS
and
Bus
ines
s O
bjec
ts.
Ener
gy P
lann
ing
Plat
form
(EPP
) Upg
rade
App
licat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
ject
Tota
l Cos
t of P
roje
ctFT
E E
stim
atio
n
218
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
PCI Replacement
219
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0500
1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000042
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2019
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
3,000
3,500
1,000
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
7,500
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades749
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Power Cost Inc (PCI Replacement)
A key objective of this project is to avoid over-customization of the new tools. This will be challenging and will require determination and discipline from both IT and the business unit. However, we have full agreement from the business unit leadership on this approach. As part of theimplementation project we will conduct in-depth analysis/design workshops with the selected vendor(s) to review not just what needs to be done (the requirements), but also how the requirement will be implemented (e.g. screen or report layout). We have established a priority order of how requirements can be met: 1. Standard system functionality 2. Simple system configuration 3. Business process changes 4. Significant system configuration (will require justification and business unit principal manager approval) 5. Customization (will require significant justification and business unit director approval)
The current PCI system is used for a number of functions1 on the trade floor and is very expensive to maintain, has insufficient performance and consistent quality issues, and the vendor struggles to keep the system up to date with CAISO changes. An analysis in 2014 showed that other vendors can provide similar or better functionality at a lower cost. We plan to select one or more 3rd party vendors to replace the parts of PCI that cannot be covered by OpenLink Endur functionality.
Power Cost Inc (PCI Replacement)
220
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
PCI ReplacementInvestment Memo
221
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative Description
PCI Replacement
The current PCI system is used for a number of functions1 on the trade floor and is very expensive to maintain,has insufficient performance and consistent quality issues, and the vendor struggles to keep the system up todate with CAISO changes. An analysis in 2014 showed that other vendors can provide similar or betterfunctionality at a lower cost. We plan to select one or more 3rd party vendors to replace the parts of PCI thatcannot be covered by OpenLink Endur functionality.
SCE’s strategy for our generation resources is to maximize their market value by participating in the CAISOmarket.
Reduce operating costs (primarily IT operating costs related to system maintenance and upkeep).Reduce the number of spreadsheets and manual workarounds.Enhance responsiveness to changes in CAISO markets.Enable single data entry at power plants for both CAISO and NERC generation outage reportingrequirements.
Capabilities: Power Supply – Power Procurement – Energy Procurement & Management – EnergyOperations will be matured with enhanced automation and less need to rely on manual workarounds.Organizational: Power Supply – Energy Procurement & Management will be the main users of the system.Process:
o Perform Power Trading will be impacted by moving the deal capture from PCI to Endur.o Manage Day Ahead Operations will be impacted by replacing the existing PCI system.o Manage Real Time Operations will be impacted by replacing the existing PCI system.o These are all critical business processes and will require redundant systems with immediate failover
mechanisms.
1 PCI functionality covers optimization, generation outage management, CAISO communication (bidding andscheduling) and position management for the real time desk.
222
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
1. Utilize OpenLink Endur to replace existing PCI functionality where possible.2. Identify solutions to PCI functionality areas that Endur doesn’t cover. These include:
a. CAISO interface (bidding and scheduling)b. Generation outage managementc. Optimization and bid generation
The solutions identified may be on site software or hosted services.
Alternative 1: Do nothing. This will cause SCE to incur higher ongoing costs.Alternative 2 (recommended): Replace PCI with a 3rd party system to be selected.
223
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%40
%46
%14
%0%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se1,
490,
000
$
-$
596,
000
$
68
5,40
0$
208,
600
$
-
$
1,
490,
000
$
Ven
dor L
abor
100%
1,49
0,00
0$
-
$
59
6,00
0$
685,
400
$
20
8,60
0$
-$
1,49
0,00
0$
S
CE
IT L
abor
100%
1,49
0,00
0$
-
$
59
6,00
0$
685,
400
$
20
8,60
0$
-$
1,49
0,00
0$
S
I Lab
or50
%74
5,00
0$
-$
298,
000
$
34
2,70
0$
104,
300
$
-
$
74
5,00
0$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n50
%74
5,00
0$
-$
298,
000
$34
2,70
0$
104,
300
$-
$74
5,00
0$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l5,
960,
000
$
-$
2,38
4,00
0$
2,
741,
600
$
834,
400
$
-
$
5,
960,
000
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
14
9,00
0$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
14
9,00
0$
Har
dwar
e10
%14
9,00
0$
-$
59,6
00$
68,5
40$
20,8
60$
-$
149,
000
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
10%
149,
000
$
-
$
59
,600
$
68
,540
$
20
,860
$
-
$
14
9,00
0$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
298,
000
$
-
$
11
9,20
0$
137,
080
$
41
,720
$
-
$
29
8,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t6,
258,
000
$
-$
2,50
3,20
0$
2,
878,
680
$
876,
120
$
-
$
6,
258,
000
$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
1,25
1,60
0$
-
$
50
0,64
0$
575,
736
$
17
5,22
4$
-$
1,25
1,60
0$
TOTA
L7,
509,
600
$
-$
3,00
3,84
0$
3,45
4,41
6$
1,
051,
344
$
-
$
7,
509,
600
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
3,00
0,00
0$
3,50
0,00
0$
1,
000,
000
$
-
$
7,
500,
000
$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Inte
grat
ion
with
the
new
ETR
M a
pplic
atio
n an
d th
e le
gacy
app
licat
ions
, inc
ludi
ng M
V90
, Com
mon
Dat
a S
tore
, GM
SLicensecostsinclude
prep
aidmainten
ance
PCI R
epla
cem
ent
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
224
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Power Procurement Market Systems Front-Office (FO)
Capabilities Strategic Assessment
225
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
Pow
er P
rocu
rem
ent
Mar
ket S
yste
ms
Fron
t-Offi
ce (F
O) C
apab
ilitie
sS
trate
gic
Ass
essm
ent
Last
Upd
ate:
Jul
y 30
, 201
4Ve
rsio
n1.
01
226
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
PCI M
arke
t Sys
tem
s Ti
mel
ine
2
Issu
e V
olum
e B
y C
reat
ion
Dat
e
•Is
sue
volu
me
has
cont
inue
d to
dec
line
–S
ettle
men
t fu
nctio
nalit
y re
mov
al m
ay b
e co
ntrib
utor
Agi
ng (M
onth
s)B
y C
reat
ion
Dat
e
•Ti
cket
agi
ng h
as g
ener
ally
in
crea
sed
over
tim
e
227
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
Cos
t of O
wne
rshi
p Ev
alua
tion
-Mar
ch 2
014
3
Shad
owS
ettle
men
t
Fron
t Offi
ceB
ack
Offi
ce
Bidd
ing
Allo
catio
nsPo
wer
Tra
ding
Pow
er
Sche
dulin
gO
utag
eM
anag
emen
tP
re-
Set
tlem
ent
CYC
GS
ettle
Cor
eS
ettle
Cor
e
Rep
lace
d 20
12B
yR
epla
ced
2013
By
Rep
lace
d 20
13B
y
Res
ourc
e Pl
anni
ngPC
I C
ore
Fun
ctio
ns
Gen
Trad
er
Ven
tyx
Gen
Man
ager
RO
To B
e R
epla
ced
Q4
2014
PCI 2
013
Cos
t Ove
rvie
w
Oth
ers,
44,5
51,
79%
PC
I,12
,144
,21
%
2013
App
licat
ion
Mai
nten
ance
Effo
rt
(Hrs
)
Maint/Sup
t,$1,786,919,
41%
Rel.Testing,
$657,580,
15%
Enhancem
ent,
$4,941,0.1%
Projects,
$1,559,397,
35%
*ITS
Labo
r,$150,487,4%
*ITS
HW,
$51,000,1%
Storage,
$114,495,3%
2013
PC
I Cos
t Bre
akdo
wn
O&
M,
$2,2
76,5
98, 5
3%
Cap
ital,
$2,0
48,2
21, 4
7%
2013
PC
ICos
t Bre
akdo
wn
*ITS
cos
ts a
re e
stim
ates
usi
ng u
tility
IT (U
NIT
E) b
ench
mar
ksAsse
ssm
ent F
ocus
228
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
Ass
essm
ent A
ppro
ach
4
oFo
cus
on h
igh-
leve
l Fro
nt-O
ffice
cap
abili
ties
oB
iddi
ng/S
ched
ule
Man
agem
ent
oP
ower
Tra
ding
oO
utag
e M
anag
emen
to
Res
ourc
e O
ptim
izat
ion
oA
sses
s cu
rren
t Mar
ket S
yste
ms
vend
or la
ndsc
ape
to a
sses
s m
atur
ity o
f sol
utio
n ca
pabi
litie
s an
d te
chno
logy
oId
entif
ied
shor
t, m
anag
eabl
e ve
ndor
list
oC
ondu
cted
sev
eral
SC
E-P
G&
E te
leco
nfer
ence
to s
hare
key
obs
erva
tions
, cha
lleng
es, l
esso
n le
arne
d an
d ou
tlook
on
Mar
ket S
yste
m to
ols
to v
erify
our
alig
nmen
t
*Par
ticip
atin
g ve
ndor
s ar
e no
t 100
% re
pres
enta
tion
of c
urre
nt m
arke
t ven
dors
Vend
ors*
Solu
tions
Vent
yxB
id/S
ched
ule
Man
agem
ent,
nMar
ket,
Gen
erat
ion
Ope
ratio
ns
OAT
IM
RTU
mod
ule,
Web
Trad
er, W
ebO
MS
, Web
Gen
erat
ion
Pla
nner
Pow
erS
ettle
men
tsP
ower
Dea
l, S
ched
ule
Mod
ule,
Gen
erat
ion
Out
age,
Pow
erS
imby
Asc
ent
Ana
lytic
s
Ope
nLin
kE
ndur
, Ada
pt2
ISO
by
Ada
pt2,
IRM
Vers
ifyE
vent
Man
agem
ent,
Vtra
der,
Vpe
rform
ance
229
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
Vend
or L
ands
cape
Vend
ors
•In
crea
sed
num
ber o
f ac
tive
vend
ors
with
var
ious
tech
nolo
gies
in C
AIS
O m
arke
t sol
utio
n si
nce
MR
TU d
eplo
ymen
t•
Div
erse
ven
dor b
ase.
Bot
h es
tabl
ishe
d an
d em
ergi
ng p
laye
rs a
long
with
sm
all t
o la
rge
vend
ors
•C
AIS
O m
arke
t cha
nges
pre
sent
a c
halle
nge
to m
ost v
endo
rs to
ada
pt to
mar
ket c
hang
es.
Som
e ve
ndor
s ar
e ad
aptin
g to
mee
t the
se c
halle
nges
thro
ugh
host
ing
and
othe
r met
hods
5
Lim
ited
Func
tions
Or N
ot D
emon
stra
ted
(Due
To
Con
stra
ints
suc
h as
tim
e, e
nviro
nmen
t, et
c.)
Ade
quat
e Fu
nctio
ns D
emon
stra
ted
Key
Fun
ctio
ns D
emon
stra
ted
Not
use
d. B
RS
and
func
tion
spec
ifica
tion
not a
vaila
ble
Third
par
ty b
usin
ess
partn
er d
epen
denc
y1
Key
func
tion
info
rmat
ion
colle
cted
n/a
No
info
rmat
ion
colle
cted
for k
ey fu
nctio
n
* Li
mite
d in
form
atio
n co
llect
ed fo
r Ver
sify
whi
ch w
ill n
ot p
artic
ipat
e in
CA
ISO
mar
ket u
ntil
Q4
2014
Vend
orsT
hatH
avePa
rticipated
DemoSession
Hig
h-le
vel c
apab
ility
info
rmat
ion
colle
cted
230
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
Cos
t Ana
lysi
sB
udge
tary
Quo
te•
Opp
ortu
nity
for S
CE
to o
ptim
ize
inve
stm
ent w
ith d
iver
se o
ptio
ns in
lice
nsin
g, im
plem
enta
tion,
m
aint
enan
ce s
uppo
rt, m
arke
t enh
ance
men
ts a
nd c
usto
miz
atio
n•
Hos
ting
solu
tion
is re
adily
ava
ilabl
e w
hich
can
redu
ce to
tal c
ost o
f ow
ners
hip
•D
iver
sity
in c
ost m
odel
and
man
agem
ent o
f enh
ance
men
t/cus
tom
izat
ion
will
pro
vide
bes
t op
tion
to m
eet F
O b
usin
ess
requ
irem
ents
whi
le re
duci
ng re
curr
ing
supp
ort a
nd m
aint
enan
ce
cost
6*1
-Tim
e C
ost D
etai
l der
ived
from
SC
E E
stim
atio
n M
odel
usi
ng e
stim
ated
lice
nse
cost
for n
ew a
nd a
pplic
able
exi
stin
g lic
ense
**P
CI e
stim
ated
5-Y
ear R
ecur
ring
Cos
t usi
ng c
urre
nt y
early
mai
nten
ance
($1.
05M
) and
O&
M ($
2.2M
) cos
t tra
cked
in 2
013
Not
e: A
ll co
st c
ompo
nent
s in
5-Y
ear C
ost P
roje
ctio
n ar
e es
timat
ed b
ased
on
high
-leve
l cap
abili
ty re
quire
men
ts a
vaila
ble
for t
his
publ
icat
ion
1tim
eCo
st
Licen
seLabo
rHW
/SW
Contingency
25%To
tal
Cost
Total
Vend
orMainten
ance
ITO&
M
**PC
IOn
site
Delivery
Unlim
ited
$0$0
$0$0
$0$5,250,000
$11,000,000
Ventyx
Optio
n1
(FOEN
T)On
site
Delivery
3250
MW/
5Us
ers
$765,000
$3,442,500
$459,000
$1,575,125
$6,241,625
$1,175,000
$2,295,000
Ventyx
Optio
n2
(FOTR
M)
Onsite
Delivery
3250
MW/
5Us
ers
$980,000
$4,410,000
$588,000
$1,997,750
$7,975,750
$1,425,000
$2,940,000
Hosting
40Us
ers
$0$4,200,000
$0$1,710,000
$5,910,000
$2,000,000
$3,200,000
Onsite
Delivery
40Us
ers
$1,900,000
$8,550,000
$1,140,000
$3,657,500
$15,247,500
$1,900,000
$5,700,000
Hosting
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Onsite
Delivery
30/
200Us
ers
$1,655,000
$6,240,000
$993,000
$4,104,475
$12,992,475
$6,778,400
$3,757,500
Solutio
nType
Licen
seBa
seVe
ndor
Solutio
n
$23,528,375
OATI
5Year
CostProjectio
n
$16,250,000
$9,711,625
$12,340,750
$11,110,000
$22,847,500
PowerSettlem
ents
n/a
*1TimeIm
plem
entatio
nCo
stTo
tal5
Year
Owne
rshipCo
st
5Year
Recurring
Cost
231
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
Oth
er F
indi
ngs
PG&
E St
atus
•P
G&
E a
t exe
cutio
n ph
ase
of th
eir t
echn
olog
y st
rate
gy to
repl
ace
hom
e-gr
own
Fore
cast
-Bid
ding
-S
ched
ulin
g (F
BS
) app
licat
ion
oE
ndur
to b
e st
rate
gic
tradi
ng p
latfo
rmo
Usi
ng C
OTS
pac
kage
to a
ddre
ss o
ther
mar
ket s
yste
m c
apab
ilitie
s su
ch a
s re
sour
ce
optim
izat
ion
and
outa
ge m
anag
emen
to
PC
I int
erfa
ce fo
r CA
ISO
com
mun
icat
ion
and
dow
nloa
d w
ill n
ot c
hang
eo
Ste
erin
g C
omm
ittee
at d
irect
or le
vel t
o en
sure
stra
tegi
c al
ignm
ent
Tech
nolo
gy•
Mos
t ven
dors
offe
r hos
ted
solu
tions
. Som
e ha
ve m
ultip
le s
olut
ion
offe
rings
incl
udin
g hy
brid
del
iver
y m
odel
s•
Tech
nolo
gy in
tegr
atio
n to
out
side
ent
ities
(CA
ISO
) has
bec
ome
mor
e st
anda
rd a
nd s
tream
lined
(e.g
. W
eb S
ervi
ces)
•Va
rious
ven
dor a
ppro
ache
s to
sta
y cu
rren
t with
CA
ISO
mar
ket c
hang
es.
This
will
be
an im
porta
nt
crite
ria in
our
ven
dor s
elec
tion.
7
232
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
Con
clus
ion
Bas
ed o
n ou
r ass
essm
ent f
indi
ngs,
it is
our
reco
mm
enda
tion
that
we
purs
ue re
plac
ing
our
curr
ent m
arke
t sys
tem
s to
olse
t.
Nex
t Ste
ps
•U
tiliz
e M
RTU
requ
irem
ents
as
base
line
for M
arke
t Sys
tem
s re
plac
emen
t effo
rt
•C
ondu
ct fi
t/gap
ana
lysi
s of
cur
rent
to n
ew re
quire
men
ts a
nd b
usin
ess
chan
ges
–Q
4/14
•Pu
t RFI
on
the
stre
et fo
r Mar
ket S
yste
ms
repl
acem
ent –
Q1/
15
•C
ompl
ete
busi
ness
cas
e an
d bu
dget
for 2
016
proj
ect l
aunc
h –
Q2/
15
•Pu
blis
h R
FP fo
r ven
dors
Q3/
15
•Ve
ndor
/ S
olut
ion
sele
ctio
n –
Q4/
15
8
233
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
B A
C K
U P
S
L I
D E
S
9
234
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
Vend
or B
udge
tary
Quo
te D
etai
l
10
Vend
or B
udge
tary
Cos
t Det
ail
Lice
nse/
mai
nten
ance
cos
t doe
s no
t inc
lude
exi
stin
g S
CE
lice
nse
that
can
be
reus
ed
*SC
E In
tegr
atio
n co
st is
est
imat
ed b
ased
on
high
-leve
l cap
abili
ty re
quire
men
ts$
-Inc
rem
enta
l cos
t will
app
ly to
this
item
NA
–N
o in
crem
enta
l cha
rge
for t
his
item
. Cos
t will
be
incl
uded
in fi
nal q
uote
SolutionBase
LicenseBase
LicenseCost
Hardware/3rdParty Software
ImplemenationTraining,A
dmin, Config,PM
*SCEIntegration/ Customization
AnnualMaintenace/ Support
CommonChanges/Ehnancem
entsCAISOInitiatives
Spring/FallReleases
SCECustomizationSCECustomization
Rel.Update
OneTimeCo
stRe
curring
Mainten
ance
Cost
Ventyx
Optio
n1
(FO
ENT)
Onsite
Delivery
3250
MW/
5users
$265,000
$NA
$195,000
$235,000
NANA
$$
Ventyx
Optio
n2(FO
TRM)
Onsite
Delivery
3250
MW/
5users
$480,000
$NA
$465,000
$285,000
NANA
$$
Hosting
40Us
ers
NANA
$750,000
$$420,000
NA$
$$
Onsite
Delivery
40Us
ers
$1,900,000
$350,000
$700,000
$$380,000
NA$
$$
Hosting
30/2
00Us
ers
$$1,275,000
$1,250,000
NANA
$NA
Onsite
Delivery
30/2
00Us
ers
$1,570,000
$$1,275,000
$1,250,000
$1,195,000
NANA
$NA
OATI
PowerSettlem
ents
235
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Info
rmat
ion
Tech
nolo
gy –
Clie
nt P
ortfo
lio M
anag
emen
t
11
*Ven
dor b
udge
tary
quo
tes
are
base
d on
var
ious
term
s an
d co
nditi
ons.
Quo
tes
such
as
licen
se c
ost a
nd a
nnua
l mai
nten
ance
cos
t are
revi
sed
to p
rovi
de c
ompa
tible
bas
e co
st a
s in
put t
o S
CE
Est
imat
ion
Mod
el t
o pr
ojec
t tot
al c
ost.
*Ven
tyx
licen
se c
ost i
nclu
des
exis
ting
and
new
lic
ense
. Exi
stin
g lic
ense
is e
stim
ated
at $
500K
bas
ed o
n an
nual
mai
nten
ance
of $
100K
per
yea
r at 2
0% o
f ful
l lic
ense
*OA
TI h
oste
d so
lutio
n do
not
hav
e on
e-tim
e lic
ense
fee,
ann
ual r
ecur
ring
mai
nten
ance
fee
(app
roxi
mat
ely
$400
,000
) is
used
as
one-
time
licen
se c
ost t
o de
rive
estim
ated
tota
l cos
t*P
ower
Set
tlem
ents
on-s
ite d
eliv
ery
solu
tion
licen
se a
nd m
aint
enan
ce in
clud
e ex
istin
g an
d ne
w s
olut
ion
licen
se. P
aid
licen
se o
f $85
K a
nd re
curr
ing
mai
nten
ance
of $
160,
680
*Pow
erS
ettle
men
tsho
sted
sol
utio
n lic
ense
and
mai
nten
ance
cos
t not
ava
ilabl
e at
this
tim
e. Q
uote
onl
y in
clud
es R
esou
rce
Opt
imiz
atio
n (R
O) m
odul
epr
ovid
ed th
roug
h bu
sine
ss
partn
er A
scen
d A
naly
tic
Bas
ed o
n Ve
ndor
Lic
ense
and
Mai
nten
ance
SC
E Es
timat
ion
Mod
el
SolutionBase
LicenseBase
LicenseCost
5Year Maintenace/ Support
VendorLabor
SCEITLabor
SCEBULabor
SILabor
Integration& Custoization
Hardware
OtherSoftware& License
Contingency
O&MLabor Ongoing SupportCost
25%
Recurrin
gTo
talCo
st
Estim
ation
Mode
lVe
ndor
Budg
etary
Quote
*To
talLab
orTo
talHW
/SW
Venty
xOpti
on1
(FOEN
T)On
siteDe
livery
3250
MW/
5User
s$765,00
0$1,17
5,000
$1,14
7,500
$382,50
0$765,00
0$382,50
0$765,00
0$382,50
0$76,5
00$1,57
5,125
$459,00
0$7,87
5,625
Venty
xOpti
on2
(FOTR
M)On
siteDe
livery
3250
MW/
5User
s$980,00
0$1,42
5,000
$1,47
0,000
$490,00
0$980,00
0$490,00
0$980,00
0$490,00
0$98,0
00$1,99
7,750
$588,00
0$9,98
8,750
Hostin
g40
Users
$0$2,00
0,000
$1,60
0,000
$800,00
0$800,00
0$200,00
0$800,00
0$0
$0$1,71
0,000
$640,00
0$8,55
0,000
Onsite
Delive
ry40
Users
$1,90
0,000
$1,90
0,000
$2,85
0,000
$950,00
0$1,90
0,000
$950,00
0$1,90
0,000
$950,00
0$190,00
0$3,65
7,500
$1,14
0,000
$18,2
87,50
0
Hostin
g30
/200
Users
$290,00
0$290,00
0NA
NANA
NANA
NANA
NANA
NAOn
siteDe
liver y
30/2
00Us
ers$1,65
5,000
$6,77
8,400
$1,27
5,000
$827,50
0$1,65
5,000
$827,50
0$1,65
5,000
$827,50
0$165,50
0$4,10
4,475
$751,50
0$22,3
33,62
5
Estim
ation
Mode
l
OATI
Powe
rSettle
ments
Vend
orBu
dgeta
ryQu
ote*
236
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Energy Trading and Risk Management
237
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000226
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2018
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
3,000
2,400
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
5,400
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software756
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Energy Trading and Risk Management (ETRM)
The ETRM System Replacement project will replace the Sungard Entegrate ETRM system which was put in place in 2008 and is used by Power Supply to capture and process all conventional bilateral contracts as well as physical and financial power and gas transactions. SCE requires a fully integrated, end-to-end commodity trading system to support its current and future trading of physical and financial energy commodities and bilateral contracts. The system must include front, middle and back office capability. The system must automate the entire trade to payment process and limit manual intervention and processing. This will reduce operational risk, minimize settlementrisk for trade execution, and help control operational costs. The Sungard Entegrate system is being phased out over time by Sungard in favor of their new Aligne platform
The ETRM System Replacement project will replace the Sungard Entegrate ETRM system and will be able to handle conventinal bilateral contracts and energy commodity products without extensive use of spreadsheets.
Energy Trading and Risk Management (ETRM
238
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Energy Trading & RiskManagement (ETRM)System Replacement
239
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Entegrate Replacement
B. Initiative Description
This project replaces the aging Sungard Entegrate Energy Trading and Risk Management (ETRM) system with theOpenLink Endur system, which we initially purchased for the CMP project, but intend to use as a commonplatform for all of Power Supply’s wholesale trades and contracts. Entegrate is aging and while it’s stillsupported by Sungard it’s not their strategic product and new functionality (such ad Dodd Frank reporting) isnot being added. In addition, Power Supply has had to develop numerous spreadsheet workarounds to addressfunctional shortcomings in Entegrate.
The PCI and Entegrate systems are closely linked in that energy deals are entered into PCI and then transferredto Entegrate via a system interface. Also, PCI needs Entegrate deal information for data submission to CAISO.
C. Business Strategic Alignment
SCE’s strategy is to procure the majority of the power to our customers through bilateral contracts of varioustypes and durations. These contracts are currently managed in two separate systems: WES (to be replaced byEndur as part of the CMP project) for renewable power and Entegrate for conventional power and financialcontracts.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
Reduced number of spreadsheets and manual workarounds to address Entegrate functionalshortcomings.Streamlined process for invoice payments (automated interface to SAP rather than today’s manualinterface).Enhanced controls (less manual copy/paste between Entegrate and spreadsheets).Decommission computing environments that are no longer needed.
E. Business Impact Assessment
Capabilities:o Power Supply – Power Procurement – Energy Procurement & Management – Energy Contract
Management and Energy, Gas and Emissions Trading will be matured with enhanced automationand less reliance on manual workarounds.
o Risk Operations will be matured with less reliance on spreadsheets and manual workarounds.o Power Procurement Accounting will be matured with less reliance on spreadsheets and manual
workarounds.Organizational: This project impacts four major groups of users:
o Power Supply – Energy Procurement and Managemento Power Supply – Settlement & Operations Serviceso Finance – Risk Management – Risk Operations
240
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
o Controllers – Accounting – Regulatory Accounting and Analysis – Power Procurement AccountingProcess
o Manage Contract On Boarding, Manage Contracts, Manage Contract Compliance, SupportRegulatory and Cross Functional Organizations and Manage Contract Termination will all beimpacted by moving from Entegrate to Endur.
o Obtain OK To Trade Approval, Perform Power Trading, Perform Beyond Day Ahead (Forward) PowerTrading, Transmission Trading, Gas Trading, Emissions Trading and Support Power, Gas & EmissionTrading Activities will all be impacted by moving from Entegrate to Endur.
o Perform Contract Compliance and Analysis and Manage Contract Settlements Operations will all beimpacted by moving from Entegrate to Endur.
o Risk Operations processes will be impacted by moving from Entegrate to Endur.o Power Procurement Accounting processes will be impacted by moving from Entegrate to Endur.
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
1. Replace Sungard Entegrate with OpenLink Endur.2. Utilize Endur to replace existing PCI functionality where possible.
G. Proposed Options
Alternative 1: Keep existing system. This is not a viable approach since Entegrate is obsolete.Alternative 2: Upgrade Entegrate to Sungard Aligne. This will require a new implementation withsimilar costs as the Endur implementation and will leave us with two systems that managerenewable and conventional contacts.Alternative 3: Replace with new COTS package to be selected. This will require purchasing a newsystem (including license fees for the new system) with implementation with similar costs as theEndur implementation. It will leave us with two systems that manage renewable and conventionalcontacts.Alternative 4 (recommended): Replace with OpenLink Endur.
241
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%55
%45
%0%
0%10
0%
CO
TS L
icen
se1,
385,
000
$
-$
761,
750
$
62
3,25
0$
-$
-$
1,38
5,00
0$
V
endo
r Lab
or10
0%1,
385,
000
$
-$
761,
750
$
62
3,25
0$
-$
-$
1,38
5,00
0$
S
CE
IT L
abor
50%
692,
500
$
-
$
38
0,87
5$
311,
625
$
-
$
-
$
69
2,50
0$
SI L
abor
25%
346,
250
$
-
$
19
0,43
8$
155,
813
$
-
$
-
$
34
6,25
0$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n50
%69
2,50
0$
-$
380,
875
$31
1,62
5$
-$
-$
692,
500
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
4,50
1,25
0$
-
$
2,
475,
688
$
2,02
5,56
3$
-
$
-
$
4,
501,
250
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
11
0,80
0$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
11
0,80
0$
Har
dwar
e0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t4,
501,
250
$
-$
2,47
5,68
8$
2,
025,
563
$
-$
-$
4,50
1,25
0$
C
ontin
genc
y20
%90
0,25
0$
-$
495,
138
$
40
5,11
3$
-$
-$
900,
250
$
TOTA
L5,
401,
500
$
-$
2,97
0,82
5$
2,43
0,67
5$
-
$
-
$
5,
401,
500
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
3,00
0,00
0$
2,40
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
5,
400,
000
$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Usi
ng e
xist
ing
CM
P e
nviro
nmen
t, H
W, O
S, a
nd D
BLi
cens
e co
sts
incl
ude
prep
aid
mai
nten
ance
Inte
grat
ion
with
Leg
acy
appl
icat
ions
, inc
ludi
ng C
redi
t and
Col
late
ral,
Com
mon
Dat
a S
tore
and
the
new
sch
edul
ing
appl
icat
ion
ETR
M R
epla
cem
ent
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
242
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Aggregated Demand Response (ADR)
243
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000182
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 3/1/2017
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year2,590
870
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
3,460
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software754
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Aggregated Demand Response - Phase 2
The Aggregated Demand Response (ADR) system will integrate retail DR programs into CAISO’s markets. The ADR system will be used to translate the retail resources (demand response programs) into wholesale biddable elements just like supply side resources as required by the (California Public Utility Commission (CPUC).
The CPUC has encouraged the growth of Price-Responsive DR in order to “enhance electric system reliability, reduce power purchase and protect the environment.” In D.05-11-009, the CPUC developed a strategy and initial programs to promote DR. In proceeding A.05-05-006, the CPUC adopted 2006-2008 programs and goals for DR for SCE and the other California energy IOUs.
Aggregated Demand Response - Phase 2
244
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Aggregated DemandResponse Phase 2
245
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Aggregated Demand Response Phase 2B. Initiative Description
The Aggregated Demand Response (ADR) system will integrate retail DR programs into CAISO’s markets. TheADR system will be used to translate the retail resources (demand response programs) into wholesale biddableelements just like supply side resources as required by the CPUC. As a part of CPUC Rule 24, also known asDirect Participation in Wholesale Markets, the CPUC expects the IOUs will integrate some of the DemandResponse (DR) programs into California Independent System Operator (CAISO’s) markets. Additionally, CAISOrequires SCE to provide demand forecast information into its market to mimic generation resources. PowerSupply will require analytical tools to operate in the CAISO market with aggregate demand response as adispatchable resource.
ADR aggregates retail demand response programs into wholesale resources that can be bid into the CAISOwholesale markets. The aggregation is based on location and the specific parameters of the various demandresponse programs, where an aggregated wholesale resource typically would consist of similar customerprograms within a specific geographic area. After the CAISO markets run the awards are downloaded fromCAISO and allocated to the retail demand response programs that make up the wholesale resource.
ADR (Phase 1 scope) was implemented in 2015. ADR Phase 1 performs the following functions for Priceresponsive Demand Response (PDR) and Reliability Demand Response Resources (RDRR):
1. Define PDR/RDRR – Determines how the Demand Response resources will be physically defined for thewholesale markets2.Manage PDR/RDRR Capacity/Availability – Manages the DR resources to account for changes3. Aggregate Data (Daily) – Gathers and uses the available meter data for assessing the performance of the DRresources as well as for forecasting9. Calculate Performance – Reviews the performance of each DR resource against an Award10. Perform Settlement Support – Calculates DR resource performance and submitting meter data it to CAISO
The ADR system will need additional functional enhancement (Phase 2) for the longer term demand responseprograms. Phase 2, which is included in this current funding request, will perform the following functions:
4. Forecast Performance – Develop the resource plan for each DR resource. The DR resource will contain bothprice points and capacity amounts (MW)5. Update PDR Bids – Send the DR resource availability/capability to downstream systems to prepare forbidding into the market6. Translate Awards to Retail Instructions – Determine how DR resource awards are translated to specificinstructions for a service account7.Monitor DR Performance – Review actual meter data to ensure the DR resource is meeting the Award.Advanced analytic capability will be required to perform this function.8. Send Adjusted Instructions – Send additional instructions to CSOU to curtail additional load if the DRresource is not meeting the Award
246
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
These additional capabilities will facilitate the full functioning and usage of demand response resources byaggregating the demand resource attributes and providing them to Day Ahead and Real Time trading asavailable generic resources for the next wholesale market opportunity including the next increment of the hour,the next day (for the day ahead market), next week, next month, etc. Additional functionality is also required toautomate some manual processes and address some of the complexities that the CAISO has introduced into itsmarket design in the area of resource registration, baseline calculation and limitations around the discretedispatch of resources.C. Business Capabilities Mapped
Power PortfolioManagement
Power Analytics
Power PortfolioManagement
Power Dispatch
Power PortfolioManagement
Power Planning (Supply and Demand)
Power PortfolioManagement
Power Trading
Power PortfolioManagement
Demand Forecast
D. Desired Business Outcomes
The CPUC has encouraged the growth of Price Responsive DR in order to “enhance electric system reliability,reduce power purchase and protect the environment.” In D.05 11 009, the CPUC developed a strategy andinitial programs to promote DR. In proceeding A.05 05 006, the CPUC adopted 2006 2008 programs and goalsfor DR for SCE and the other California energy IOUs.
CPUC required that SCE includes in its 2009 2011 DR application, its plan for integrating demand response intothe CAISO’s wholesale markets. SCE is preparing to integrate demand response resources as both ProxyDemand Resources (PDR) and Reliability Demand Response Resources (RDRR). PDR can be bid into Day Aheadand Real Time Energy and Ancillary Services markets, and RDRR can be bid into Real Time Energy as acontingent resource.
SCE currently has nearly 1,000 MWs that will be biddable into CAISO markets. It is not inconceivable to expectthat eventually all demand response resources, approximately 1,500MW, will be bid into CAISO markets usingprice and or contingent triggers. In the current DR OIR proceeding, additional functionality to accommodate thebifurcation of DR is being contemplated that will require managing components of the DR programs outside ofthe market.
IT developed ADR (Phase 1) solution to integrate demand response into the procurement process with thefollowing functionality: define PDR/RDRR, manage PDR/RDRR capability/availability, aggregate data – daily,forecast performance, calculate performance, and perform settlement support. The ADR Phase 1 does notsatisfy required functions for the full SCE DR program integration in 2016. ADR Phase 2 will complete therequired functions needed.
247
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$V
endo
r Lab
or-
$-
$-
$-
$S
CE
IT L
abor
7,75
0$
246,
599
$56
,412
$25
5,00
0$
160,
000
$-
$-
$-
$72
5,76
1$
SI L
abor
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n15
,400
$1,
089,
701
$87
4,09
5$
1,90
5,00
0$
570,
000
$-
$-
$-
$4,
454,
196
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
-$
-$
23,1
50$
1,33
6,30
0$
930,
507
$2,
160,
000
$73
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
5,17
9,95
7$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
-$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
-$
Har
dwar
e-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t-
$-
$23
,150
$1,
336,
300
$93
0,50
7$
2,16
0,00
0$
730,
000
$-
$-
$-
$
5,
179,
957
$C
ontin
genc
y20
%-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$43
2,00
0$
146,
000
$-
$-
$-
$57
8,00
0$
TOTA
L-
$
-
$
23
,150
$
1,
336,
300
$
93
0,50
7$
2,
592,
000
$
876,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
5,75
7,95
7$
Test
imon
y*-
$
20
,000
$
1,
340,
000
$
930,
000
$
2,
590,
000
$
870,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
5,
750,
000
$
Assumptions:
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.C
AIS
O w
ill c
ompl
ete
the
desi
ng o
f the
DR
RS
sys
tem
and
pub
lish
all A
PIs
CA
ISO
will
not
cha
nge
the
scop
e an
d sc
hedu
le fo
r im
plem
enta
tion
of D
RR
S s
yste
m
Stre
amlin
ing
of th
e bu
sine
ss o
pera
tions
will
not
impa
ct o
f the
sco
pe
Agg
rega
ted
Dem
and
Res
pons
e (A
DR
) Pha
se 1
& 2
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
248
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Commodity Management Platform (CMP)
249
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 7340
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000112
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 6/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year2,850
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,850
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software759
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
CMP (Renewable Contract Mgmt System Replacement)
The Renewable Contract Management System project seeks to install a new system to manage renewable power contracts and replace the Wholesale Energy System (WES).
WES will be unable to handle the volume and complexity of the new renewable contracts that are currently online and those that are expected to come online in the next five years in growing numbers.
Commodity Management Platform (CMP)
250
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 4)
Commodity Management Platform (CMP)A. Project Overview
The project will install and configure the OpenLink Endur system to manage renewable power contracts.The new system will replace the current system called Wholesale Energy System (WES), as WES is basedon obsolete technology and will be unable to handle the volume and complexity of new renewableenergy contracts that are currently on line and are expected to come online in the next 5 years withincreasing complexity.The number of renewable energy contracts has been increasing as SCE continues to sign contracts toreach the 33% renewable portfolio standard. The new contracts are significantly more complex than theexisting contracts. Contracts that have already been signed are coming into production as the variousgeneration projects go live and will need to be managed as well.The new system will provide much needed automation of processes that have to be done manuallyusing spreadsheets today. Since the WES system cannot handle hourly data, all contracts that requirehourly data (which included virtually all of the new contracts) are handled manually using spreadsheets,Access databases and user developed SAS tools today. The new system handles hourly (and sub hourly)data and has a formula editor that will enable advanced contracts to be configured in the system andautomate the processing of these contracts.OpenLink also brings an extensible system platform that we can use in the coming years as a basis onwhich to replace the existing and aging Entegrate deal capture system as well as handle future contracttypes.The project is dependent on the GMS Upgrade project for data to calculate the curtailment trackingprovisions in new renewable energy contracts.
B. Implementation Overview
System Integrator selection start in November 2013 following CRT approvalProject start in June 2014Go live in August 2016
C. Project Rationale
The main driver behind this project is the rise in the number and complexity of the renewable contractsmanaged by Power Supply. The graph below shows the projected number of contracts growing in thecoming years.
251
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(2 of 4)
As can be seen above the number of contracts will actually level out after 2015. However, the number ofcomplex contracts will continue to increase significantly as old contracts roll of and are replaced by newer,more complex contracts. The graph below shows the number of contracts that will need to be settled eachyear:
The ‘High’ bar in the chart above illustrates the number of contracts that have a high complexity forsettlement. The number of these contracts will triple between 2013 and 2017.
Today, renewable energy contracts are handled in the existing WES. This system is old and lacksfunctionality to handle hourly data, which all high complexity contracts (and most other new contracts)require. The only way to handle contracts requiring hourly data today is to develop manual workaroundsusing spreadsheets, Access databases or user developed SAS programs as illustrated below:
The required results are calculated using these tools and manually fed into the existing WES system. Thisapproach introduces significant risk and requires incremental staffing to keep up with the rising number ofcontacts.
A solution is needed in the short term. As new renewable energy contracts have increased rapidly innumber and will continue to do so in the next 5 years, it will become increasingly difficult for WES to handlethe increased complexity. Any delay in the project will cause the number of spreadsheets required to handlethe new contracts to increase.
D. Project Benefits
Avoided financial losses associated with mishandling or inaccurately managing and/or settling contractReduce future head count increases needed to meet business growth
Current process for settling renewable and CHP contracts
252
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(3 of 4)
Improved risk management and controls. Although incremental personnel and manual controls can beadded around spreadsheet based solutions to substantially reduce risks there is a residual set of risksthat cannot be eliminated due to the nature of spreadsheets. These risks are related to lack ofautomated audit logs, enforced data integrity, automated workflow and centralized implementation ofchangesReduced risk of missing data due to a high number of disparate data sources and a complex manualprocess. More spreadsheets invariably means more sources of data (often copy/paste from otherspreadsheets) and more handoffs between people and groups, all of which increase the risk of misseddata
E. Alternatives
After the project was paused in 2011, four alternatives were studied as part of the CMP reassessmenteffort in Fall 2011:
o Implement OpenLink Enduro Develop OpenLink Endur like capabilities in houseo Update the current WES system to current technology but keep the same functionality and
manual workaroundso Do nothing and keep the current WES system built on obsolete, non supported technologies
Alternative 1– Continue implementation of Openlink Endur WES replacement and enhancementso Implement a solution (Openlink Endur) for WES replacement and renewable energy contract
settlementso Continue to utilize Entegrate as deal capture system until needed functionality requires
replacement, and use OpenLink to replace Entegrate with at that timeAlternative 2– In house development was discarded for the following reasons:
o High costs (close to those of an OpenLink solution)o High implementation risk since we would essentially be building a copy of a vendor package in
houseo No expandable platform since we would develop a point solution with few options to expand
the system footprint
253
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(4 of 4)
Alternative 3– Spreadsheet solution: Upgrade WES technologies and leverage existing systemso Upgrade the existing technology platform of WESo Continue to utilize Entegrate as deal capture system until needed functionality requires
replacemento Internally create new systems or purchase one off solutions, UDAs and manual processes as
required to meet business requirementsAlternative 4 (do nothing) was discarded since the current system is obsolete and built on nonsupported technologies, including Sybase database and Microsoft Visual Basic 6, which is no longersupported by Microsoft.In 2013 a 3rd party consultant (Structure Group) was engaged to perform an assessment of the projectincluding:
o How peer companies manage and settle bilateral contractso What vendors are capable of meeting the SCE business needso Provide a recommendation on how SCE should move forward
Structure’s findings were as follows:o There is no single universal solution that peer companies use to settle bilateral contracts.
Energy Trading & Risk Management (ETRM) systems, point vendor software solutions, and inhouse developed systems are all used by various companies
o Recommend implementing OpenLink because (1) it is unlikely that another vendor will provide asignificantly cheaper solution, and (2) OpenLink is the leading vendor to provide thefunctionality required by SCE.
Following the 2013 reassessment the overall recommendation is to proceed with OpenLink for thefollowing reasons:
o Doing nothing was analyzed and is not an optiono Immaterial cost differences between vendorso OpenLink has the capabilities to meet SCE needs and fits the technology footprint
254
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2010
- 20
1220
1320
1420
1520
1620
1720
1820
1920
20To
tal
Ong
oing
O&
M30
%3%
22%
34%
11%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or1%
298,
915
$
138,
961
$
159,
954
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
298,
915
$
SC
E IT
Lab
or11
%2,
701,
302
$
1,12
1,96
8$
11
2,24
5$
48
8,75
0$
60
8,33
9$
37
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2,
701,
302
$
SI L
abor
65%
16,2
84,2
62$
3,63
6,28
3$
-
$
4,
932,
629
$
6,36
5,35
0$
1,
350,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
16,2
84,2
62$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n11
%2,
767,
244
$
922
$4,
495
$42
,914
$1,
588,
913
$1,
130,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
2,76
7,24
4$
La
bor S
ubto
tal
22,0
51,7
23$
4,89
8,13
4$
27
6,69
5$
5,
464,
293
$
8,56
2,60
2$
2,
850,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
22,0
51,7
23$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
-$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
516,
750
$
-$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
516,
750
$
-$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
516,
750
$
Har
dwar
e12
%3,
125,
876
$
2,65
9,72
6$
418,
552
$21
,423
$26
,175
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$3,
125,
876
$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.3,
125,
876
$
2,65
9,72
6$
41
8,55
2$
21
,423
$
26
,175
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
3,
125,
876
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t25
,177
,599
$
7,
557,
860
$
695,
247
$
5,48
5,71
5$
8,
588,
777
$
2,85
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
25
,177
,598
$
C
ontin
genc
y-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
TOTA
L25
,177
,599
$
7,
557,
860
$69
5,24
7$
5,48
5,71
5$
8,58
8,77
7$
2,85
0,00
0$
-
$-
$-
$-
$
25
,177
,598
$Te
stim
ony*
7,55
7,00
0$
69
5,00
0$
5,
490,
000
$
8,59
0,00
0$
2,
850,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
25,1
82,0
00$
Assumptions:
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.Th
e pr
ojec
t will
be
impl
emen
ted
in A
ugus
t 201
6N
o ne
w re
quire
men
ts a
re in
trodu
ced
durin
g st
abili
zatio
n pe
riod
Com
mod
ity M
anag
emen
t Pla
tform
(CM
P)
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
255
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Generation Management System (GMS) Upgrade
256
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000149
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year250
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
250
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software753
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
GMS Upgrade
The Generation Management System (GMS) was developed and implemented in 2003 to enable SCE’s Trading and Energy Operations personnel to more accurately determine SCE’s net energy position throughout each operating day, thereby improving the opportunity to lower energy costs to its customers.
The GMS system has upgraded its software as new versions have become available, one software version was a major upgrade and the system been operating reliably. However, the current softwareversion is not compatible with the current versions of Windows and Windows Server, which causes maintenance issues.
GMS Upgrade
257
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
1 | P a g e
GMS Upgrade EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (1 of 2)
PROJECT OVERVIEW_
Buy or build: [Buy]Leverage current capabilities / Fit with existing roadmap: [Yes]
Description
The Generation Management System (GMS) was developed and implemented by Power Procurement in 2002. GMS enables SCE’s Energy Supply and Management personnel to more accurately determine SCE’s net energy position throughout each operating day, thereby lowering energy costs. GMS provides real time information for renewable, conventional and qualified facility power plants and enables SCE to update hour-ahead schedules as needed for generation deviations from planned schedules. GMS provides compliance data and monitoring for reporting as required by various agencies.
The GMS upgrade project will upgrade the existing system to the latest platform of the vendor software.
The GMS system is classified as a NERC Critical Cyber Asset and is subject to NERC CIP regulations.
Status
The GMS upgrade project was implemented in 2016
Ease of implementation
Medium: GMS is based on a vendor software package from Invensys PLC.
PROJECT RATIONALE_
Business needs
The GMS system upgraded its software as new versions became available, one software version was a major upgrade and the system been operating reliably. However, the current software version is not compatible with the current versions of Windows and Windows Server, which causes maintenance issues.
The system was designed and warranted by the vendor for 25 connections to power plants. A software upgrade in 2005 enabled the system to handle 50 connections, but this is insufficient to handle SCE’s current 105 connections and projected future portfolio as more renewable generation resources comes on-line. (An average of 60 new connections is expected each year with 225 total connections by the end of 2018).
The new software version brings a number of enhancements in data integration, alarming and screen development.
PROJECT RATIONALE (Continued)_
The original scope of the project in 2013 was to upgrade the existing GMS software and address the 2 WECC findings on dual factor authentication and comply with NERC CIP version 3 The scope of the project has been significantly expanded to include the following:
Implementation of a brand new window Active Directory forest (NSCE.com) and all of the servers and services needed to support the new domain Re-defining Catalogues system for NSCE infrastructure, which included NPSI too Address the NERC CIP v5 Requirements Implementation of the new Qualys Vulnerability tool Implementation of the complex Intrusion Detection System (IDS) Evidence collection for the entire NSCE infrastructure along with the NGMS infrastructure
The following Milestones will be completed in 2016 Milestone
NERC CIP compliant Infrastructure Site Acceptance Testing Implementation - Cutover Production Implementation Post Implementation Tasks:
Stabilization Decommission of old infrastructure
Urgency
A solution is needed in the short-term since the number of data connections to power plant is currently above what the original system was designed for, and new connections are continuously being added to support more renewable power plants as they come online. Also, the current version of GMS in not compatible with the current versions of Windows and Windows Server.
258
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
1 | P a g e
GMS Upgrade
A. Project Overview
Purpose
Same basic functionality with enhancements
No sub-projects
Technicalaspects
Provides data to other tools
The purpose of the project is to upgrade the current Invensys software platform (which was installed in 2002) with the current version of the software (called Wonderware ArchestrA).
The basic functionality of the software remains unchanged, but the new platform brings a number of enhancements:
Better data integration – easier to bring real-time data out of the GMS system to share with other systems. This will lower the development cost of future projects that require data from GMS. Alarming – easier to configure various types of alarms, e.g. when a renewable generating unit is operating outside the expected forecast Screen development – easier to add screens to provide overview information for multiple generating units or details of the operations of a specific generating unit.
There are no sub-projects identified.
GMS is a real-time control system that collects data about the operation of SCE’s power plants up to every 4 seconds. GMS receives operating instructions from CAISO and translates these instructions into commands that are sent to the plants’ control systems for execution. For example, CAISO may instruct the Mountain View 3 unit to increase output by 20 MW. GMS receives the instruction from CAISO, alerts the operator, validates the instruction against the Mountain View capabilities and forwards the instruction to the generating plant.
Currently the existing GMS system provides data on an ad-hoc basis for various analysis purposes. This ad-hoc data is manually exported. Going forward data is required on a consistent recurring basis for several new purposes:
Multi-Stage Generators (MSG). SCE has 3 new generators under contract that will require detailed real-time data in order to validate the counterparty invoices. Curtailment tracking. Detailed real-time data is needed to validate counterparty invoices for economic curtailment (where SCE instructs the generator to reduce output due to economic, rather than reliability, reasons). We currently have one active resource where the value or economic curtailments is approx. $1 million per year. We have over 20 resources coming on line over the next few years that will have similar requirements. CAISO pay for performance initiative. Detailed real-time data from GMS is required in order to validate CAISO settlement charges related to the Pay for performance market initiative. The pay for performance initiative is implemented by the IMEP3 project but GMS is the source for data needed for validation.
The current system would require extensive ongoing manual efforts to export the data required to support these initiatives on an ongoing basis. The upgraded system will enable automated data exports.
259
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2 | P a g e
B. Project Rationale
Compatibility with current Windows versions
Increase number of data connectionsto power plants
Software enhancements
The GMS system has not changed platforms since it was installed in 2002 and has been operating reliably since then. However, the current version is not compatible with the current versions of Windows and Windows Server, which causes maintenance issues. The new version is compatible with SCE’s current versions of Windows and Windows Server. This issue is urgent since the previous Windows versions will become unsupported both internally and externally over the next year.
The system was designed and warranted by the vendor for 25 connections to power plants. A software upgrade in 2005 enabled the system to handle 50 connections, but this is insufficient to handle SCE’s current 105 connections and projected future portfolio as more renewable generation resources comes on-line. (An average of 60 new connections is expected each year with 225 total connections by the end of 2018).
The new platform brings a number of software enhancements in data integration, alarming and screen development, which will make it easier to configure and customize the system to support a growing portfolio of generating units.
C. Key Benefits
Moreconnectionsto power plants
Compatible with current Windows
Software enhancements
Better data integration
Most importantly, the new software version provides more capacity for data connections to power plants. We are currently operating above the number of connections that the system was designed for (25) and new renewable power plants come online as we sign new contracts to meet the state’s 33% renewable portfolio goal. Connections to power plants are required to manage, monitor and collect real-time data from those plants.
The current version of In Touch software cannot run on the current versions of Windows and Windows Server. The new version will reduce maintenance issues since it is compatible with the current versions of Windows and Windows Server.
Software enhancements in data integration, alarming and screen development will make it easier to configure and customize the system without adding staff even as the size of the renewable portfolio grows.
The current version has limited data export capability and the upgrade will enable GMS to provide data to the right people at the right time to make the right decisions including needed curtailment tracking functionality in the CMP project.
260
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
3 | P a g e
D. Alternatives
Upgrade existing system
Upgrade the existing GMS system as described in this document. This is the recommended alternative.
Do nothing This is not a viable alternative long-term since the current system is already operating above the original design specifications and is only able to handle the current number of connections thorough mitigation efforts that are not sustainable will eventually fail as we keep adding connections to renewable power plants.
Delayimplementation
This shifts the costs, but does not reduce them. A delay will require increased mitigation efforts to keep the system operating and will impact the timing of information availability to the real-time operators.
Reduce scope Since this is an upgrade of the software platform reducing scope is difficult since we cannot upgrade part of the platform.
261
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
35%
16%
39%
10%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or43
%1,
079,
457
$
432,
134
$
40
7,39
7$
131,
233
$
10
8,69
3$
-$
-$
-$
1,07
9,45
7$
S
CE
IT L
abor
26%
660,
417
$
43
,945
$
13
5,75
1$
339,
064
$
14
1,65
7$
-$
-$
-$
660,
417
$
S
I Lab
or20
%49
3,40
9$
493,
409
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
49
3,40
9$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n0%
12,0
48$
5,32
0$
4,78
0$
1,22
3$
726
$
-
$-
$-
$12
,048
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
2,24
5,33
1$
-
$
48
1,39
9$
547,
927
$
96
4,92
9$
251,
076
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2,
245,
331
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
-$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
-$
Har
dwar
e11
%27
3,51
1$
-$
409,
592
$(1
46,8
76)
$10
,795
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$-
$27
3,51
1$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s-
$
-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.27
3,51
1$
-$
409,
592
$
(1
46,8
76)
$
10,7
95$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
273,
511
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t2,
518,
842
$
-$
890,
991
$
40
1,05
1$
975,
724
$
25
1,07
6$
-$
-$
-$
-$
2,51
8,84
2$
C
ontin
genc
y-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
TOTA
L2,
518,
842
$
-$
890,
991
$40
1,05
1$
975,
724
$25
1,07
6$
-$
-$
-$
-$
2,51
8,84
2$
Test
imon
y*-
$
89
0,00
0$
400,
000
$
98
0,00
0$
250,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2,
520,
000
$
Assumptions:
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.Th
e pr
ojec
t has
bee
n im
lem
ente
d in
Jun
e 20
16.
The
nega
tive
cost
for 2
016
is a
resu
lt of
the
2015
and
201
6 ac
crua
l cor
rect
ion
.
Gen
erat
ion
Man
agem
ent S
yste
m (G
MS)
Upg
rade
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
262
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Power Supply Projects less than $3M
263
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000028
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2020
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
1,200
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
1,200
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades748
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Usage Measurement System (UMS)
The Usage Measurement System project will replace the current UMS system, which is based on obsolete technology and is unable to support the use of the new SmartConnect® meter interval data. The availability of retail interval meter data from SCE’s SmartConnect® program requires significant changes to Power Supply’s usage aggregation and reporting processes. The current technology and design of UMS will not support the demands of the new SmartConnect® meter interval data. The SCE requirement to submit Settlement Quality Meter Data (SQMD) to the CAISOfor the cumulative and interval metered services for each hour of every trade day cannot be supported with the existing UMS system.
The replacement of SCE’s UMS will provide the ability to handle retail customer interval meter data from SCE’s SmartConnect® program and the replacement of obsolete technology with current technology that can be supported going forward.
Usage Measurement System (UMS)
264
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Usage MeasurementSystem
265
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameUsage Management System (UMS) ReplacementB. Initiative Description
The project will update existing tools to accommodate Smart Connect meter data for submission to theCalifornia Independent System Operator (CAISO).
Current tools take monthly cumulative billing files from CSBU systems; the proposed solution would usehourly meter data instead of monthly meter data.
The current Usage Measurement Aggregation (UMA) system was designed and developed in the late1990s and was updated in the early 2000s. The technology is over 10 years old. The system currentlyconverts monthly meter data to hourly values using statistical load profiles The proposed system wouldutilize hourly meter data from the Smart Connect data warehouse.
The project is planned to begin in 2018 and is expected to take less than one year to complete.
There are no dependencies on other projects.
C. Business Strategic Alignment
Replacement of the current Usage Measurement Aggregation system by a new system that can accommodateSmart Connect interval meter data will result in a more accurate Settlement Quality Meter Data (SQMD)submission to the CAISO. More accurate meter data will reduce the size of the CAISO uplift charges that arecaused by less accurate meter data submissions.
Utilizing the Smart Connect meter data to support the CAISO SQMD submission will improve the utilization ofthe Smart Connect assets. SCE is the only major utility in California not to use retail customer interval meterdata in its SQMD submission. Replacing UMA with a system that can accommodate interval meter data willmitigate the reputational risk that SCE faces by using cumulative meter data when interval meter data isavailable.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
The Usage Measurement Aggregation system is over 15 years old. While it continues to function, wehave deferred replacement of this system until the completion of the Smart Connect project. Now thatthe Smart Connect project has been completed we believe that we are obligated to use the moreaccurate hourly data instead of the monthly data with load profiling.
This project will replace the existing UMA system with the current SCE standard tools and methods. Thisproject will utilize the hourly meter data to report to the CAISO rather than the load profiled monthlymeter data.
266
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
E. Business Impact Assessment
The UMS Replacement initiative will impact following business capabilities:
Agreement Management Agreement Billing and PaymentManagement
Usage Data Collection
Analytics Operational Analytics Operational AnalyticsAsset Management Asset Maintenance Meter ServicingData Management Meter Data Management Meter Data ManagementData Management Asset Data Management Asset Data ManagementPower PortfolioManagement
Contracts Management Settlements
Current system was designed and developed in the late 1990s. The technology (PowerBuilder) is over 10years old. This project will upgrade the technology to current SCE standards, thereby improving userexperience as well as maintainability.The current application retrieves monthly cumulative billing files from CSBU systems. The files are thenconverted to hourly data using statistical load profiles. Then for submission to CAISO the profiled usagedata is aggregated based on rate class and voltage level. The current application is not flexible enoughand requires a lot manual work in case of system failure
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
G. Proposed Options
The proposed solution is to retrieve usage from the Smart Connect data and aggregate it with thecustomer’s usage who have opted from Smart Metering. Since the current UMA has been developedmore than 15 years in Power Builder, that is obsolete technology, it should be upgrade to the currentSCE technology and standards.
267
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
100%
0%0%
100%
Pro
ject
Dur
atio
n10
00ho
urs
FTE
SC
E F
TE ($
70)
1070
0,00
0$
-$
-$
700,
000
$
-
$
-
$
70
0,00
0$
Bus
ines
s C
onsu
ltant
s ($
200)
120
0,00
0$
-$
-$
200,
000
$
-
$
-
$
20
0,00
0$
Tech
nica
l Con
sulta
nts
($20
0)0
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l90
0,00
0$
-$
-
$
900,
000
$
-
$
-$
90
0,00
0$
Labo
r Sup
port
Cos
t4%
-$
28,0
00$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
28,0
00$
Har
dwar
e50
,000
$
-
$
-
$
50
,000
$
-
$
-
$
50
,000
$
E
mbe
dded
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
50,0
00$
-$
-$
50,0
00$
-$
-$
50,0
00$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
100,
000
$
-
$
-
$
10
0,00
0$
-$
-$
100,
000
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
000,
000
$
-$
-
$
1,00
0,00
0$
-$
-
$1,
000,
000
$C
ontin
genc
y20
%20
0,00
0$
-$
-$
200,
000
$
-
$
-
$
20
0,00
0$
TOTA
L R
EQU
EST
1,20
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
1,
200,
000
$
-
$
-
$
1,
200,
000
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
-$
1,20
0,00
0$
-$
-$
1,20
0,00
0$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Inte
rnal
Dev
elop
men
tTh
e da
ta is
wel
l und
erst
ood
and
is h
igh
qual
ityIn
tegr
atio
n w
ith S
mar
t Con
nect
met
er d
ata
Usa
ge M
easu
rem
ent S
yste
m
App
licat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
ject
Tota
l Cos
t of P
roje
ctFT
E E
stim
atio
n
268
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000148
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 1/1/2017
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year2,185
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,185
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades752
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
PPD Control Systems Hardware Refresh
Upgrade aging control/monitoring systems. Coordinate individual upgrade efforts according to dependency on resources, operational impact and outage windows, etc. Assess upgrade options to leverage investment opportunities for convergence to a standard platform if feasible.
A number of existing control systems are at or beyond their useful life, are not under maintenance contract, or require operating upgrades (e.g. Microsoft Windows) to maintain a stable environment. Running this equipment to failure is not an option, as the loss of control of generating assets can result in increased operating costs, loss of revenue and increased unplanned outages.
PPD Control Systems Hardware Refresh
269
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 1)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
PPD Control SystemsHardware Refresh
270
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 1)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NamePPD Control Systems Infrastructure RefreshB. Initiative DescriptionRefresh of end of life, out of support equipment that was centralized into IT in 2013/14C. Business Capabilities Mapped
D. Desired Business OutcomesEvaluation of the systems has revealed that many systems are at or beyond their useful life, are notunder maintenance contract, or require operating software upgrades to maintain a stable environment.Additionally, many of these systems will be out of standard support and will require SCE to purchaseextended support agreements. Running this equipment to failure is not an option, as the loss of controlof generating assets can result in increased operating costs, loss of revenue and increased unplannedoutages.E. Business Priorities & ConcernsCoordination of refresh with scheduled outages will be critical to the success of this refresh program. Sinceplant outages are scheduled months in advance, there is little room for schedule variance and the refresh of thesystems must work flawlessly. Efforts to perform these refreshes were halted due to the Control Systemsmanagement moving to IT. Business leadership and operations is concerned that delaying these upgrades willresult in unplanned outages and higher replacement costs.F. Business Strategic Alignment
Refreshing PPD’s core Control System Hardware is foundational to support their goals and objectives for eithersustained or improved Generation Reliability Index (GRI). With a trend of reduced staff and the need for greateroperational flexibility, Process Automation and the supportive Distributed Control Systems (DCS) are vitalcomponents of their various Plant Site Operations. The need for DCS to be current, modern, flexible, andsupportable is foundational to a reliable operation today and in the future. Allowing these vital components tofall into obsolescence introduces unwanted risk and allows for consequence contrary to the goals and objectivesof Generation for sustained or improved GRI.
271
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
14%
86%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se49
8,00
0$
-$
428,
280
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
42
8,28
0$
Ven
dor L
abor
65%
323,
700
$
22
1,30
6$
278,
382
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
49
9,68
8$
SC
E IT
Lab
or79
%39
3,42
0$
85,5
99$
338,
341
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
42
3,94
0$
SI L
abor
30%
149,
400
$
1,
767
$
128,
484
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
13
0,25
1$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n0%
-$
1,62
2$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
1,62
2$
La
bor S
ubto
tal
1,36
4,52
0$
31
0,29
4$
1,17
3,48
7$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
483,
781
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
-$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
-$
Har
dwar
e68
8,00
0$
40,5
35$
647,
465
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
688,
000
$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
688,
000
$
40
,535
$
64
7,46
5$
-$
-$
-$
-$
688,
000
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t2,
052,
520
$
350,
829
$
1,
820,
952
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
2,17
1,78
1$
C
ontin
genc
y20
%41
0,50
4$
-$
364,
190
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
36
4,19
0$
TOTA
L2,
463,
024
$
350,
829
$2,
185,
143
$-
$-
$-
$-
$2,
535,
972
$Te
stim
ony*
351,
000
$
2,
190,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
2,54
1,00
0$
Assumptions:
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.1)
Net
wor
k di
vers
ity a
nd c
apac
ity w
ill b
e su
ffici
ent f
or W
ide
Are
a N
etw
ork
(WA
N) a
spec
t of t
his
Dis
tribu
ted
Con
trol S
yste
m (D
CS
)2)
Pro
ject
sco
pe is
bro
ad a
nd c
ompl
ex w
ith h
igh
conf
iden
ce n
o si
gnifi
cant
add
ition
al s
cope
will
be
intro
duce
d3)
All
grap
hics
and
des
ign
rela
tive
to I/
O c
ount
is a
ccou
nted
for
4) R
ecen
t org
cha
nge
in G
ener
atio
n do
es n
ot c
ause
dis
rupt
ion
to g
eogr
aphi
c to
polo
gy o
f the
cur
rent
des
ign
5) D
esig
n fo
r fun
ctio
n be
yond
trad
ition
al P
roce
ss A
utom
atio
n is
com
plet
e6)
Out
age
Pla
nnin
g fo
r gen
erat
ion
asse
ts c
an a
ccom
mod
ate
revi
sed
Inte
grat
ed P
roje
ct S
ched
ule
PPD
Con
trol
Sys
tem
s H
ardw
are
Ref
resh
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
272
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0200400600800
1,0001,2001,4001,6001,800
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000230
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 6/1/2018
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year400
1,570
600
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,570
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software757
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Gas Solar Control Systems Refresh
This effort will refresh aging control system infrastructure which includes PLCs and Fire Protection System at Mountain View (MV) and Peakers PLCs Upgrade.
Without this effort the IT asset will continue to be at risk and can potentially impact MV and Peakersplants generation in case of failure.
Gas Solar Control Systems Refresh
273
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 1)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Gas/Solar Control SystemRefresh
274
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 1)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NamePower Production – Part of “PPD HW Refresh program” for “Gas/Solar Control System Refresh”B. Initiative DescriptionRefresh of end of life, out of support equipment that was centralized into IT in 2013/14.Gas Solar control systems will be focus of refresh starting in 2016 through 2018.
C. Business Strategic AlignmentEvaluation of the systems has revealed that many systems are at or beyond their useful life, are not undermaintenance contract, or require operating upgrades (Windows) to maintain a stable environment.Additionally, many of these systems will be out of standard support and will require SCE to purchase extendedsupport agreements. Running this equipment to failure is not an option, as the loss of control of generatingassets can result in increased operating costs, loss of revenue and increased unplanned outages.D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
This effort will refresh aging control system infrastructure which includes PLCs and FireProtection System at Mountain View (MV) and Peakers PLCs Upgrade. Without this effort theIT asset will continue to be at risk and can potentially impact MV and Peakers plantsgeneration in case of failure.The associate operations and IT effort in recovering the plant to normal operations will beresource intensive and challenging.MV plant will be subjected to generation risk of 1000MW in case of system failure; Pearkersplant failure will be subjected to NERC CIP compliance risk
E. Business Impact AssessmentThe refresh effort will require both IT and Power Supply resources for the planning, construction andcommissioning for the new assets and system even vendor resources will handle majority of the core workwith IT resource assisting.
The refresh will also need to be coordinated with plant operations to have advance notice for outage window.
F. Technology/Automation RationaleThe refresh effort will upgrade aging assets and control systems with latest technology andcomponents to sustain normal operations. Routine IT support will be restored to handle regularmaintenance based on yearly pre plan refresh/maintenance schedule moving forwardG. Proposed Options
The following options are under consideration:Option 1: Complete a like for like system refresh which offers the same functions using the sametechnology platform
Option 2: Re platform where applicable to maintain same monitoring/control functions but allow fortrending standard across gas/solar portfolio to enable future growth with added capabilities, functionsand potential opportunities for resource optimization.
275
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
16%
61%
23%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se99
2,25
0$
158,
760
$
60
5,27
3$
228,
218
$
-
$
-
$
99
2,25
0$
Ven
dor L
abor
50%
496,
125
$
79
,380
$
30
2,63
6$
114,
109
$
-
$
-
$
49
6,12
5$
SC
E IT
Lab
or85
%84
3,41
3$
134,
946
$
51
4,48
2$
193,
985
$
-
$
-
$
84
3,41
3$
SI L
abor
24%
238,
140
$
38
,102
$
14
5,26
5$
54,7
72$
-$
-$
238,
140
$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
0%-
$
-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$-
$
La
bor S
ubto
tal
2,56
9,92
8$
41
1,18
8$
1,56
7,65
6$
59
1,08
3$
-$
-$
2,56
9,92
8$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
-$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
-$
Har
dwar
e-
$
-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$-
$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t2,
569,
928
$
411,
188
$
1,
567,
656
$
591,
083
$
-
$
-
$
2,
569,
928
$
Con
tinge
ncy
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
TOTA
L2,
569,
928
$
411,
188
$1,
567,
656
$
591,
083
$-
$-
$2,
569,
928
$Te
stim
ony*
400,
000
$
1,
570,
000
$
600,
000
$
-
$
-
$
2,
570,
000
$
Assumptions:
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.1.
Finalprojectcostwillbe
determ
ined
basedon
finalcontractprocured
throughSCM
with
supp
ortin
gprojectS
OW
2.Re
curringsupp
ort/Mainten
ance
costfrom
EmersonSure
Services
willbe
offset
byelim
inationof
supp
ort/mainten
ance
costfrom
Rockwelland
othe
rservice
vend
orforR
ockw
ell
3.ITcontrolsystem
supp
ortresou
rcewillremainat
samelevelw
ithsupp
orte
ngineersre
traine
dto
supp
ortn
ewOvatio
ncompo
nentse
ndto
end
4.ITPSCteam
willprovideadeq
uate
resource
andSM
Esto
supp
ortp
rojectde
velopm
entw
hich
willruninparallelw
ithothe
rcom
petin
gcontrolsystem
projectsinGe
neratio
npo
rtfolio
PPD
Gas
Sol
ar C
ontr
ol S
yste
ms
Ref
resh
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
276
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1. WITNESS: Joanne Tran
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000079
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2020
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
500
1,000
SCE $
1,000
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,500
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades751
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Work Mgt and Reliability-Centered Maint
The purpose of this project is twofold: (1) replace mostly paper-based work management routines inSCE’s Generation department and (2) introduce Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) in generation. Work management covers how work crews and scheduled and dispatched to the various PPD field locations. RCM uses measurements and data analytics to service and/or replace plant components before they are likely to fail rather than replacing them at predefined time intervals.
Work management will improve and streamline the crew scheduling process in Generation. RCM will help control the ongoing maintenance expenses without sacrificing plant reliability or availability.
Work Mgt and Reliability-Centered Maint
277
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Work Management andReliability Centered
Maintenance
278
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Work Management and Reliability Centered Maintenance
B. Initiative Description
The purpose of this project is to replace paper based work management routines in SCE’s Power Productiondepartment (PPD) and to introduce Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) in PPD.
Work management determines how work crews and scheduled and dispatched to the various PPD fieldlocations.
RCM uses measurements and data analytics to service and/or replace plant components before they are likelyto fail rather than replacing them at predefined time intervals.
C. Business Strategic Alignment
PPD is looking for ways to streamline their maintenance operations to more effectively manage generatormaintenance. This project supports this initiative.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
Work management will improve and streamline the crew scheduling process in PPD.RCM will reduce the ongoing maintenance expenses without sacrificing plant reliability or availability.
E. Business Impact Assessment
Capabilities: Asset Management, Asset Operations, and Generation Operations will be enhanced to betterperform crew scheduling and to perform maintenance when it’s needed rather than on a fixed schedule.Process Impacts:
o Power Production, Power Generation, Plant Operation, Manage Generation Plant Operation will beimpacted from improved crew scheduling and implement reliability based maintenance
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
Implement work management system.Implement data acquisition and analytics to support reliability centered maintenance.
279
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
G. Proposed Options
We are currently evaluating the following options.
The PPD work management functionality desired is similar to Transmission & Distribution (T&D)’s workmanagement work crew processes. The operation of the field crews in T&D and PPD are similar – crews arescheduled and dispatched to perform maintenance and repair work in various field locations. We plan toevaluate existing T&D solutions such as Consolidated Mobile Solution (CMS), to determine if we can applythem to PPD business needs.
RCM uses measurements and data analytics to service and/or replace plant components before they arelikely to fail rather than replacing them at predefined time intervals. Asset data is stored in SAP today, butmay need to be enhanced for this effort. Also, data needs to be collected and stored in SAP to indicate thehealth of each asset. The health data may include existing measurements collected by the control systems(e.g. output levels and run time), data collected by other existing software tools (e.g. vibration analysis) anddata collected manually (e.g. lubricant analysis). This data will need to be imported into and stored in SAP tocreate a historical record of asset health and to the used for asset analysis. Data analytics will need to beprovided to use the asset and health data in SAP to analyze asset health, predict the likelihood of futurefailures and schedule preventive inspection and maintenance work before the asset fails.
280
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
20%
40%
40%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se50
0,00
0$
-$
-$
100,
000
$
20
0,00
0$
200,
000
$
50
0,00
0$
Ven
dor L
abor
100%
500,
000
$
-
$
-
$
10
0,00
0$
200,
000
$
20
0,00
0$
500,
000
$
S
CE
IT L
abor
50%
250,
000
$
-
$
-
$
50
,000
$
10
0,00
0$
100,
000
$
25
0,00
0$
SI L
abor
40%
200,
000
$
-
$
-
$
40
,000
$
80
,000
$
80
,000
$
20
0,00
0$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n65
%32
5,00
0$
-$
-$
65,0
00$
130,
000
$13
0,00
0$
325,
000
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
1,77
5,00
0$
-
$
-
$
35
5,00
0$
710,
000
$
71
0,00
0$
1,77
5,00
0$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
43
,000
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
43
,000
$
Har
dwar
e50
%25
0,00
0$
-$
-$
50,0
00$
100,
000
$
100,
000
$
250,
000
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
10%
50,0
00$
-$
-$
10,0
00$
20,0
00$
20,0
00$
50,0
00$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
300,
000
$
-
$
-
$
60
,000
$
12
0,00
0$
120,
000
$
30
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t2,
075,
000
$
-$
-$
415,
000
$
83
0,00
0$
830,
000
$
2,
075,
000
$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
415,
000
$
-
$
-
$
83
,000
$
16
6,00
0$
166,
000
$
41
5,00
0$
TOTA
L2,
490,
000
$
-$
-$
498,
000
$
99
6,00
0$
99
6,00
0$
2,
490,
000
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
-$
500,
000
$
1,
000,
000
$
1,
000,
000
$
2,
500,
000
$
Ass
umpt
ions
:*C
ost e
stim
ates
are
roun
ded
for f
orec
astin
g pu
rpos
es.
Spe
cial
ized
reso
urce
s w
ith b
lend
ed s
kills
in b
oth
Com
pute
r Ana
lytic
s an
d P
redi
ctiv
e R
elia
bilit
y w
ill b
e re
quire
d (i.
e. h
ighe
r cos
t ven
dor l
abor
)S
CE
sta
ndar
d to
ols
for A
nalty
ics
and
Rep
ortin
g w
ill b
e le
vera
ged
The
trans
actio
nal a
spec
t of t
he s
olut
ion
spac
e w
ill le
vera
ge e
xist
ing
SC
E s
tand
ard
plat
form
sN
o cu
stom
izat
ion
will
be
requ
ired
of e
xist
ing
SC
E tr
ansa
ctio
nal s
yste
ms
Onl
y la
bor d
olla
rs w
ill b
e re
quire
d fo
r Con
trol S
yste
m w
orkW
ork
Man
agem
ent R
elia
bilb
ity M
aint
enan
ce
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLa
rge
CO
TS P
roje
ct>$
5M
281
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Enterprise Software Projects
282
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CAPITAL WORKPAPERS - ITSouthern California Edison Company
OU SUMMARY, BY WITNESS, BY EXHIBIT(Nominal $000)
Forecast Capital Expenditures
TotalTestimony DescriptionItem
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2,600 3,400 5,200 5,400 5,400 22,0001 J.P Shotwell
SCE-04, Vol. 02 2,600 3,400 5,200 5,400 5,400 22,0001.1
0 3,400 5,200 5,400 5,400 19,400CIT-00-DM-DM-0000681.1.1
2,600 0 0 0 0 2,600CIT-00-SD-PM-0002171.1.2
283
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CAPITAL WORKPAPERS - ITSouthern California Edison Company
OU SUMMARY, BY WITNESS, BY EXHIBIT(Nominal $000)
Forecast Capital Expenditures
TotalTestimony DescriptionItem
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
4,200 0 0 0 0 4,2001 David R Pierce
SCE-04, Vol. 02 4,200 0 0 0 0 4,2001.1
4,200 0 0 0 0 4,200CIT-00-SD-PM-0001421.1.1
284
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CAPITAL WORKPAPERS - ITSouthern California Edison Company
OU SUMMARY, BY WITNESS, BY EXHIBIT(Nominal $000)
Forecast Capital Expenditures
TotalTestimony DescriptionItem
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
700 0 0 0 0 7001 Doug Bauder
SCE-04, Vol. 02 700 0 0 0 0 7001.1
700 0 0 0 0 700CIT-00-SD-PM-0001391.1.1
285
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Enterprise Content Management
286
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
1. WITNESS: J.P Shotwell
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000068
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: Specific Blanket
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
3,400
5,200
5,400
SCE $
5,400
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
19,400
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades721
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Enterprise Content Management
See Testimony
See Testimony
Enterprise Content Management
287
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Enterprise ContentManagement
288
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 3)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameEnterprise Content Management (ECM)
B. Initiative DescriptionThe Enterprise Content Management program is focused on improving SCE’s capabilities to manage a diverseand complex set of business records. SCE has been in business for more than 125 years, which has created alarge volume of business information that supports the Company’s operations. The vast majority of thisinformation exists in a variety of electronic formats, such as electronic spreadsheets and PDF files, as well as“structured” IT supported database systems used across the enterprise. This initiative will implement solutionsto minimize the risks associated with management of SCE business records, and deploy tools and controls toensure employees are able to fulfill their records management compliance responsibilities.
The volume, frequency of change, and variety of this information is ever increasing, as are the regulations. Theoperations of SCE are highly dependent on the accessibility, accuracy, and compliance of this information.This increasingly complex information landscape and growing pace of change in technology continues tochallenge the information governance and record keeping capabilities implemented in SCE. The initiativesidentified below are needed to support the evolving information governance needs required to mitigate therisks and challenges.
C. Business Strategic AlignmentThe Enterprise Content Management program will support Information Governance’s strategy of ensuringcompany records are accurate, accessible, and compliant. D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & BenefitsAnticipated benefits from the ECM program:
Improve employee culture and awareness of the risks associated with mismanagement of Company’sinformationEnhance safety, reliability and compliance by improving the quality of Company’s critical informationMinimize efforts required by employees for performing routine information governance activitiesAvoid fines and penalties resulting from non compliance
E. Business Impact AssessmentThe following business capabilities will be matured through this program:
1. Records Quality2. Information Management3. Records Management4. Information Protection
289
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
G. Proposed OptionsIn order to enhance the business capabilities to achieve Information Governance’s desired goals / outcomes,the following technology initiatives are being proposed:
1. Digital Signaturesa. Currently, the document needs to be printed, signed, and then scanned to create the
finalized business recordb. In the existing process, it may be hard to confirm the integrity, reliability, and trustworthiness
of the signature processc. Expand the rollout of Digital Signatures (CoSign) and eSignatures (DocuSign) across SCE
2. Centralization of Critical Recordsa. A significant portion of SCE's critical records (defined by being critical to operations, safety,
or compliance) are contained in unmanaged repositories, which lack the necessary controlsto perform records management
b. Complete migration of critical records into SCE’s standard records repositories3. Automated Record Keeping
a. Currently, the method for declaring, classifying, and dispositioning records is manual, whichis vulnerable to human error and judgement
b. Enable the management of records based on pre defined “rules” and automating these rulesin SCE’s standard record repositories
4. Email Records Managementa. Content would be developed by IT Cybersecurity and manually distributed to each location
when new content is made availableb. These records need to be retained per the Company’s record retention schedule and
provided the same records management protections and controls as document basedrecords
5. Enterprise Searcha. Today, users have no way to search all repositories (enterprise content systems, emails, file
shares, and cloud services), making it difficult to find the appropriate recordb. Make business information accessible and retrievable from multiple enterprise type sources
to create a single results interface, providing a comprehensive view of available information6. Structured Data Lifecycle Management
a. Provide the capabilities to enable records management, archiving, and legal disposition ofthe data residing within the SCE’s structured data transactional systems (i.e. SAP)
7. In Place Records Managementa. Allow users to manage content across SCE’s multiple content repositories
8. Digital Records Preservationa. Provide long term preservation of records in the face of changes in technological electronic
format and media standards, technological obsolescence, and degradability of technologicalmedia
Due to technological advancements, the ease and frequency of creating electronic records is exponentiallyincreasing, as are the compliance, safety, and operational needs. The risks associated with managing thiscomplex information landscape is significantly higher than the past. One of the alternatives to this ECMprogram is managing content manually, which will require a large dedicated staff. This team will need tocompliment operational, safety, and compliance organizations, who will continue to spend time to executeroutine tasks associated with searching, declaring, classifying, and disposing of SCE's records.
290
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
This manual alternative could result in high costs over a long period of time. Ultimately, the consequences ofmanual processes may include the following:
Reliability of company operationsRegulatory or legal compliance mattersUnsafe conditions for employees and customersFinancial or reputational damage
291
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
CO
TS L
icen
se4,
765,
000
$
1,27
0,00
0$
1,
535,
000
$
1,15
0,00
0$
81
0,00
0$
4,76
5,00
0$
V
endo
r Lab
or5,
387,
500
$
437,
500
$
1,
300,
000
$
1,60
0,00
0$
2,
050,
000
$
5,38
7,50
0$
S
CE
IT L
abor
1,07
7,50
0$
18
7,50
0$
260,
000
$
32
0,00
0$
310,
000
$
1,
077,
500
$
SI L
abor
4,31
0,00
0$
75
0,00
0$
1,04
0,00
0$
1,
280,
000
$
1,24
0,00
0$
4,
310,
000
$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n-
$-
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
15,5
40,0
00$
2,64
5,00
0$
4,
135,
000
$
4,35
0,00
0$
4,
410,
000
$
15,5
40,0
00$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
-$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
-$
Har
dwar
e63
0,00
0$
190,
000
$
20
0,00
0$
150,
000
$
90
,000
$
63
0,00
0$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.63
0,00
0$
190,
000
$
20
0,00
0$
150,
000
$
90
,000
$
63
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t16
,170
,000
$
2,
835,
000
$
4,33
5,00
0$
4,
500,
000
$
4,50
0,00
0$
16
,170
,000
$
C
ontin
genc
y20
%3,
234,
000
$
567,
000
$
86
7,00
0$
900,
000
$
90
0,00
0$
3,23
4,00
0$
TOTA
L19
,404
,000
$
3,
402,
000
$5,
202,
000
$5,
400,
000
$5,
400,
000
$19
,404
,000
$Te
stim
ony*
3,40
0,00
0$
5,20
0,00
0$
5,40
0,00
0$
5,40
0,00
0$
19,4
00,0
00$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
Ente
rpris
e C
onte
nt M
anag
emen
t
Larg
e C
OTS
Pro
ject
>$5M
292
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Electronic Document Management / Records Management (eDMRM)
293
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
1. WITNESS: J.P Shotwell
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 7847
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000217
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 11/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year2,600
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,600
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software722
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
eDMRM - 2015 Rollout
eDMRM is currently the SCE electronic solution for enterprise document and record management.
An enterprise solution, eDMRM is the System of Record for all of SCE.
eDMRM -2015 Rollout
294
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Electronic DocumentManagement / RecordsManagement (eDMRM)
295
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 3)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameElectronic Document Management / Records Management (eDMRM) – 2015
B. Initiative DescriptionThe eDMRM project expands and increases the capabilities and usability of the existing eDMRM solution byincluding:
o ENGINEERING DRAWING MANAGEMENT – Engineering drawings are being migrated into eDMRM. Thecontent in Corporate Drawing Management solution is being migrated to the eDMRM DrawingManagement module. The plan is to bring the remaining 4 engineering libraries into the same module,as well as to implement additional enhancements to the solution.
o RECORDS RETROFIT AND DISPOSITIONING – A series of changes need to be made to approximately 50libraries in eDMRM in order to meet compliance and audit requirements. These libraries have noRetention Class Codes applied, and this needs to be corrected. When the codes are applied, a RecordSeries Indicator (RSI) needs to be added to each record to control specified retention events. Finally, arecord disposition process needs to be configured and applied.
o HIGH RISK RECORDS – Information Governance has identified 33 Record Class Codes that areconsidered to be high risk based on criticality and complexity. These records need to be migrated toeDMRM to mitigate risk and increase accessibility. Today, many of these records exist on shared drives.
o OPENTEXT HEALTH CHECK – The eDMRM solution has grown from managing 2 TB of content in 2013 toover 19 TB in early 2015. As a result, less than acceptable performance often occurs. OpenText hasagreed to perform a Health Check, providing 3 4 SMEs to perform an end to end performance analysis.The expected result is a series of technical recommendations to improve performance that will need tobe implemented as part of this project.
C. Business Strategic Alignmento Improve the reliability of operations and safety of personnel and publico Avoid unnecessary engineering construction costso Improve speed and accuracy of emergency responseo Ensure integrity, protection and availability of high risk business records across the Companyo Significantly improve compliance controls surrounding unstructured datao Improve e Discovery and Legal Hold operationso Improve eDMRM system performance for end users D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
E. Business Impact Assessmento eDMRM Engineering Drawing Management solution, will implement several critical features
including:Grouping of engineering assets and related sub components, to enable bulk checkin/check out, a key requirement for engineering drawing operations. This will preventan inaccurate version of a drawing being issued for construction.
296
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
Enable powerful search using Drawing number range, to expedite quick and accurateretrieval of drawings.Integration with AutoCAD to significantly reduce the time for analyzing drawings.
These features will improve:Construction and M&I operations thereby improve reliability, safety and reduceavoidable construction costsAvailability of drawings critical for quick Emergency response operations
o Migrating unmanaged High Risk records from file shares and document libraries into eDMRMwill improve protection, integrity and accessibility of these types of records. This will result in:
Significant enhancement of compliance controls around unstructured data.Minimizing the possibility of privacy breaches, significant monetary penalties andreputational damage by keeping records in a highly controlled environment.
These features bring:Providing quick Emergency response of critical contentContent integrity that will deliver reliability, safety, and availabilityHigh levels of security to the recordsEnsures the high risk records are protected, available, and findable throughout thecompany.
o Records retrofitting adds a set of global metadata to all libraries in eDMRM. Global metadataapplies Information Governance document types, compliance security requirements, andrecords management retention and dispositions processes resulting in:
Significant enhancement of compliance controls around unstructured data.Strong enforcement of records retention and disposition of content.
These features bring:Improves compliance controls (FERC, NERC, etc.) surrounding unstructured dataIdentifies records for e Discovery and Legal Hold operationsEnsures the availability and findability of records throughout the company.
o The implementation of the OpenText Health Check recommendations will improveperformance and reliability for all users.
Engineering drawings will be processed faster, leading to more accurate and saferdelivery of drawing for outages, construction, and repairs.Documents being processed for T&D, Ethics and Compliance, and other enterprisewide applications will be delivered faster and more reliably.Overall response to all users will be enhanced, assuring improvements in productivityand higher satisfaction with the eDMRM solution.
297
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
The eDMRM application is the SCE architectural standard for unstructured content management and theadditional components of the entire program are included on the IT roadmap.
o Domain: Information Managemento Technology: OpenText Content Server v10.5
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
G. Proposed Options
Manual work around optiono Record migration, classification, and disposition can be solved with manual processes
performed by the content owners (users). However, high levels of risk exists when theindividuals do not follow company policy for records management and do not observerequirements to migrate content to a centralized location.
o Additional manual processes will be cost prohibitive.
298
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2013
2014
2015
2016
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%0%
0%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or0%
-$
-$
-$
SC
E IT
Lab
or0%
877,
427
$
23
1,62
2$
46
8,59
4$
13
4,97
7$
42
,234
$
87
7,42
7$
SI L
abor
0%11
,885
,261
$
1,
823,
680
$
6,
421,
981
$
1,
239,
835
$
2,
399,
765
$
11,8
85,2
61$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n0%
-$
-$
-$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l12
,762
,688
$
2,
055,
302
$
6,
890,
575
$
1,
374,
812
$
2,
441,
999
$
12,7
62,6
88$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
0%-
$
-
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
-
$
Har
dwar
e0%
148,
268
$
41
,802
$
-
$
49
,182
$
57
,284
$
14
8,26
8$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
148,
268
$
41
,802
$
-
$
49
,182
$
57
,284
$
14
8,26
8$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t12
,910
,956
$
2,
097,
104
$
6,
890,
575
$
1,
423,
994
$
2,
499,
283
$
12,9
10,9
56$
Con
tinge
ncy
5%12
4,96
4.15
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
12
4,96
4$
124,
964
$
-
$-
$
-
$
-
$
TO
TAL
13,0
35,9
20$
2,09
7,10
4$
6,89
0,57
5$
1,42
3,99
4$
2,62
4,24
7$
13,0
35,9
20$
Test
imon
y *2,
100,
000
$
6,
890,
000
$
1,
420,
000
$
2,
600,
000
$
13
,010
,000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
Elec
tron
ic D
ocum
ent M
anag
emen
t / R
ecor
ds M
anag
emen
t (eD
MR
M)
Larg
e C
OTS
Pro
ject
>$5M
299
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Plant Ledger Upgrade and Tax Module Installation
300
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0500
1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500
1. WITNESS: David R Pierce
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 7467
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000142
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 7/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year4,200
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
4,200
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software705
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Plant Ledger Upgrade and Tax Module Installation
Upgrade of the PowerPlan suite of capital accounting software to the latest commercially available version (2015.1.3.0) and the implementation of the PowerPlan Tax Repairs module, which automates the determination as to whether a capital expenditure is deemed a repair for tax purposes.
PowerPlan is the software application that manages the sub-ledger for SCE’s fixed asset accounting, property tax, and income taxes. However, the application has not been upgraded for the past eight years as necessary to remain technically supported and address changes in SCE’s business needs for managing capital asset accounting and IRS tax regulations. The upgrade reduces application failures from outdated vendor technology, greatly decreases costly SCE-specific customizations, and eliminates business process inefficiencies. The version upgrade is also necessary in order to implement the Tax Repairs module which enables SCE to continue to provide customers with the flow-through tax benefit associated with the tax-repair deduction in a systematic and auditable manner adhering to IRS guidelines.
Plant Ledger System Upgrade
301
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Plant Ledger Upgrade andTax Module Installation
302
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NamePlant Ledger Upgrade and Tax Module InstallationB. Initiative DescriptionThis project has two primary components:
1. The upgrade of PowePlan software and activation of the Tax Repairs module within PowerPlan. This willeliminate code customizations, spreadsheets, and existing pain points and provide new functionalityreducing manual labor through automation and new system integration. This effort, which will includethe necessary information for the tax repairs calculations in 2016. The upgrade effort will involvereplacing the current version of the Powerplan software modules and implementing version 2015.1.3.0of the software. With the upgrade will come the removal of 442 (Approximately ¾ are removals forcustom reporting fields; the remainders are business function and technical customizations) of the 566customizations within the current version of PowerPlan. Utilizing the standard features in version2015.1.3.0 will allow for automation, transparency of data and full integration between the modules.
2. The Tax Repairs portion of this project involves developing business process changes and implementingsystem modifications in order to properly quantify capital projects that can be immediately expensedfor tax purposes as a repair in accordance with Internal Revenue Service (IRS) guidelines. This effort willresult in significant benefits to SCE’s financial earnings. As an interim solution, upstream SAP, GIS, andDesign Manager (DM) changes allow SCE to comply with IRS guidelines while the upgrade portion of thisproject will deliver a long term IT compliant and SAP integrated solution reducing risk.
C. Business Strategic AlignmentThe Tax Repairs project will define business process and procedural changes to associate work orders and assetquantity to each circuit. The project will also perform the necessary data conversion and implementation ofsystem changes to capture circuit and asset quantity data and calculate repairs deduction on eligible orders.This project will also address business process changes in Capital Asset Accounting and Tax Department that aremeant to deliver process efficiencies and transparency in the data.D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & BenefitsIRS Compliance Effective January 1, 2016, the Revenue Procedures mandate the 10% replacement test onper circuit basis instead of average circuit basis. To meet this requirement, Tax Repair Project was launched todevelop business process changes and implement the Tax Repairs module of PowerPlan that will enable therepairs calculations per the IRS requirements.
Software Support Compliance The PowerPlan modules must be upgraded from version 10.2.1.2 to version2015.1.3.0 as the vendor will no longer support the older 10.2.1.2 version after 2014.
SCE IT Compliance – Solution should reside within SCE’s Data Center in a supported software solution.E. Business Impact Assessment
The Tax Repairs project will define business process and procedural changes to associate work ordersand asset quantity to each circuit. The project will also perform the necessary data conversion andimplementation of system changes to capture circuit and asset quantity data and calculate repairsdeduction on eligible orders. This project will also address business process changes in Capital AssetAccounting and Tax Department that are meant to deliver process efficiencies and transparency inthe data.
303
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
The PowerPlan solution is an existing technology within the SCE IT footprint. An evaluation was performed tounderstand SAP’s current capabilities. The result was a finding that SAP’s Asset Lifecycle Accounting (ALA)product was not ready to address the capabilities needed, thus PowerPlan was the selected option.G. Proposed OptionsAlternative #1 Continue with PowerPlan Upgrade / Tax Repairs
Functionality
IRS and SCE IT Data Center ComplianceElimination of Custom CodeData Accuracy and efficiency gains in transparency & reportingTax Repairs ModuleGreater integration with SAP and within PowerPlan SuiteSoftware Support Compliant (PowerPlan and Windows Server)
Drawback None
Alternative #2
Address compliance functionality needs through with current version (continuewith current version of PowerPlan)Provide Fix Issues & OU desired capabilities on O&M
Functionality Depends on O&M approved funding
Drawback
SCE IT Data Center Non CompliantNo gains in Transparency & ReportingLimited tax deduction calculations - Tax Repairs calculation conducted on non-supported applicationContinue with integration issues within PowerPlan Suite as well as with SAPSoftware Compliance (PowerPlan and Windows Server)Continue with manual spreadsheets due to lack of integrated system
Alternative #3Continue with current version of PowerPlanProvide Fix Issues O&M
Functionality Depends on O&M approved funding but limited to data issue;
Drawback
SCE IT Data Center Non CompliantNo gains in Transparency & ReportingLimited tax deduction calculations - Tax Repairs calculation conducted on non-supported applicationContinue with integration issues within PowerPlan Suite as well as with SAPSoftware Compliance (PowerPlan and Windows Server)Continue with manual spreadsheets due to lack of integrated system
304
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2013
2014
2015
2016
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%0%
0%
CO
TS L
icen
se97
0,71
5$
-$
-$
970,
715
$
-$
970,
715
$
V
endo
r Lab
or0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
SC
E IT
Lab
or0%
341,
726
$
60
,520
$
2,
690
$
17
6,52
5$
10
1,99
1$
341,
726
$
S
I Lab
or0%
7,05
2,69
0$
16
7,68
0$
-
$
3,
465,
714
$
3,
419,
296
$
7,05
2,69
0$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
0%-
$-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
8,36
5,13
1$
22
8,20
0$
2,
690
$
4,
612,
954
$
3,
521,
287
$
8,36
5,13
1$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
5%-
$
17
,086
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
17
,086
$
Har
dwar
e0%
271,
370
$
-
$
-
$
13
1,37
0$
14
0,00
0$
271,
370
$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
0%-
$-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.27
1,37
0$
-$
-$
131,
370
$
140,
000
$
27
1,37
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t8,
636,
501
$
228,
200
$
2,69
0$
4,74
4,32
4$
3,66
1,28
7$
3,
661,
287
$
Con
tinge
ncy
15%
549,
193
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
54
9,19
3$
549,
193
$
TOTA
L9,
185,
694
$22
8,20
0$
2,69
0$
4,74
4,32
4$
4,21
0,48
0$
9,18
5,69
4$
Test
imon
y *22
8,20
0$
2,
690
$
4,
744,
324
$4,
200,
000
$9,
180,
000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
Plan
t Led
ger U
pgra
de a
nd T
ax M
odul
e In
stal
latio
n
Larg
e C
OTS
Pro
ject
>$5M
305
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
PowerPlan Tax Repairs
306
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
WHITE PAPER
PowerPlan Tax RepairsPractical Steps for Implementing the Tangible Property Regulations
307
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
1
INTRODUCTION
Asset intensive companies are struggling with adopting the recent tangible property
regulations and safe harbor guidance in a way that minimizes manual manipulation, eliminates
system customization and provides necessary transparency. Any company anticipating
large capital expenditures over time should leverage the tangible property regulations to
deploy a robust tax strategy and optimize cash ow.
Historically, determining what is capital versus current expense for expenditures associated
with tangible property has been a long-standing, contentious issue for both business
taxpayers and the . ith the issuance of the nal tangible property regulations and
industry-speci c safe harbor guidance, the expectation is that much of the contention will be
replaced with more clarity instead of relying on the courts.
ow that regulations are nalized, the challenge shifts to how to implement the new rules.
However it’s not as easy as it appears. Why? In part, because the data necessary to automate
the process is generally found in different systems or solutions. Adding to the complexity
is the challenge of what the accounting, operations and IT groups need or are responsible
for when it comes to expenditures. “Who would have ever known how many systems and
processes a task like replacing a utility pole could touch? We spent a great deal of time just
tracking through the spider web.” – Tax Director – Regulated Utility
Despite the complexity and challenges, compliance with the regulations is required. This
means businesses need to implement sustainable processes that are ef cient, provide
greater visibility and insight, and are exible enough to allow for future guidance or audit
adjustments.
While meeting the compliance requirements taxpaying companies now have the opportunity
to take advantage of the clearer de nitions around the issue of capital versus repair to
maximize the deduction and minimize the cash tax liability, resulting in annual savings
anywhere from $10 million for smaller companies to more than $300 million for larger
companies.
308
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2
Companies who have successfully implemented the new tangible property tax rules have
incorporated key stakeholders across the organizations in the discussion, developed a
detailed implementation plan and modi ed business processes before incorporating the
necessary changes. “The key success to our automation project was getting all of the
stakeholders on board early with the bene ts to our company and our customers.” – Tax
Director
This paper discusses the challenges of implementing the new regulations, the bene ts of
automating tax repairs, and the critical steps needed to de ne your implementation process.
I. HISTORY OF REGULATIONS AND OTHER GUIDANCE
In 2006 the IRS issued the original regulations concerning the treatment of capital
expenditures which were withdrawn in 2008 and reissued after receiving a not-so-welcome
reception. Then in 2011, the IRS withdrew the 2008 regulations and issued new regulations
in temporary and proposed form. Are you confused yet? inally in September 2013, nal
regulations were issued with an effective date of January 1, 2014. The original regulations left
a great deal of uncertainty and prompted various capital intensive industries to approach the
IRS about issuing speci c guidance. As a result the Industry Issue Resolution IIR program
issued speci c safe harbor guidance for
1. Transmission and distribution network assets in the utilities industry Rev. rocedure
2011-43 ,
2. Repair versus capitalization in the cable industry Rev. rocedure 2011-2 ,
3. ower generation assets in the utilities industry Rev. roc. 2013-24 ,
4. Repair versus capitalization in the natural gas industry Rev. roc. 2014-1 , and,
. Unit of property for network assets in the telecommunications industry Rev. roc.
2011-22, 2011-2 and 2011-28 .
“Who knew all the integrated systems that are involved in the repair of a single power line?”
~ Tax Director of Regulated Utility
309
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
II. KEY CHALLENGES FOR LEVERAGING TANGIBLE PROPERTY REGULATIONS AND
SAFE HARBOR GUIDANCE
The key challenge in implementing the tangible property regulations and leveraging tax
repairs safe harbors is understanding the complexity of their application by industry. In order
to follow the guidelines, the rst hurdle is de ning a “unit of property” for tax purposes.
After de ning the unit of property, companies must then determine if the work performed on
that unit of property is a betterment, restoration, or adaption to a new or different use.
Inherent in de ning a unit of property and then making determinations as to the result of the
work performed is having the necessary data available. For instance, how are assets created
for book purposes? Do the book accountants track assets at the level necessary for tax or
for example do they consider everything at high, generic levels? In addition, the tangible
property regulations interact with other book tax differences associated with self-constructed
property particularly the U ICA provisions. Avoiding “double counting” and reconciling
these interactions is a must to ensure compliance and integrity of the deduction. Finally,
manual or customized solutions to complete these tasks are time and resource intensive and
make controls and reconciliations dif cult at best.
3
310
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
4
III. DEFINING UNIT OF PROPERTY AND APPLYING STANDARDS WITHIN SPECIFIC
INDUSTRIES
Understanding how units of property are classi ed can be helpful in making accounting
method determinations. For example, the unit of property differs by industry for track
structures, wireline telecommunications, wireless telecommunications, electric power
transmission, distribution and generation, and oil & gas distribution, midstream, transmission
and downstream assets. The nal regulations included the following examples
a. Electric Power Transmission and Distribution Network Property
De ned broadly, electric transmission and distribution property includes “real and
personal property that is used to conduct and control electricity at any point between
an electrical generating station and the location of consumption of the electricity
by the consumer,” such as wires conductors , towers, poles, structures and ttings
mounted on towers and poles, electrical interrupters such as circuit breakers, fuses
and other switches , transformers, capacitors, instrumentation, security structures, and
pad on which equipment is mounted. It also includes street lighting and traf c and
similar signal systems.
311
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
b. Generation property
xamples of generation property include coal- red, natural gas- red, oil- red,
hydroelectric, and nuclear-powered power stations. The safe harbor identi es the tax
unit of property by the functional interdependence of how the plant operates. For
example, a coal red plant’s boiler system is the tax unit of property but further broken
down into a boiler’s major components – steam drum, economizer, etc. The safe harbor
does not include renewable energy such as wind or solar.
c. Oil & Gas Property
For midstream pipeline transportation the unit of property may be the section of
pipeline between two compressor stations. When the Gas Distribution Industry Issue
Resolution IIR is released, it is expected the non-linear unit of property de nition will
be more speci c for compressor stations, processing plants, etc.
For downstream property re neries and chemical plants the tangible property
regulations guidance on unit of property should be referenced. Some potential units
of property are the re nery or plant in its entirety, including crude distillation units,
catalytic cracking units, hydrogen units, Amine treating and regeneration units,
Dimersol units, and catalytic reforming units chemicals created during the re ning
process; terminals and storage facilities.
We recommend consulting your tax professional as it relates to your speci c circumstances.
5
312
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
6
IV. AUTOMATION IS KEY TO YOUR TAX STRATEGY AND IN MAXIMIZING THE BENEFITS
OF THE NEW REGULATIONS
A company’s tax strategy historically includes information, people, processes and technology.
Information is key to your strategy and leveraging technology should enable the access of
information and not be a barrier to success. Companies should not rely on manual systems,
customizations or the infamous Excel spreadsheet to manage the process. By automating the
repair regulations and eliminating these barriers, companies can achieve following objectives
and bene ts
1. Creating a Sustainable Process – Allows you to synchronize your book asset records with
your tax asset records and easily keep track of your additions, disposals and transfers.
This provides the ability to support multiple books, users and companies.
2. Enabling Compliance – Enables the proper tracking of retirements and the proper
ordering and management of all tax basis adjustments including 263a interest and
overheads. The ability to incorporate and comply with future legislation is also facilitated
through automation.
a. Meeting SOX and Other Audit Standards – Helps ensure that the standards of
completeness, validity, and accuracy are met and provides 1 a system audit trail that
tracks who made changes when, and 2 a nancial audit trail with the ability to drill
down to work orders and invoices to support calculations.
3. Accommodating Business Changes – Facilitates forecasting and budgeting efforts,
allowing companies to quickly project cash ow considerations and provides data quickly
and more reliably for estimated tax and tax planning purposes.
. Maximi ing Financial Bene t – Enables the ability to assess large quantities of different
projects by type to quickly apply multiple scenarios before choosing which scenario is
best suited for your business. This also provides control of the overall process.
313
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
7
“When we began the process to implement the new regulations,
automation and compliance were our key priorities.”
~ Tax VP
314
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
8
V. TAKING PRACTICAL STEPS TO IMPLEMENT THE REGULATIONS
With more clarity around the issue of capital vs repair for tax, best-in-class companies who
automate their tangible property regulations can maximize the deductions and minimize that
cash tax liability, resulting in annual savings anywhere from $10 million for smaller companies
to more than $300 million for larger companies.
Once the barrier of interpreting and determining the appropriate application of the regulations and
safe harbor by industry is overcome, the key to success is applying the new standards successfully
and automating to maximize the bene ts. Best-in-class companies who automate their tangible
property regulations can achieve compliance, integrate their tax strategy and potentially maximize
the deductions and minimize that cash tax liability, resulting in annual savings.
Here are steps to take to ensure that your adoption and automation goals are met
1. Assess Your Current State - To determine where to start implementing your automated
solution, ask these questions
What methods and elections are currently in place?
What are your current book capitalization policies?
What will be the impact on other tax areas? 263 a , 1 , state income, earnings, etc.
2. Engage All Stakeholders – The level of detail required for automation may impact your
supply chain, enterprise asset management EA , operations and nancial systems.
Therefore, it is critical to engage other departments and functions across your business,
for example, engineering, operations, accounting and IT, in order to document gaps and
make plans.
3. Determine Your Requirements – Critical to the automation of tax repairs is developing
a road map of information ow across your entire business in order to determine your
ultimate requirements. Once you have your team assembled, de ne the requirements
of each of your stakeholders and use these as the guidelines for decision-making as you
identify changes needed for compliance and automation.
4. Identify the Changes Needed for Compliance – After you have de ned the
requirements of each of your stakeholders, take your previous review of your current
accounting process and policies and identify the changes that need to be made for
compliance. In addition, analyze the opportunities that exist for adopting new methods.
315
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
9
5. Identify the Gaps in Automation – Because there are so many departments and so many
implications with tax repairs, build a design map to identify system gaps and areas of
improvement needed to take full advantage of the tax repairs and be in compliance. For
example, the questions you need to ask are
What systems feed into your current ledger process?
Does your work management system allow for determination of categories of projects?
What planning tools are needed to run various scenarios?
6. Put It All Together – The nal step in developing an implementation plan for your
automated solution is developing roadmaps for your compliance and system changes and
establishing checklists for actions needed to close automation gaps.
7. Implement Your Plan – Implementing a sustainable and automated solution requires a
coordinated approach across the tax, accounting, and IT departments. The right partners
and products will make your tax repairs automation implementation a success.
VI. CONCLUSION
With the nal tangible property regulations in place, these new regulations present an
opportunity to deploy a more advanced tax strategy, maximize current deductions and
minimize cash tax liability for capital intensive businesses. Now companies can more easily
classify an asset as a repair or capital improvement. However, to take advantage and save
potentially millions in tax liabilities, you must eliminate manual assessments within your
processes.
By automating the entire tax repairs process, companies save time and the team can focus
on analyzing the data to make better business decisions, which ultimately helps maintain
compliance and manage a signi cant deduction on the return. Creating a successful
implementation plan for implementing the new tangible property regulations requires
assessing the current state of your compliance processes, including stakeholders across the
various businesses, and de ning requirements for each. Once an implementation plan has
been developed and successfully executed, tax departments will be quick to respond to the
demands of CFOs and the marketplace with accurate and up-to-date cash ow analysis. A
tax department with these regulations now automated will be able to interact strategically
with overall strategies of the company.
316
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
10
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Jim Dahlby – Vice President
Jim brings more than 13 years of experience at ower lan in a wide variety roles including
program management, product management, solution architecture and implementation.
He was the key architect of the ower lan Tax Repairs, roject anagement and Capital
Budgeting odules. He also designed and authored the Regulatory CWI , Tax Repairs, Asset
Retirement Obligation FAS 143 and Reimbursable rojects modules.
Jim graduated with highest honors from the Georgia Institute of Technology where he
received a Bachelor of Science degree in Industrial and Systems Engineering with a minor in
Economics.
Tim Price - Director, Professional Services
Tim rice is an experienced consultant with extensive systems integration and management
consulting experience. His expertise resides in the process design and implementation of
accounting and work management applications. rior to joining ower lan, Tim worked as
a anager at Accenture, in the nance and performance practice where alongside project
work developed and documented best practice work management and nance O s for the
utilities industry.
r. rice graduated from The University of Georgia where he received a Bachelor of Business
Administration in Finance.
317
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
11
ABOUT POWERPLAN
ower lan is an enterprise software company devoted to helping asset-centric businesses
optimize their nancial performance. ower lan combines purpose-built software for asset
centric accounting, tax and budgeting/analytics with domain expertise to help executives
generate cash, mitigate compliance risk and enable a culture of cost management. The
world’s most demanding asset-intensive companies trust ower lan to manage more than
$2.3 trillion in assets today. ower lan is a privately held company based in Atlanta, GA.
For more information, call us at 1 6 8.223.2800 email us at info pwrplan.com, or visit us at
www.powerplan.com.
300 Galleria arkwaySuite 2100Atlanta, Georgia 3033
tel 1 6 8.223.2800
www. ower lan.com
Unlocking the Power of Fixed Assets.
All content is Copyright 2014 ower lan, Inc. All rights reserved.No portion of the content may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form, or by any means, without prior written permission from ower lan. roduct functionality is subject to change without notice.
318
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Corporate Projects less than $3M
319
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
CAPITAL WORKPAPERS - ITSouthern California Edison Company
OU SUMMARY, BY WITNESS, BY EXHIBIT(Nominal $000)
Forecast Capital Expenditures
TotalTestimony DescriptionItem
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
7,670 4,140 2,370 1,110 3,970 19,2601 Jay Castleberry
SCE-04, Vol. 02 7,670 4,140 2,370 1,110 3,970 19,2601.1
0 0 0 0 1,000 1,000CIT-00-DM-DM-0000751.1.1
1,700 1,000 0 0 0 2,700CIT-00-DM-DM-0000741.1.2
0 2,200 0 0 0 2,200CIT-00-DM-DM-0000711.1.3
0 0 2,000 0 0 2,000CIT-00-DM-DM-0000661.1.4
0 0 0 0 2,600 2,600CIT-00-DM-DM-0000651.1.5
0 940 370 370 370 2,050CIT-00-DM-DM-0000621.1.6
350 0 0 0 0 350CIT-00-DM-DM-0000591.1.7
2,200 0 0 0 0 2,200CIT-00-SD-PM-0002161.1.8
620 0 0 0 0 620CIT-00-SD-PM-0002141.1.9
2,800 0 0 0 0 2,800CIT-00-OP-SM-0000251.1.10
0 0 0 740 0 740CIT-00-OP-SM-0000261.1.11
320
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000071
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2017
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
2,200
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,200
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades729
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Legal Re-platform
Upgrade from SharePoint 2010 to SharePoint 2013 on-prem to support highly integrated legal platform (LIMS) with custom SharePoint applications
Keep version current with the latest system updates from vendor
Legal Re-platform
321
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Legal PlatformModernization
322
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Legal Platform Modernization
B. Initiative Description
The objective of this program is to take a holistic view of the entire Legal portfolio and make improvements,reduce redundancies and customization, and streamline and develop efficiencies of the Legal applications andinfrastructure. This initiative will align with the strategic direction and objectives of Legal and IT. This programinitiative will be made up of multiple projects and enhancements that will be multi phased and will span overmultiple years.
SCE is planning to re platform the current core technical environment. The plan is to upgrade the current LegalSharePoint environment with a platform to address the existing technical obsolescence and gap infunctionalities. This upgrade will resolve gaps in functionality not met by the current platform, provide agilityand flexibility to meet changing business needs, improve interface with new systems, and streamline datasharing. The process improvements achieved will improve processing of Claims against SCE (bodily injury,damage to electrical appliances, accidents involving SCE vehicles, and property damage), the handling of legalmatters (comprehensive management system for legal matters), and regulatory proceedings. This will enableLegal to be more responsive to change such as data requests, lawsuits, court rule changes and compliance.
C. Business Strategic Alignment
This initiative will enable the Legal organization to operate in an efficient manner leveraging proven enterprisetechnology solutions.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
Address the technical obsolescence of existing applicationsReduce customizationAddress/close gaps in current functionalityProvide flexibility to meet changing business needsImprove interfaces with new systemsStreamline data sharingImprove reporting capabilitiesMobile capabilities
E. Business Impact Assessment
This program will impact all the major legal applications and business processes:o Legal Information Management Systemo Claims Information Management Systemo Regulatory Information Management Systemo Regulatory Claims Management System
323
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
o Workers Compensationo Legal Matters Management Systemo eDiscovery
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
Address the technical obsolescence of existing applicationsReduce customizationAddress/close gaps in current functionalityProvide flexibility to meet changing business needsImprove interfaces with new systemsStreamline data sharingImprove reporting capabilitiesMobile capabilities
G. Proposed Options
Option 1 (Recommended)Integrate and upgrade the Legal applications and capabilities into the current enterprise applications andplatforms.
Option 2Upgrade the existing applications separately to address existing gaps and functionality.
324
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%0%
0%0%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or0%
135,
000
$
-
$
13
5,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
135,
000
$
S
CE
IT L
abor
0%75
,000
$
-
$
75
,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
75
,000
$
S
I Lab
or0%
1,55
0,00
0$
-
$
1,
550,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
1,55
0,00
0$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
0%-
$-
$-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
1,76
0,00
0$
-
$
1,
760,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
1,76
0,00
0$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
0%-
$
-
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
-
$
Har
dwar
e0%
75,0
00$
-$
75,0
00$
-$
-$
-$
75,0
00$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
75,0
00$
-$
75,0
00$
-$
-$
-$
75,0
00$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
835,
000
$
-$
1,83
5,00
0$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
835,
000
$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
367,
000
$
-
$
36
7,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
367,
000
$
TOTA
L2,
202,
000
$
-$
2,20
2,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
2,20
2,00
0$
Test
imon
y *-
$
2,
200,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2,
200,
000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tLega
l Pla
tform
Mod
erni
zatio
n
Med
ium
CO
TS P
roje
ct$1
M to
$5M
325
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000075
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2020
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
0
0
SCE $
1,000
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
1,000
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades731
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Reg Affairs - TM2 Replacement
Requesting a new database system to manage regulatory filings and tariffs that has similar functionality to the current system; however has web-based front-end, task reporting, review/approval workflows, and quicker processing capabilities.
Require a new application that will manage tariffs and advice letters and accommodate the unique requirements of the California Public Utilities Commission for cancellation, editing, composition, and publication of submitted filings and documents on the Internet.
Reg Affairs - TM2 Replacement
326
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Reg Affairs TM2Replacement
327
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 3)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Tariff Manager System (TM2) Replacement/Upgrade Project
B. Initiative Description
Tariff Manager 2 (TM2) supports the State Regulatory Operations (SRO) department(s) in the preparation,management, and retention of California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) advice filings. TM2 pays particularattention to the management of tariffs, providing tools that support the unique CPUC requirements forcancellation, editing, composition, and publication of these complex documents. TM2 also automates thepublication of submitted filings, the currently effective tariff books and historical tariffs to SCE websites, savingsignificant personnel resources while helping to ensure that SCE remains in compliance with CPUC postingrequirements.
An update to or replacement of TM2 is requested due to system age (15+ years) and company reliance on a solecontractor to maintain the system. If a replacement system is procured or built, SRO requests that thereplacement system have similar functionality to the current system, with expanded reporting, search,review/approval workflows capabilities and a web based front end for broadened accessibility.
C. Business Strategic Alignment
TM2 functionality is in alignment with company and department goals.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
SRO relies on TM2 to produce, manage, and retain all of SCE’s California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)tariffs and advice letters. TM2 is compatible with Microsoft Office software, able to maintain up to date webpages and acrobat files providing a complete presentation of the filing history and currently effective tariffs.Successor system or upgraded TM2 version is expected to be web based for expanded user accessibility.
TM2 is a custom built data base system that manages tariffs and advice letters and accommodates the uniquerequirements of the CPUC for cancellation, editing, composition, and publication of submitted filings anddocuments to the internet. This system is support by IT; however, program changes are dependent on oneindependent contractor. The system is antiquated with several functionalities, such as expanded search andrate synching/population capabilities, not built into the system. These missing functionalities would increaseproductivity while limiting risk of error and noncompliance.
The new TM2 solution will provide the following benefits to the company and SRO organization:
Compliance with General Order (GO) 96 BBusiness records retentionCustomer service – Advice filing and historical and current tariff information is published and availableto both SCE personnel and the public at sce.comCloud base solution will provide easier, increased access for SRO staff
328
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
E. Business Impact Assessment
TM2 is currently being utilized by the Investor Own Utilities (IOUs), such as SoCal Gas, PG&E, SDG&E, and SCE,therefore the solution functionality impacts all IOUs. The application has remained in largely the same state,with few changes made since it was implemented more than 15 years ago. Worries over application lifespanand system maintenance/enhancement have been raised due to the dependence on dated technology and thesingle, external contractor. These issues raise challenges in making enhancements that interact with newtechnology. Therefore, if TM2 is not replaced or upgraded with new technology, then SCE will have to manuallymanage the thousands of tariffs and filings. This would lead to the following impacts:
Out of compliance from the GO 96BO&M labor increaseFinancial impacts
In addition to the impacts listed above, internal SCE and other utilities audits have suggested the need for a toolwith newer technology to ensure compliance with CPUC and risk avoidance of vendor obsolescence.
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
The solution will manage and retain tariffs and advice letters in addition to enabling SRO to remain incompliance with CPUC requirements in regards to the following tariffs specific activities:
CompositionPublicationEditingCancellationRetention
Moreover, the solution will handle task reporting, review/approval workflows, have improved search andquicker processing capabilities.
G. Proposed Options
Option1 – Do not replace or upgrade TM2:As stated in section E of this document, if TM2 is not replaced or upgraded with new technology, then SCEwill have to manually manage tariffs when the existing system becomes obsolete. This would lead to thefollowing impacts:
Out of compliance from the General Order GO96 BPotential increase of RMICompany reputation damageO&M labor increaseFinancial impacts
329
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
Option2 – Upgrade TM2:TM2 can be upgraded with newer technology by the same independent contractor that is an expert onspecific CPUC requirements for tariff management. While this option would seem optimal, the independentcontractor has become a single point of failure and high risk to SCE. If the vendor is out of business, there willbe no updates to the system, leaving SCE with the potential risk to resort to manual processes or assess othertools. The reliance on this vendor is a primary driver in upgrading the current TM2 system.
Option3 – Replace TM2:SCE and other Utilities have looked for other technologies that can fulfill the tariff management processrequirements under the CPUC regulations, but could not find anything off the shelf that meets the uniquerequirements of the CPUC and the numerous filing load that SCE is responsible for. This leads option 3 toeither perform a research for better technology solutions to be built by a third party or in house.
Procure a COTS Solution:The advantages of procuring a COTS solution includes the following:
Eliminates the high risk of having one single developer for software enhancements and bug fixesReplaces antiquated technology with newer technologyKeeps SCE in compliance with CPUC requirements
While there are several advantages of procuring a COTS solution, other Utilities, including SCE, were not ableto find any technology solution which can fulfill Utility Regulatory CPUC requirements under GO 96B.
Build the solution In House:The advantages of building a solution in house includes the following:
Eliminates the high risk of having one single developer for software enhancements and bug fixesThe solution can be developed based on SCE standards and policiesThe technology remains in SCE enabling the business to perform changes require by CPUCregulations or to perform changes require by SRO organizational needs
The execution of complete Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) may result in more expense than thepurchase of a new system. Additionally, the development costs are born strictly by SCE, instead of sharedamongst SCE and the other IOUs.
330
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%0%
0%0%
CO
TS L
icen
se17
5,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
175,
000
$
17
5,00
0$
Ven
dor L
abor
0%-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
S
CE
IT L
abor
0%12
5,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
125,
000
$
12
5,00
0$
SI L
abor
0%50
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
500,
000
$
50
0,00
0$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l80
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
800,
000
$
80
0,00
0$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
4%-
$
5,
000
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
5,
000
$
Har
dwar
e0%
50,0
00$
-$
-$
-$
-$
50,0
00$
50,0
00$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
50,0
00$
-$
-$
-$
-$
50,0
00$
50,0
00$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t85
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
850,
000
$
85
0,00
0$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
170,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
17
0,00
0$
170,
000
$
TOTA
L1,
020,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
1,02
0,00
0$
1,02
0,00
0$
Test
imon
y *-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
000,
000
$
1,
000,
000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
tReg
Affa
irs -
TM2
Rep
lace
men
t
Med
ium
CO
TS P
roje
ct$1
M to
$5M
331
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: SERVICE MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 7849
WBS Element: CIT-00-OP-SM-000025
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year2,800
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,800
Program Group: OPERATIONS - IT
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software724
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Integrated Financial Planning
This project aims to improve the effectiveness of the forecast and planning processes across Finance.
Deliverables will enhance financial and operational decision making capability supported by more accurate, integrated, transparent and timely enterprise data.
Integrated Financial Planning
332
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Integrated Budget Planning
333
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Integrated Budget Planning Project will enhance the financial planning processes and will integrate the shortterm and long term planning processes into one standardized methodology.B. Initiative Description
This project aims to improve the effectiveness of the forecast and planning processes across Finance.Specifically, we aim to:
Integrate planning processes across short term and long term planning to allow use of common toolsEstablish consistent planning methodologies and policies based on leading practicesIntegrate data and planning assumptions across Treasurer’s, Capital Asset Analytics, Income Tax, andRegulatory AffairsDesign, configure and test an integrated short term financial planning model to align stakeholders forfinancial planning purposesCreate data repository for all financial planning activities required to develop short term financialstatements and increase data availability and transparencyProduce automated financial statements – Balance Sheet, Income Statement, Cash Flow Statement forbudget and long term forecast
C. Business Capabilities Mapped
The following Business Capabilities are identified as being a part of the Integrated Budget and Long TermPlanning project:
Financial PlanningD. Desired Business Outcomes
o Provide a single platform to easily produce an integrated set of pro forma financial statementsassociated with our budgeting process, short term planning and long term planning processesthat are consistent, accurate and transparent
o Automate recurring financial planning tasks so that finance can focus on scenario modeling andcomparative analyses for improved decision making. Ability to save scenario results for futureuse will aid with comparative analysis
o Support monthly financial reforecasts. Improvement in turnaround time via the platform willfacilitate monthly reforecasts of key planning items
o Minimize variances arising from methodology differences and time spent reconciling. Platformwill utilize the same methodologies and input sources to produce results for both short termand long term financial planning
334
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
o Provide a set of deep variance commentary functionality that can easily allow the finance teamto drill down into the key drivers and help establish cause effect relationships. Currently thiscapability is handicapped as the relevant information ( data, assumptions and calculations) isprocessed and stored across disparate systems within departments in corporate finance andregulatory planning
o Provide automation to generate control and summary reports to facilitate regular review forCurrent/Deferred Income Tax accruals, Income Tax payments and to verify book/tax differencestie to related Plant and Balancing Account forecasts. Model will also add greater data detailsthat could potentially improve tax repair forecasts
o Establish a platform that is stable, repeatable and secure that can guide users through definedprocesses, guard against inadvertent data deletion and provide flexibility to the business tomake modeling changes without incremental support from IT
o Ability to execute a financial forecast more often in a calendar year.
E. Business Priorities & Concerns
The business priorities and concerns identified and associated key challenges to achieving the businessinitiatives are listed below:
Provide integrated Pro Forma Financial Statements.Reduce cycle times to produce monthly updates to earnings per share and cash forecasts for thecurrent year outlook, budget, and long term plan – Efficient data integrations, calculations andapproval controls will be required to provide timely and accurate resultsAlign financial planning modeling assumptions across Finance and Treasury – Harmonizing twoseparate processes today will require a common understanding of both methodologies and purpose ofprocessesCreate new data repository and building a stable platform for planning calculations to increasetransparency – Complex, offline calculations may be required due to complexity, flexibility orcompliance with FERC or CPUC requirements. A single platform that includes both the data andcalculations across all planning workstreams will improve drilldown and variance driver analysisIncorporate leading practices into the planning process framework – Change impacts to incorporateleading practices into the broader user group may require further analysis or preparation for futurephases
F. Strategic Business Alignment
The Integrated Financial Planning project will improve our pro forma financial statements and alignswith the following 2016 SCE interface goals:
Core earnings targetCost effective financingsCash management to maximize AFUDCAdvance a High Performance Organization culture
335
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%0%
0%0%
0%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
SC
E IT
Lab
or0%
69,0
37$
28,2
67$
40,7
70$
-$
-$
-$
-$
69,0
37$
SI L
abor
0%3,
911,
948
$
1,32
6,08
0$
2,58
5,86
8$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
3,
911,
948
$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l3,
980,
985
$
1,35
4,34
7$
2,62
6,63
8$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
3,
980,
985
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
0%-
$
-
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
-
$
Har
dwar
e0%
358,
281
$
30
4,28
1$
54
,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
35
8,28
1$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
358,
281
$
30
4,28
1$
54
,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
35
8,28
1$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t4,
339,
266
$
1,65
8,62
8$
2,68
0,63
8$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
4,
339,
266
$
Con
tinge
ncy
5%13
4,03
1.90
$
13
4,03
2$
-$
-$
-$
-$
134,
032
$
TOTA
L4,
473,
298
$
1,65
8,62
8$
2,81
4,67
0$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
4,
473,
298
$
Test
imon
y*1,
658,
628
$
2,
800,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
4,45
8,62
8$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
Inte
grat
ed B
udge
t Pla
nnin
g
Med
ium
CO
TS P
roje
ct$1
M to
$5M
336
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 7826
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000216
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year2,200
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,200
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software733
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Union Negotiations
As a result of the agreement entered into between SCE and IBEW, Local 47, how we accrue, use, and earn sick leave and other paid time off benefits have changed significantly. These changes willrequire a restructure of the existing SAP Time Management and Payroll schemas, configuration and enhancement of timekeeping and pay programs, interfaces, reports and forms.
The project is being delivered in two phases. Phase 1 specifies work to be delivered in 2015 with an effective date of January 1, 2016. Phase 1 focuses on restructure of SAP Time Management and Payroll schemas and configuration. Additionally and until Phase 2 work is completed and released into production, the implementation of interim processes are required to monitor and make adjustments to ensure employees timekeeping and pay are accurate.
Union Negotiations
337
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 3)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Union Negotiations
338
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 3)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Initiative name: Union NegotiationsB. Initiative Description
As a result of the agreement entered into between SCE and IBEW, Local 47, how we accrue, use, and earn sickleave and other paid time off benefits have changed significantly. These changes will require a restructure ofthe existing SAP Time Management and Payroll schemas, configuration and enhancement of timekeeping andpay programs, interfaces, reports and forms.
The project is being delivered in two phases. Phase 1 work was delivered in 2015 with an effective date ofJanuary 1, 2016. Phase 1 focused on restructure of SAP Time Management and Payroll schemas andconfiguration. Additionally and until Phase 2 work is completed and released into production, theimplementation of interim processes are required to monitor and make adjustments to ensure employeestimekeeping and pay are accurate.
This document provides the business case for Phase 2 of the Union Negotiations Project. Phase 2 addresses the“technical” (back end) impact requiring SAP programming changes to existing 3rd party interfaces, reports,enhancements, and forms. There will also be a need for additional configuration and automation or eliminationof the interim processes set up in Phase 1. Phase 2 completes the delivery of system changes required to meetthe Disability and other paid time off benefits plans changes collectively bargained and entered into anagreement between the company and the unions.
Phase 2 will also address the resolution of outstanding defects impacting disability related time and pay throughprocess improvements. Phase 2 allows the company to fully comply with the recently implemented CaliforniaPaid Sick Leave Assembly Bill (AB1522).
If Phase 2 is not completed in a timely manner, increased operational support will be required by both HRDisability Management and Corporate Payroll to continue managing the interim processes that resulted fromPhase 1. Both HR Disability Management and Corporate Payroll will assume the additional operational supportwith existing staffing levels with the understanding that Phase 2 will be delivered in 3rd QTR 2016.C. Business Strategic Alignment
1. Benefits union negotiations (with IBEW and UWUA) and resulting significant changes contribute to thecompany’s overall goal to achieve top quartile performance in cost and satisfaction. Changes resultingfrom benefits union negotiations enabled the company to more closely align with industrywidebenchmarks while still offering competitive wages and benefits to its employees.
2. Benefits Union Negotiations Phase 2 project also enables the automation of manual work processesaround timekeeping and payroll for employees on extended disability leaves. These processimprovements, through automation, enable the company to further achieve O&M cost reductions.
339
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 3)
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
In order to meet the negotiated January 1, 2016 effective date of the disability benefits plan changes agreed betweenthe company and the union, it was necessary to split the project up into two phases.
Phase 1 delivered the configuration or “front end” changes that provide the employee with the necessaryinformation and tools to report disability and other paid time off benefits per the new plan.
Phase 2 was planned to deliver the “back end” changes, consisting primarily of program coding changes toprograms, interfaces, reports, and forms.
And until these “back end” program coding changes were delivered, Phase 1 introduced manualprocesses that would be necessary to carry out until Phase 2 changes were completed andimplemented in production.
These manual processes will impact both the HR Disability Management team and ControllersTimekeeping & Payroll Operations Support group who will be responsible for ensuring the newdisability and paid time off benefits are used according to the collective bargaining agreements,company disability benefits plan and policies.
Additional operational support will be required to create and generate every pay period (or morefrequently) reports around disability related timekeeping and pay, reviewed and adjustmentsidentified and made to ensure impacted employees time and pay are accurate and processed timely.
Both HR and Corporate Payroll have determined to take on the additional work during the deliveryPhase 2 without increasing current staffing levels in 2016. If, however, Phase 2 project is not deliveredin 2016, HR will need additional staffing.
Phase 2 will also complete the remaining changes required to be fully compliant with Assembly Bill 1522 (AB1522),California Paid Sick Leave law. By completing the changes required by AB1522 along with the program changesidentified in scope for Phase 2, we will be able to leverage development and testing efforts and costs and be fullycompliant with all requirements set forth by AB1522.
If Phase 2 is implemented in 2016:
Risk is mitigated through automation of changes and ensure accurate and timely pay to employees.
Compliance to mandates and required local, state, and federal reporting agencies around disability leaves(FMLA, AB1522, Wage & Hour laws) will be accomplished and manual efforts automating increasing accuracy ofand timeliness in 3rd party reporting requirements and employees pay.
E. Business Impact Assessment
CapabilitiesOrganizationalProcess
o Indicate which processes this initiative will impact and how they will be impactedo Indicate if this impacts a critical business process, and if so, indicate any Business
Continuity/Disaster Recovery implications (e.g. immediate recovery, etc.)
340
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 3)
Capabilities, Organizational and Process impacts:o Phase 2 will automate many of the manual, interim processes deliberately introduced in Phase 1 to
meet the January 1, 2016 effective date. HR Disability and Corporate Payroll will carry out manualprocesses to ensure reporting and payroll requirements are met within specified time frames untilthe back end changes are implemented.
o Phase 2 automates the tedious manual entry of timekeeping and pay for employees out ondisability.
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
Deliverables implemented as part of Phase 2 will automate/eliminate the manual, interim processes introducedin Phase 1 as well as other labor intensive processes to process time and pay for employees on disability leave.Through automation, legal reporting requirements to third parties, including local, state and federal agencieswill be met as well as legislative requirements such as CA Paid Sick Leave (AB1522) ensuring timely and accuratereporting.G. Proposed Options
Option 1:The recommendation is to continue with Phase 2 which will automate/eliminate the manual, interimprocesses introduced in Phase 1 as well as other labor intensive processes to process time and pay foremployees on disability leave. Through automation, legal reporting requirements to third parties, includinglocal, state and federal agencies will be met as well as ensuring accurate and timely pay to employees. Thebusiness sponsors are willing to assume the additional work as a result of the manual, interim processes in2016 but will not be able to sustain without additional O&M labor budget beyond 2016.
Option 2:Do not implement phase 2. This will require extensive manual querying and extracting of large amounts ofemployees detailed timekeeping and payroll data that need to be analyzed and adjustments identified toensure accurate and timely reporting and pay. This involves having a thorough understanding of disabilityrelated time off laws that require certain types of disability leave to be taken before other types and tounderstand eligibility and waiting period rules outlined by the company’s disability and other paid time offbenefits plans and policies. If Phase 2 isn’t pursued, the business will have to seek additional O&M laborbudget to support the additional work introduced as a result of Phase 1 on an ongoing basis.
341
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
100%
0%0%
0%0%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
SC
E IT
Lab
or0%
83,8
75$
83,8
75$
-$
-$
-$
-$
83,8
75$
SI L
abor
0%1,
750,
000
$
1,75
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
750,
000
$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l1,
833,
875
$
1,83
3,87
5$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
833,
875
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
0%-
$
-
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
-
$
Har
dwar
e0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
833,
875
$
1,83
3,87
5$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
833,
875
$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
366,
775
$
36
6,77
5$
-$
-$
-$
-$
366,
775
$
TOTA
L2,
200,
650
$
2,20
0,65
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
2,20
0,65
0$
Test
imon
y *2,
200,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2,
200,
000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
Uni
on N
egot
iatio
ns
Med
ium
CO
TS P
roje
ct$1
M -
$5M
342
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Operation Services Projects
343
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
C-CURE 9000
344
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0100200300400500600700800
1. WITNESS: Doug Bauder
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 7430
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000139
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 7/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year700
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
700
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software706
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
CCURE 9000
Many SCE facilities, including all major buildings, control centers, and generation facilities, are protected by a centrally-controlled alarm and event management system. This physical access control system (PACS) logs all access and attempted access to SCE facilities in connection with the Corporate Security ID badging system.
The PACS upgrade project is to address the above-described limitations of the current version and to meet the projected growth of SCE’s physical security system needs.
CCURE 9000
345
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
C CURE 9000
346
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameC CURE 9000B. Initiative DescriptionUpgrade the C CURE 8000 application to C CURE 9000. The existing PACS application, C CURE 8000, was installedin 1998. It was designed to integrate up to 150 alarm panels to maintain a high reliability of operations. Thereare currently 340 alarm panels connected to PACS and it is now well beyond its reliable capacity. It is unable toreliably accommodate additional facilities or secured areas within facilities. Other significant challenges includetechnical limitations that prevent integration with other security and compliance systems. These limitationsinclude reliance on a non standard database format, non scalable architecture, 32 bit operating environment,and performance issues. Additionally for NERC CIP v5 the following elements are required; Create a scalableenvironment that meets 99.9% reliability and meet the 15 minutes response time required by. Migrate 122 sitesfrom the existing system to the new system. Deploy independent Satellite Application Servers (SAS) to ensuresegregation of NERC and non NERC alarm groups. Implement a new architectural solution to allow for unlimitedexpansion of alarms; Include multiple levels of resiliency using multiple database & application servers; andSynchronize all database servers automatically.C. Business Strategic AlignmentThe upgraded system will enable Corporate Security to expand security operations monitoring, maintaincompliance with NERC CIP v5 requirements and the secondary site for Disaster Recovery will enable applicationredundancy for Corporate Security when data center could be down.D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & BenefitsThe upgraded system will enable Corporate Security to expand security operations monitoring, maintain compliancewith NERC CIP v5 requirements and the secondary site for Disaster Recovery will enable application redundancy forCorporate Security when data center could be down.
E. Business Impact Assessment
Capabilities (Note: Enterprise capability map can be used to help understand capabilities to be matured.)OrganizationalProcesses
o Indicate which processes this initiative will impact and how they will be impacted.o Indicate if this impacts a critical business process, and if so, indicate any Business
Continuity/Disaster Recovery implications (e.g., immediate recovery, etc.).
Upgrade to C CURE 9000 from C CURE 8000. The C CURE 9000 Upgrade includes:1. Migration of the existing 122 sites programmed in C CURE 8000 over to C CURE 9000;2. Implementation of a scalable and high availability C CURE 9000 environment to support future NERC
and Non NERC sites;Physical Access Control System (PACS) upgrade scope into NERC CIP compliance:
1. Create a scalable environment that meets 99.9% reliability and meet the 15 minutes response timerequired by NERC CIP v5;
2. Migrate 122 sites from the existing system to the new system;3. Deploy independent Satellite Application Servers (SAS) to ensure segregation of NERC and non NERC
alarm groups;4. Implement a new architectural solution to allow for unlimited expansion of alarms;
347
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
At the direction of Corporate Security, IT Cybersecurity and Enterprise Architecture, in collaboration withSiemens, reviewed SCE’s Physical Security Infrastructure (PSI) and made recommendations to expand the scopeof the C CURE 9000 project. As a result, PSI is now the umbrella term that now describes this project that isaimed to strengthen SCE’s cybersecurity posture in accordance with Enterprise Security Architecture’s design.Additionally, three key strategic functions within SCE’s physical security technology were added to the scope:
1. Build an effective support model between Corporate Security and IT2. Expand the NERC scope to include all C CURE servers and other PSI components, except non NERCmonitoring and video surveillance3. Enhance SCE’s geographic disaster recovery capability by creating a Disaster Recovery (DR) site tosignificantly reduce the time to return to normal operational level
G. Proposed OptionsTwo other options were considered in connection with the PACS upgrade project:
1. Complete replacement of PACS;2. Create a secondary, independent PACS environment.
The first option would require SCE to replace all alarm panels at current alarmed facilities. This isbased on the design and deployment of the current alarm system solution, where all the currentalarm system panels are unique to the PACS software. This option was rejected because it wouldnot be cost effective to replace all alarm system components when compared to upgrading theexisting application.
The second option would create operational challenges in maintaining two access control systems.Implementing this option would require the IT and Corporate Security departments to increase staffto operate multiple application environments. Additionally, security personnel would need to usetwo different computing environments to monitor security alarms, increasing operational risks andchallenges. This solution was not considered viable because of the operating challenges incoordination, communication, and response management.
348
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or0%
-$
-$
SC
E IT
Lab
or0%
1,93
7,66
8$
77
,708
$
60
6,32
7$
66
9,14
7$
52
4,40
7$
60
,079
$
1,
937,
668
$
SI L
abor
0%6,
243,
508
$
13,4
98$
2,23
2,83
2$
1,12
5,46
8$
2,25
6,16
9$
615,
541
$
6,
243,
508
$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n0%
-$
-$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l8,
181,
176
$
91,2
06$
2,83
9,15
9$
1,79
4,61
5$
2,78
0,57
6$
675,
620
$
8,
181,
176
$
-$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
-$
-$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
-$
-$
-
$
H
ardw
are
0%1,
373,
590
$
-$
182,
173
$
231,
403
$
926,
239
$
33,7
75$
1,37
3,59
0$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
0%-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.1,
373,
590
$
-$
182,
173
$
231,
403
$
926,
239
$
33,7
75$
1,37
3,59
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t9,
554,
766
$
91,2
06$
3,02
1,33
2$
2,02
6,01
8$
3,70
6,81
5$
709,
395
$
70
9,39
5$
Con
tinge
ncy
0%-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$-
$
-
$
TOTA
L9,
554,
766
$
91,2
06$
3,02
1,33
2$
2,02
6,01
8$
3,70
6,81
5$
709,
395
$9,
554,
766
$Te
stim
ony*
90,0
00$
3,02
0,00
0$
2,03
0,00
0$
3,71
0,00
0$
700,
000
$9,
550,
000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
C-C
UR
E 90
00
Larg
e C
OTS
Pro
ject
> $5
M
349
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
Operational Services Projects less than $3 Million
350
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0100200300400500600700800
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: SERVICE MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-OP-SM-000026
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2019
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
0
740
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
740
Program Group: OPERATIONS - IT
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: MOBILE RADIOS
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareMobile Radios723
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Mobile Field Response
The mobile command center therefore needs to adequately support operational communication needs for SCE employees and those working with SCE in a support capacity.
This effort directly supports the goal for responding and recovering from catastrophic disasters and business disruptions.
Mobile Field Response
351
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 4)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
MOBILE FIELD RESPONSE
352
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 4)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameThe current mobile field response capability is satisfied by 2 mobile command centers (MCC). They arelarge RV type vehicles outfitted with communications and operational support systems to help thoseSCE employees out in the field supporting an incident or emergency where existing brick and mortarfacilities are not sufficient or too distant to be efficient enough to run various operations.
Operations and activities include field work related to restoration as well as work in support of suchefforts. The mobile command center therefore needs to adequately support operationalcommunication needs for SCE employees and those working with SCE in a support capacity. The MCCscommunications infrastructure is currently difficult to set up and does not have enough bandwidthcapabilities to support operations when the MCC has been deployed. For example, when T&D requiresthe use of the OMS application from the MCC, OMS users have reported extreme slowness andresponse of application, hindering their ability to perform their duties.
Through actual deployments such as the French Fire it has become clear that the MCC is onecomponent of field response. There is a need to deploy other types of response environments such asDRASH tents. Consequently, there is a significant need for communications support for any type of fieldresponse environment. The MCC is a viable option to support short term deployments and in locationswhere heavy vehicles can gain access. Other situations call for long term deployments of mobileresponse facilities. In cases such as this, the current communications system cannot be utilized as itcannot be decoupled from the large RV type MCC.
Finally, mobile field response require communications must also be resilient to deal with adverseenvironmental conditions that may impact land based communications systems such as cellularnetworks and the loss of land based facilities such as the Alhambra Data Center.
The current state of MCC’s resilient network capabilities
Single built in satellite system.
Several challenges have been observed
The satellite antenna is difficult to set up on the older MCC.The single built in antenna is a single point of failure.The satellite system cannot be removed from the MCC and used for other temporarycommand/support facilities.Bandwidth is limited as it is as single system.SCE network downlink is only available through Alhambra. If Alhambra facility is unavailable,SCE connectivity is lost. There is currently no satellite redundancySlowness as a result of outdated technology (current solution is point to point and does nothave TCP acceleration).
B. Initiative DescriptionSCE is requesting to have four mobile response units with a combination of 2 RV units and 2 portablecommunication devices (e.g. satellite). Both of these units will need network capabilities, local printing and
353
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 4)
internet access. This will include increased network bandwidth capabilities for RVs and two newindependent satellites. In addition, the current satellite infrastructure relies on a satellite hub located atAlhambra. This is a point of failure in the event the Alhambra facility is inoperable, therefore a backup hubis required at a separate location.C. Business Strategic Alignment
By providing a backup satellite hub at IOC, this will provide redundancy for SCE groups in the event thatthe ADC is not operating. This backup will serve as a disaster recovery site for all of SCE’s satellitecommunications using SCE’s Admin iDirect Hub. These applications include NERC CIP Security monitoring,NetComm over Satellite (NetCOS) backhaul, Hydro EHAS SCADA communication, and MRP Radio backhaul.All of these applications support business recovery in the event of a disaster. In addition to T&D, thefollowing SCE groups would be supported by this backup satellite hub at IOC: Security, IT, and NorthernHydro.D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
The overall objective of updating the MCC is increase the overall operational communications capabilities
1. Improve ease of setup of the satellite system for satellite communications. Currently, an FTE isrequired to setup and be onsite to manage the satellite system. An independentcommunication solution should not require an FTE to setup and maintain it.
2. Allow for independent use of a satellite system from the MCC in the case a mobile tent solutionis used instead of the RV. This will provide SCE options on how to respond to specific incidentsbased on location and duration.
3. Allow for multiple systems to be established to increase bandwidth. Current technology in theMCC is outdated and needs to be updated.
4. Maintain the ability to use SCE internal networking systems (phone, SCE network applicationssuch as OMS) on a robust and resilient solution. Currently, the MCC has limitations due toavailable bandwidth available for use by first responders.
5. Provide adequate computing and network performance for devices connecting to the MCC.
Increased network capabilities will improve operations performance by allowing first responders timelyaccess to the necessary systems to coordinate the incident. The more people that can connect andcoordinate work through a networked mobile response facility allowing for the quicker the deployment ofresources and work assignments.
E. Business Impact AssessmentThis effort will allow SCE to respond in the event of emergency impacting our business operations. Byproviding the multiple configurations (RV, Satellite trailer) SCE will have greater flexibility to addressmultiple emergencies at the same time as well as tailor the solution to the terrain/environment of thespecific situation.
By providing a variety of configurations for mobile response, SCE will be able to provide the appropriatesolution based on the terrain of the incident. An independent satellite system will allow a command centerto be setup in areas where the MCC cannot be deployed. Additionally, by having an independent systemwhere a FTE is not required to setup and maintain the satellite, SCE resources can be redirected to assistingwith incident management.
354
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 4)
To address the slowness of the current MCCs, additional hardware will be purchased to increase thebandwidth to prevent impacts to the first responders during an incident. Some of the bandwidth andcurrent challenges are due to the older hardware components of the MCC therefore upgrading thehardware will address these issues and address the speed.
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
The technologies included in this effort leverage existing SCE technology and provide a backup or disasterrecovery hub for all satellite communications for the entire SCE organization.G. Proposed Options
Option #1: Upgrade existing MCC, Add new satellite trailers and backup hub1. Update bandwidth capabilities on the two existing MCC RVs by putting them on SCE’s existing
iDirect SatCom system.2. Obtain two independent satellite trailers. Includes one button setup and portability3. Implement a backup satellite hub at IOC for disaster recovery purposes.
355
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(4 of 4)
356
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%10
0%0%
100%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or10
0%-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
S
CE
IT L
abor
100%
75,0
00$
-$
-$
-$
75,0
00$
-$
75,0
00$
SI L
abor
100%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n10
0%-
$-
$-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
75,0
00$
-$
-$
-$
75,0
00$
-$
75,0
00$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
0%-
$
-
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
-
$
Har
dwar
e10
0%54
1,85
0$
-$
-$
541,
850
$
-
$
54
1,85
0$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
541,
850
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
54
1,85
0$
-$
541,
850
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t61
6,85
0$
-$
-$
-$
616,
850
$
-
$
61
6,85
0$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
123,
370
$
-
$-
$
-
$
12
3,37
0$
-$
123,
370
$
TOTA
L74
0,22
0$
-$
-$
-$
740,
220
$
-$
740,
220
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
-$
-$
740,
000
$
-$
740,
000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
Har
dwar
e Pu
rcha
se a
nd In
stal
l
Mob
ile F
ield
Res
pons
e
<$1M
357
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000065
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2020
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
0
0
SCE $
2,600
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,600
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades727
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Crisis Information Management System
Crisis Information Management System
Crisis Information Management System
Crisis Information Management System
358
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Crisis InformationManagement System
359
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Crisis Management Information SystemB. Initiative Description
SCE has transformed the way the company responds to business disruptions. The introduction ofIncident Management Teams has provided a new mechanism to strategically and cohesively respond tonatural and man made incidents such as significant weather events or fires that cause customeroutages. These recent changes introduce new challenges to existing operations. Protocols and processesfor managing people have had great success however there is still a gap in providing process automatingtools to manage the information and communication used to create a common operating model.
In a To Be environment, the desired solution would be a centralized technology which promotes realtime situational awareness, data and information management and collection, and a digitization ofprocess and protocols related to incident management. Such a solution should facilitate the aggregationof incident and emergency information critical for efficient and effective emergency response. Key valuewould come from the reduction of duplicative efforts, quicker dissemination of real time information,centralized management of documentation and information to be used throughout the company.Members from various OUs acting as part of an Incident Management Team (IMT) would use this singlesystem to develop a single picture using centralized information.
In extreme events or events that require external coordination, a to be system can integrateinformation exchanges seamlessly without added software with the first responder community. Thisproject request is for the On Premise implementation of WebEOC software:
WebEOC will be installed on premise, using SCE infrastructure and will be maintained by SCE ITteamExternal integration with other WebEOC systems at federal, state, county, and city level will beperformed by Intermedix Professional ServicesInternal integration with other SCE systems will be supported and managed by SCE IT teamBusiness Readiness and Organizational Change Management activities will be supported byBusiness Resiliency, Corporate Communication, and IT CommunicationTraining will be provided by vendor and SCE HR team
C. Business Strategic AlignmentThis project contributes to response and recovery capabilities from catastrophic disasters and businessdisruptions. The Crisis Information Management System will provide reporting and oversight toincidents across the enterprise.D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & Benefits
Allow Incident Management Teams to access critical applications in a timely manner, conduct business,and manage the incident from anywhere within SCE territory. Provide consolidated solution fordisplaying incident management information to various users including executives, IMT teams and BR.
360
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
E. Business Impact AssessmentThis effort will continue to support the business restoration and incident management capabilities within SCE byexpanding the use of the technology currently in place, WebEOC. This will have an impact across the enterprisewithin the various operating units with a limited number of users.
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
This effort of the Crisis Management Program will bring the WebEOC application on premise to beadministered by SCE MSP personnel within IT. Connectivity to the external entities will also beestablished and interfaces to internal SCE applications such as T&D work management.
SCE selected WebEOC based on recommendations from the following agencies:
At the federal level of the U.S. government, WebEOC is used by FEMA, the Environmental ProtectionAgency, the Government Accountability Office, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration,the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the TVA, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. Departments ofAgriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Interior, Transportation, andVeterans Affairs, as well as other federal agencies.
WebEOC is also used by more than 60 state level agencies in 40 states and U.S. territories.Nationwide, WebEOC is used by thousands of first responders and emergency managers working atthe county or city level in 48 of 50 states, representing hundreds of jurisdictions.
Within SCE territory, WebEOC is being used by CA State, LA City, LA Fire Department, OrangeCounty, Riverside County, Ventura County and many more.
G. Proposed OptionsOption #1: (Recommended) Leverage current Crisis Management System by bringing application onpremise and expand the interfaces to internal SCE applications along with external reporting agencies.Option #2: Continue to use Crisis Management System as a SaaS application with no integration to SCEinternal applications.
361
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%0%
0%0%
CO
TS L
icen
se50
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
500,
000
$
50
0,00
0$
Ven
dor L
abor
0%37
5,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
375,
000
$
37
5,00
0$
SC
E IT
Lab
or0%
550,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
55
0,00
0$
550,
000
$
S
I Lab
or0%
675,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
67
5,00
0$
675,
000
$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
0%-
$-
$-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
2,10
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2,
100,
000
$
2,10
0,00
0$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
0%-
$
-
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
-
$
Har
dwar
e15
%75
,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
75
,000
$
75
,000
$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
0%-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.75
,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
75
,000
$
75
,000
$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t2,
175,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
2,17
5,00
0$
2,
175,
000
$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
435,
000
$
-
$-
$
-
$
-
$
43
5,00
0$
435,
000
$
TOTA
L2,
610,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
2,61
0,00
0$
2,61
0,00
0$
Test
imon
y *-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2,
600,
000
$
2,
600,
000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
Cris
is In
form
atio
n M
anag
emen
t Sys
tem
Med
ium
CO
TS P
roje
ct$1
M to
$5M
362
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000066
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2018
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
0
2,000
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,000
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades728
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Seismic Risk Assessment
Seismic Risk Assessment
Seismic Risk Assessment
Seismic Risk Assessment
363
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Seismic Risk Assessment
364
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
Seismic Risk AssessmentB. Initiative DescriptionSCE has committed to implementing an Enterprise Seismic and Mitigation Program. The effort is to span acrossall types of SCE assets and infrastructure to include non electric, generation and electrical assets. In order tomanage this effort a system is needed to monitor, track and report on SCE assets before and after a seismicevent.C. Business Strategic Alignment
Currently limited analytical capabilities exist to understand the impact of seismic events on servicereliability and restoration at SCE.
This project aligns with the SCE Goal of Reliability by contributing to the ongoing support and restorationof the grid. By using the predictive analysis for Seismic events, SCE could proactively plan to minimizethe impact of seismic events on SCE assets impacting the grid. In addition, by identifying thevulnerabilities immediately following a seismic event, SCE will be able to pinpoint it’s resources toinspect and determine sustained damage as a result of the seismic event. This will shorten therestoration time for outages by focusing on the vulnerable assets. It also directly supports T&D’s goal ofimproving the Customer Outage Experience.
This project is designed to improve operational efficiency and reduce the costs associated with seismicrelated outages through improved data analytics and forecasting capabilities to improve:
1. Resource utilization efficiency and planning in T&D Operations and Corporate IncidentManagement Teams during seismic events,
2. Identify vulnerabilities to seismic events prior to actual event,3. Post event customer messaging and engagement,4. Corporate wide situational awareness during seismic events.
The primary objective of this project would be to standardize on one enterprise wide Seismic tool.Currently, there are two Seismic application implemented within SCE. They are:
ShakeCast is being used by Generation for some Generation assets andSERA is being used by T&D as a stand alone application to analyze substation assets.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & BenefitsThe expected outcomes for this project are:
Standardize on an enterprise wide seismic tool to predict impacts and assess damage to SCEassets including but not limited to substation, dams and facilities.Improve Corporate wide situational awareness of potential damage areas immediately followinga seismic event by being able to:
o Provide visibility by district or city.o Identify impacts to SCE assets.o Provide early identification of impacted equipment following a seismic event in order to
focus necessary resources (personnel and equipment) on restoration efforts.
365
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
Develop appropriate business continuity plans are in place for assets/facilities identified withhigh vulnerabilities to seismic events to ensure personnel safety.Improved intelligence for enhanced decision making by: Incident Management Teams,Corporate Communications, Government Affairs, and Customer Service.Develop SCE expertise in predictive analytics and begin development of an all hazards modelingapproach.
E. Business Impact AssessmentCapabilities impacted for this project is:
1. Work Lifecycle Management including: Work Initiation, Work Scheduling and Work Closure.2. Work Execution including: Work assignments, Work Dispatch and Work Execution.3. Work Planning including: Work Forecasting and Resource Plan Development.4. People Management: Health and Safety Management.5. Security Management: Protective Services.
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
Efficiently dealing with seismic related outages has long been an operational challenge for SCE. In thepast, Operations has not been very proactive in dealing with outages. This has made it difficult todispatch field crew quickly and efficiently, further extending outage interruption times.
This effort would continue to expand the Hazard Modeling Program for Seismic events. By standardizingon an enterprise wide tool that can be used to provide predictive analysis as well as assessment postseismic event, SCE will expand its capabilities to identify hazards to the grid as well as facilities andpersonnel. This will allow SCE to proactively defend against these hazards and minimize the outages andimpacts resulting from these events.G. Proposed Options
1. Recommended Standardize on one enterprise seismic tool and use against all SCE assets andfacilities.
2. Add additional personnel to track and assess seismic hazards and then estimate the impact toSCE assets by reviewing GIS maps and evaluating required resources for restoration.
366
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%0%
0%0%
CO
TS L
icen
se45
0,00
0$
-$
-$
450,
000
$
-
$
-
$
45
0,00
0$
Ven
dor L
abor
0%31
5,00
0$
-$
-$
315,
000
$
-
$
-
$
31
5,00
0$
SC
E IT
Lab
or0%
180,
000
$
-
$
-
$
18
0,00
0$
-$
-$
180,
000
$
S
I Lab
or0%
742,
500
$
-
$
-
$
74
2,50
0$
-$
-$
742,
500
$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
0%-
$-
$-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
1,68
7,50
0$
-
$
-
$
1,
687,
500
$
-$
-$
1,68
7,50
0$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
0%-
$
-
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
-
$
Har
dwar
e0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
687,
500
$
-$
-$
1,68
7,50
0$
-
$
-
$
1,
687,
500
$
Con
tinge
ncy
20%
337,
500
$
-
$-
$
33
7,50
0$
-$
-$
337,
500
$
TOTA
L2,
025,
000
$
-$
-$
2,02
5,00
0$
-
$
-
$
2,
025,
000
$Te
stim
ony *
-$
-$
2,00
0,00
0$
-
$
-
$
2,
000,
000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
Seis
mic
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t
Med
ium
CO
TS P
roje
ct$1
M to
$5M
367
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000062
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2020
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year0
940
370
370
SCE $
370
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,050
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades726
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
EHSync Environmental Clearance Phase 2
Provide two way integration with enterprise-wide SAP-based Work Management systems including Design Manager. This type of integration would reduce errors in form entry, improve accuracy for compliance assurance and provide seamless data integration without redundant manual entries in multiple systems used across T&D and CEHS to directly improve project cycle time and automationfor real-time workflow management. · Create greater integration between Change Request and Activity Levels data fields for advanced personal object worklist (POWL) queries to improve project tracking capabilities to minimize redundant reporting and ensure critical dues dates and project data is visible for real-time decision-making. · Incorporate additional CEHS business processes (change requests in EHSync) and workflows including CRE, Power Production, GO131Dand coastal act permitting for environmental clearances to provide compliance assurance and automation on a growing commodity of projects and agency permits impacting clients. · Enhance GIS and questionnaire screening to increase auto-clearance and automation of project analysis which would improve environmental cycle time to deliver approved projects to clients for execution. · Greater functionality in search capabilities, form settings, and tasking to improve ease of use for end users and improve user productivity. * Add 50 additional GIS layers with geoprocessing. (10 layers will be addressed in 2016 and another 10 each year until 2020.) * Develop 3 additional reports for Environmental Clearance and enhance 3 existing reports.
Managing environmental health and safety issues is a top priority at SCE, and it is one of our corporate goals for 2015. We are committed to strengthening our environmental and safety culture. We are creating and sustaining a working environment that is built around the following objectives: * Prevent environmental, health, and safety (EHS) incidents from occurring, * Control environmental factors and provide the opportunity for hazards to be abated, * Have every
EHSync Environmental Clearance Phase 2
368
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
employee leave the workplace unhurt, * Minimize environmental impacts and disturbances to wildlife, * Ensure compliance with US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) permit, and * Stop work anytime unsafe conditions or behaviors are observed until the job can be completed safely.
369
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(0 of 4)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
EHSync EnvironmentalClearance Phase 2
370
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 4)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative Name
EHSync Environmental Clearance Phase 2B. Initiative Description
Managing environmental, health, and safety issues is a top priority at SCE. We are committed tostrengthening our environmental and safety culture. We are creating and sustaining a workingenvironment that is built around the following objectives:
Prevent environmental, health, and safety (EHS) incidents from occurring,Control environmental factors and provide the opportunity for hazards to be abated,Have every employee leave the workplace unhurt,Minimize environmental impacts and disturbances to wildlife,Maintain compliance with US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) permit, andStop work anytime unsafe conditions or behaviors are observed until the job can be completedsafely.
This project will improve SCE’s environmental compliance performance for two functional areas: Avianand Work Clearance.
1. In the area of avian protection, the following leading indicators are used to measure theprogress and help improve EHS performance:
Frequency of avian injury/mortality incidents,Frequency of avian nest disturbancesCount of Reported incidentsFrequency of corrective actions, andTracking of reactive retrofitting activity completion by due date
SCE has a permit with the USFWS which requires the tracking and reporting of all avian injuriesand mortalities, with the exception of a few non native species. The permit also requires thetracking and reporting of all instances where SCE must move an active bird nest, defined as anest containing eggs or chicks. However, sometimes avian incident forms are submitted whenan inactive nest must be moved. This information is documented but is not reported. The reporton avian incidents is due annually to the USFWS.
2. SCE’s Environmental Clearance program is driven by the need to only construct in legallyallowed locations using methods which minimize environmental impacts. Having an accurateand robust system for managing environmental clearance processes will improve the efficiencyand accuracy of the auto clearance process, which will decrease the time required to assessprojects. Expediting the clearance process will allow T&D to begin construction projects morequickly. This will allow SCE to realize the financial gains from these projects sooner since theseconstruction projects are associated with SCE’s consumer product (electricity).
371
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 4)
Other benefits of a robust, consolidated, and efficient environmental clearance system include:
Reduced time required to complete the clearance formIncreased data accuracyReduced data redundancyIncreased data visibilityEnhanced system usabilityEnhanced data extraction and reporting capabilities
C. Business Strategic AlignmentIt is required that all incidents specified in the permit conditions be reported annually to the USFWS.Failure to report all incidents would result in non compliance with the permit conditions and couldresult in additional conditions for future permit renewals and jeopardize the issuance of future permits.Additionally, this could have financial repercussions for SCE and could negatively impact the relationshipSCE has built with the USFWS. It is expected that fines for unreported incidents could be approximately$10,000 per incident. However, other repercussions can add additional financial burden.
The USFWS has recently revised the national permit requirements (Jan 2016) requiring reporting of 25data fields compared to previous permits that required 6 fields. The collection, analysis and reporting ofthese additional fields requires extensive effort.
Automated reporting and visibility into avian incidents will allow SCE’s internal avian experts to identifytrends and areas for improvement to reduce avian incidents. Incidents involving protected species canlead to fines and other penalties. For example, in 1999, Moon Lake, an electric utility in Roosevelt, UT,was fined $100,000 and placed on probation for three years after 17 hawks and eagles wereelectrocuted on Moon Lake’s power lines. Moon Lake’s penalty also included retrofitting its utility linesto make them safe for birds, which created a significant additional financial burden.1 In 2009,PacificCorp, another large electric utility, was fined $510,000, in addition to $900,000 in restitution, afterkilling 232 eagles on power lines. PacificCorp was also placed on probation for five years.2
SCE’s company wide Avian Protection Plan (APP) requires reporting of all bird mortality and nest issuesto the avian protection specialist or an SCE biologist. This plan has been shared with USFWS and so theyare aware of SCE’s internal policies regarding avian mortality. Tracking of these incidents throughEHSync would maintain compliance with SCE’s APP and provides a compliance process to share withUSFWS demonstrating how we comply with our own policy.
This project will also support SCE’s ability to comply with General Order 131D (GO131D) in anautomated manner. CPUC requires SCE to comply with GO 131 regulations for all work 50kV and above.The Corporate Environmental department is responsible to evaluate and process project work requestsfor GO131D projects and manually manages approximately 130 GO131D projects per year, affectingabout 200 potential users and 15 touchpoints/handoffs across multiple organizations.
GO131D projects are equal to or greater than 50kV and involve these types of activities but not limitedto:
1 US Department of Justice. “Electric Utility Sentenced for Killing Eagles and Hawks: Criminal Case is First of its KindUnder Federal Wildlife Law.” (August 12, 1999).2 “Electrocuting Eagles Costs PacificCorp $10.5 Million.” Environment News Service (July 14, 2009).
372
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 4)
1. Replacement of existing power line facilities or supporting structures with equivalent facilities orstructures
2. Minor relocation of existing power line facilities up to 2,000 feet in length, or the intersetting ofadditional support structures between existing support structures
3. Conversion of existing overhead lines to underground4. Placing of new or additional conductors, insulators, or their accessories on existing structures,
power lines, or substations to be relocated or constructed which have undergone environmentalreview pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as part of a larger project, andfor which the final CEQA document finds no significant, unavoidable environmental impactscaused by the proposed line or substation
5. Power line facilities or substations to be located in an existing franchise, road widening setbackeasement, or public utility easement; or in a utility corridor designated, precisely mapped andofficially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state or local agencies for which a final NegativeDeclaration or EIR finds no significant, unavoidable environmental impacts
Incorporation of GO131D would provide digital automation of processes to provide transparency to theoperating units, improve accuracy and reliability of project information, and enhance efficiencies withproject handoffs and tracking.
Additional information is also required by The California Coastal Act of 1976 for activities within thecoastal zone under the jurisdiction of CA Coastal Commission or other local jurisdictions (i.e. City orCounty) with an adopted Local Coastal Plan. The coastal zone area affects several T&D Regions andDistricts and could affect over 3,000 projects annually.
The enhancements for GO131D and coastal zone processes are interdependent. Coastal zone processesare also applicable to non GO131D projects currently using Environmental Clearance.
The current process poses the following challenges:1. Lack of systematic process and approvals for projects in the coastal zone may result in project
delays to perform work activities providing system reliability and safety.2. Auto clearance function requires enhancement to improve accuracy of business rules to
mitigate risk.3. Lack of automated system to consistently track and efficiently manage GO131D projects to
reduce manual and redundant project tracking and improve operational performance andaccountability.
4. Redundant automated and manual environmental processes inside and outside of EHSync thatare not fully integrated with other OU project tracking systems.
5. Limited GIS information to support enhancements to provide improved accuracy of screeningand associated workflow logic.
6. Current data visibility and reporting is limited and will need to improve to demonstratecompliance assurance with system controls and data assessment of enhancements.
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & BenefitsThe overall objective of this project is to automate the process of tracking/reporting avian incidents andimprove the efficiency and accuracy of the current implementation of the environmental clearanceprocess by incorporating other compliance processes with the Environmental Screening Form.
373
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(4 of 4)
The Avian incident type would provide the ability to generate electronic guided activity forms (GAFs)containing questions relevant to the specific type of incident being reported. The information will beavailable in EHSync and in ArcGIS. It is expected that an average of 400 incident forms will be submittedeach year by users in the field. An additional 100 incidents are expected to be submitted by AvianAdministrators.
The automation of the additional work clearances will improve efficiency and accuracy, minimizecompliance risk, and provide automated handoffs in a centralized system for a more complete range ofOU client planned projects (Transmission, Distribution, Substation, and Carrier Solutions). This includesstreamlining the steps for when and how client OUs complete the required forms, optimizing the autoclearance process, improving data accuracy, reducing data redundancy, improving data visibility, andimproving usability.E. Business Impact AssessmentThis effort impacts the following strategic business capabilities:
1. Environmental Compliance Management – Regulatory Incident Management,2. Environmental Compliance Management – Regulatory Environmental Clearance, and3. Asset Management – Grid Operations.
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
This effort will leverage the existing capabilities within EHSync including:
1. New incident type for Avian;2. Mobile application for capturing incidents in field;3. BI extractor/reports/dashboards for reporting purposes;4. Interface to GIS for plotting avian incidents;5. New change request types for coastal and G131D; and6. BI extractor/reports/dashboards for reporting purposes.
This project will leverage the existing EHSync capabilities toward the purpose of creating an enterprisewide tool for all Safety/Compliance incidents and Environmental Clearances. This option supportsarchitecture’s strategic approach for EHSync, BI and GIS technologies.G. Proposed Options
The options evaluated were:1. Incorporate avian into EHSync as a new incident type and additional work clearances. Update BI
extractors, reports and dashboards to include new incident type along with an interface to GISto plot the incident locations for reporting purposes. (Recommended Option)
2. Develop custom application for tracking avian incidents and corrective actions.3. Add additional personnel to track Avian and Work Clearances.
374
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
S
CE
IT L
abor
275,
000
$
13
3,40
0$
47,2
00$
47,2
00$
47,2
00$
275,
000
$
S
I Lab
or1,
433,
000
$
650,
000
$
26
1,00
0$
261,
000
$
26
1,00
0$
1,43
3,00
0$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
-$
-$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l1,
708,
000
$
783,
400
$
30
8,20
0$
308,
200
$
30
8,20
0$
1,70
8,00
0$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
-$
-$
Ann
ual L
icen
se F
ees
-$
-$
Tota
l Rec
urrin
g O
&M
-$
-$
Har
dwar
e-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
708,
000
$
783,
400
$
30
8,20
0$
308,
200
$
30
8,20
0$
1,70
8,00
0$
C
ontin
genc
y20
%34
1,60
0$
156,
680
$
61
,640
$
61
,640
$
61
,640
$
34
1,60
0$
TOTA
L2,
049,
600
$
940,
080
$36
9,84
0$
369,
840
$36
9,84
0$
2,04
9,60
0$
Test
imon
y*94
0,00
0$
370,
000
$37
0,00
0$
370,
000
$2,
050,
000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
EHSy
nc E
nviro
nmen
tal C
lear
ance
Pha
se 2
Larg
e C
OTS
Pro
ject
>$5M
375
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
050
100150200250300350400
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000059
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 6/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year350
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
350
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades725
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Facilities Management System
The initial scope of the FMS project was to integrate and leverage: 1. Core SAP functionality; 2. Space Planning and Move Management functionality from Archibus;
This business initiative will enable OpX goal for Corporate Real estate to move to Managed service provider for Facilities management and reduce CRE operating cost by 21% over 5 years (approximately $42 million)
Facilities Management System
376
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Facilities ManagementSystem
377
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameFacility Management Solution (FMS)B. Initiative DescriptionCRE intends to select and contract with an Integrated Facilities Management provider to provide FacilitiesManagement Services throughout their portfolio of owned and occupied sites
Historically, CRE has relied upon both external suppliers and internal staff to manage and coordinate its facilitiesmanagement activities. Edison believes that experienced, facilities management integrators may offer theopportunity to leverage existing resources and implement improved operating practices so as to deliver theServices more efficiently and effectively, and to facilitate the transformation of Edison’s current deliverymanagement model to a more efficient, cost effective and responsive model.C. Business Strategic AlignmentCorporate Real Estate is looking at opportunities to shift facilities management and janitorial servicesmanagement to a third party vendor to gain operational efficiencies and reduce cost. In order to enable this theManaged services provider will be providing SCE with a portal to log incidents and view performing metrics andalso mobile app capabilities to simplify incident reporting. SCE is expected to exchange necessary data like nonsensitive HR information, GL accounts, user ids, space management, facility condition index, buildingmanagement to enable this integration. The Service Provider’s technology solution will be used as a commonplatform to house data and manage processes for the Services.
Current State: The Facility Management RFP agreement identifies Space Management (Archibus)as being out of scope for the MSP and retained by SCE
ProblemStatement:
The existing Archibus solution is outdated, has data quality issues, and is on anunsupported version.
Key Assumptions: • Technical development work will commence no later than 12/1/2015• Upgraded cloud hosted Archibus will be enabled as part of this project to gain
Efficiencies in Space management and better integration with SAP.• The original FMS had a site survey component, which is not being addressed
within this scope
D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & BenefitsListed below are the outcomes expected with this collaboration.a) Reduce technology landscape by leveraging MSP systems b) Leverage MSP tools and technology to enable predictive maintenance c) Support goal for Corporate Real estate to move to Managed service provider d) Support solution that will evolve to remain current with industry best practices throughout the term of
the Agreement e) Leverage upgraded Archibus system for space management efficiencies and better integration with SAP.
378
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
E. Business Impact AssessmentThis initiative supports Business need to shift facilities management and janitorial services management to athird party vendor to gain operational efficiencies.
F. Technology/Automation Rationale
The high level integration requirements are as follows:1. HR data to and from SAP HR to Archibus
Non sensitive contact information like PAX, cell, email etc.location information such as building and cubeSpace/ position status
2. Financial Data (Requirement 10)Chart of Accounts, Cost center and work order
3. Onboarding and off boarding from SAP to ArchibusPosition information and status
4. SCE Portal to MSP Portal and Archibus single sign on5. SAP ECC enhancements to improve space accuracy quality from 70% to 100%
Functional location update based on statusPosition and notification update on closing a service request
G. Proposed OptionsOption 1: Take FMS off hold and complete the necessary remaining work.Option 2: Adopt the third party (FMP) hosted Archibus solution (Recommended implementation option)
379
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%0%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$V
endo
r Lab
or0%
720,
993
$19
9,63
4$
231,
107
$29
0,25
2$
-$
-$
-$
-$
290,
252
$S
CE
IT L
abor
0%23
7,03
4$
207,
578
$24
,456
$5,
000
$-
$-
$-
$-
$5,
000
$S
I Lab
or0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l95
8,02
7$
407,
212
$25
5,56
3$
295,
252
$-
$-
$-
$-
$95
8,02
7$
-$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
0%-
$-
$-
$A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$-
$-
$To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$-
$-
$-
$H
ardw
are
0%-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
0%-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$To
tal P
roje
ct C
ost
958,
027
$40
7,21
2$
255,
563
$29
5,25
2$
-$
-$
-$
-$
958,
027
$C
ontin
genc
y20
%59
,050
$59
,050
.40
$-
$-
$-
$-
$59
,050
$-
$TO
TAL
1,01
7,07
7$
40
7,21
2$
25
5,56
3$
35
4,30
2$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
017,
077
$Te
stim
ony*
407,
212
$
255,
563
$
350,
000
$
-$
-$
-$
-$
1,01
2,77
5$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
Faci
litie
s M
anag
emen
t Sys
tem
Med
ium
CO
TS P
roje
ct$1
M to
$5M
380
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 7821
WBS Element: CIT-00-SD-PM-000214
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 6/1/2016
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year620
0
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
620
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWAREPROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: NEW SOFTWARE
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareNew Software732
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Safety Observations
SCE’s safety program includes capturing and recording safety observations and identifying corrective actions through a consistent process across the entire organization.
Decommisioning six disparate Operating Unit (OU) specific Safety Observation programs/systems and consolidating into one system.
Safety Observations
381
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 2)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Safety Observations
382
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 2)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameEnterprise Wide Safety ObservationsB. Initiative DescriptionSafety is a top priority at SCE. We are committed to strengthening our safety culture to achieve an injury freeworkplace. We are creating and sustaining a working environment that is built around the following objectives:
Having every employee leave the workplace unhurtUsing work behaviors and practices that uncompromisingly protect the safety of everyoneCaring for the safety of everyone, andStopping work anytime unsafe conditions or behaviors are observed until the job can be completedsafely.
To support these corporate strategic objectives, CEHS is committed to improving SCE's environmental, healthand safety performance. The following leading indicators are used to measure the progress of the company andhelp reduce safety incidents:
1. Close Calls2. Safety Observations3. Percentage of Corrective Measures Completed on Time4. Vehicle Incidents5. Switching/Testing/Operating Incidents6. Equipment Failure7. Wire/Conductor Incidents
C. Business Capabilities MappedSafety Incident ManagementD. Desired Business OutcomesIn support of the second and third leading indicators, SCE’s safety program includes capturing and recordingsafety observations and identifying corrective actions through a consistent process across the entireorganization. The benefits of a consistent safety observation process include:
Identifying unsafe behaviors to prevent accidents from occurring.Promoting the identification of corrective actions (physical controls, procedures, training, OCM,education).Reinforcing SCE’s safety culture.Implementation of enterprise wide Safety Observation program defining a standard single processfor capturing and monitor observations and related corrective actions. Resulting in a reduction ofresources maintaining multiple observation applications across the operating units.Ability to identify and report on Corrective Actions to ensure timely completion and perform trendanalysis for implementation of preventative measures.
383
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 2)
Creation of dashboard for Safety Observations and Corrective Actions across enterprise forreporting to Senior Safety Council on the observations/corrective actions across operating unitsalong with trend analysis.Retirement of the six disparate Operating Unit (OU) specific Safety Observation programs/systemsto reduce applications being used across the operating units for observations using a phasedapproach.Ability for OU personnel to re direct time currently spent support OU Safety programs/systems toother meaningful work for personnel supporting RSE and LETS.Increase close calls by reporting on observations/corrective actions and leading indicators.
E. Business Priorities & ConcernsToday, SCE uses the following platforms to capture and record safety observations within multiple OperatingUnits (OUs):
LETS (SONGS)RSE (PPD)Access Database with Java Entry Module (T&D)Offline form with batch upload capabilities (T&D)SharePoint (HR)Microsoft Excel Templates (T&D)Corporate Observation Cards (all OUs)Safety Observations using Build SharePoint InfoPath Form (T&D)
This situation poses the following challenges across the enterprise:No enterprise wide method to track occurrences of observations.Lack of company wide reporting and trending analysis to identify process improvements.Inconsistent processes limiting our ability to measure safety observations across the enterprise andimplement lessons learned.Lack of visibility to safety performance.Inability to consistently record corrective actions and ensure their completion.Redundant use of resources maintaining multiple safety observation processes and systems.Not an efficient safety observation platform that covers all types of work.
384
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%0%
0%0%
0%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
SC
E IT
Lab
or0%
63,5
06$
42,7
67$
20,7
39$
-$
-$
-$
-$
63,5
06$
SI L
abor
0%1,
562,
315
$
1,01
6,97
7$
545,
338
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
562,
315
$
Inte
grat
ion
& C
usto
miz
atio
n0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Labo
r Sub
tota
l1,
625,
821
$
1,05
9,74
4$
566,
077
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
625,
821
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
0%-
$
-
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
-
$
Har
dwar
e0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
OS
and
DB
Lic
ense
s0%
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l HW
& O
S an
d D
B L
ic.
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t1,
625,
821
$
1,05
9,74
4$
566,
077
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
625,
821
$
Con
tinge
ncy
10%
56,6
08$
-$
56,6
08$
-$
-$
-$
-$
56,6
08$
TOTA
L1,
682,
429
$
1,05
9,74
4$
622,
685
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
1,
682,
429
$
Test
imon
y*1,
059,
744
$
62
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
1,67
9,74
4$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
Safe
ty O
bser
vatio
ns
Med
ium
CO
TS P
roje
ct$1
M to
$5M
385
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
0200400600800
1,0001,2001,4001,6001,800
1. WITNESS: Jay Castleberry
Program: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Pin #: 3896
WBS Element: CIT-00-DM-DM-000074
2. PROJECT DETAIL:
Select one3. PROJECT TYPE:
Compliance: Safety, Environmental, Licenses Customer Growth
Replacements in Kind Load Growth
Upgrades Reliability
Blanket: F&E, Tools, Spare Parts, Lab, Computer Equip X Capitalized Software
5. CLOSE DATE: 12/1/2018
7. COST ESTIMATES (NOMINAL $000):
Year1,700
1,000
0
0
SCE $
0
7 (a). SYSTEM SHORT TEXT:
7 (b). DETAILED DESCRIPTION:
8. SCOPE:
9. JUSTIFICATION:
Various (See Below)
4. ASSET TYPE: Cap Soft 5yr
6. RIIM ELIGIBLE:
2,700
Program Group: SOLUTION DELIVERY
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2018 GRC - Capital Expenditures Forecast
Testimony Summary: Organizational Unit Summary:
Major Program: Category:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANYCAPITAL WORKPAPERS - CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE
PROJECT DETAIL WORKSHEET: SOFTWARE UPGRADES
Detail: RO Model ID:
SCE-04, Vol. 02IT
Capitalized SoftwareCapitalized SoftwareSoftware Upgrades730
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Total
Ariba Deployment and Supplier Portal Dec
This initiative is intended to support decommissioning of Supplier Portal systems currently used in SCE’s Plan to Pay process with a standard set of SAP solutions (including ARIBA,Fieldglass etc) todeliver equivalent core functionality to support Enterprise Technology Optimization goals.
Realize ETO gains by moving out of a highly customized Supplier Portal to standardized technologyplatform where bulk of the capabilities is in the Cloud.
Ariba Deployment and Supplier Portal Dec
386
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(0 of 4)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Ariba Deployment andSupplier PortalDecommission
387
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
(1 of 4)
I. Business Initiative DescriptionA. Initiative NameSupplier Portal DecommissioningB. Initiative DescriptionThis initiative is intended to support decommissioning of Supplier Portal systems currently used in SCE’s Plan toPay process with a standard set of SAP solutions specifically ARIBA and Fieldglass. We would also be enablingnew vendors in ARIBA module to bring certain supplier portal vendors into ARIBA. In addition we would enablethe foundational elements of Supplemental Workforce onboarding leveraging standard Fieldglass functionality.
Ariba provides a robust on line market place connecting buyers and suppliers, as well as leading Procure to Payfunctionality that integrates SAP with the market place. Fieldglass provides capabilities in the areas of serviceprocurement including timesheets as well support Supplemental workers onboarding processes. In addition wewould be enabling work management related capabilities to support the planning collaboration processes withthe vendors.
The scope of the project named “Supplier Portal Decommissioning” would include the following Keydeliverables:
1) Transition key Supplier Portal business capabilities into a standard SAP suite of solutions by deployingcapabilities in Fieldglass, ARIBA and Fiori.
2) Deliver Onboarding Capabilities as part of the Fieldglass solution deployment.3) Change Management to help rollout deployed ARIBA Capability across operating unit at an enterprise
level thereby leverage savings and efficiencies of adopting a cloud based procurement solution.
This request for Capital funding to deliver on capabilities 1) and 2) to be delivered across 2016 and 2017 and tohelp support Change Management (capability 3) ) to enable additional SCE suppliers in Ariba as per thedeployment roadmap.
The Key Drivers behind this initiative is to drive outcomes ona) Align the complex services environment in standard & integrated SAP driven approach.b) Address gaps that currently existing in SAP & ARIBA as it relates to complex services procurement.c) Address gaps with the Supplemental Workforce Onboarding processes leveraging Fieldglass technology.d) Rollout ARIBA Capabilities per ARIBA Business case 2013 to leverage savings on sourcing, compliance &
cash management. C. Business Strategic AlignmentThe goal of this project is to generate additional savings for SCE across the Plan to Pay process by adopting theAriba Solution Set and enabling Fieldglass with additional technologies to support Supplier Portaldecommissioning. The Ariba and Fieldglass platform brings strong sourcing and Procure to Pay capabilities forboth materials and services. The implementation of the Ariba platform will allow SCE to adopt more commonand efficient processes across Operating Units and a majority of spend.
Ariba provides an extensive 3rd party on line marketplace in which both buyers and suppliers participate. Byadopting the Ariba platform, SCE will more easily integrate with a majority of its suppliers, expanding its levelautomation / integration with its supply base.
388
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(2 of 4)
Implementation of a centralized Complex services management system) aligns with the Management & controlof services and would increase efficiencies across work management, service procurement & accounts payableprocesses. The solution automates many processes and eliminates manual work ensures better control ofquality, costs, efficiency and risk. In addition implementation of Fieldglass enables capabilities in SupplementalWorkers onboarding.
Strategically, implementing the Ariba and Fieldglass platform aligns with IT’s long term strategy to optimize itsportfolio by reducing the size, complexity and cost. Ariba’s Network is projected to be the single SAP businessplatform for collaborative commerce for procurement and finance. Additionally, SAP plans to add Supply Chain,Transportation Management, Information Interchange functionality, bi directional integration from Master DataGovernance for Suppliers (MDG S), and key Supplier Self Service capabilities to the Ariba Network. Theseenhancements by SAP are seen as enablers of IT’s long term strategy to consolidate the solution it offers onfewer systems.D. Anticipated Business Outcomes & BenefitsContinued operational Savings on using ARIBA (Capability 3)
1. Reduced pricing through use of improved sourcing capabilities2. Improved user and vendor compliance and use of optimized pricing3. Cash Management savings through increased vendor discount capture
Benefits from Supplier Portal Decommissioning (Capability 1 and 2)a) Hardware Cost savings by decommissioning of 160 Servers (33% of SAP Landscape).b) Core Refresh Cost Avoidance periodically (once in 5 years).c) Improvements within the SCE Procure to pay processes through increased automation. Actual
value to be determined through process design within the project.d) Long term alignment with SAP strategic development, and reduced reliance on in house
solutions, simplifying the IT infrastructure / portfolio.E. Business Impact Assessment
This initiative fundamentally changes the solution from Supplier Portal to a Future state that aims to providesimilar capabilities along with operational improvements with the current process.Organizational change management (OCM) effort is required to migrate SAP process to Cloud basedstandard process within standard capabilities of the Future state solutions. Many of the current process aredeeply ingrained, and assumed within organizational structural design and procedures.Supplier willingness to participate in the Ariba on line market place as well as Fieldglass is critical. Whilethe Ariba market place is large, the percentage of SCE's suppliers already participating is not yet known.Enrollment and subscription fees may be a consideration for some suppliers. In addition, a significant effortis required to onboard suppliers to SCE’s Ariba solution. Delays or obstacles in the onboarding process willslow benefits realization.Depending on the deployment approach, enablement of the new capability in Fieldglass and ARIBA may gohand in hand with decommissioning of Supplier portal leading to an overlap for a short period of time.OCM changes with the HR organization to align their process with standard capabilities offered by theFieldglass solutions.
389
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(3 of 4)
F. Technology/Automation RationaleOnboarding efficiency – Moving away from current manual onboarding process for Supplemental workerswould improve the cycle time from X days to Y thereby improving efficiencies across the board by ensuringtimely availability of resources for initiatives & projects.
Plan to pay and Work Management initiatives As the various businesses are charted to reduce costs, theyare increasingly seeking to increase the level of integration with suppliers. Within material P2P processes,the business is seeking stronger reliance on supplier capabilities, resulting in a greater need for tools tointegrate SCE and suppliers (e.g. EDI and XML). Additionally, many organizations examine the work currentlyperformed internally; many are seeking to move this work to external service providers, increasing the needand for external integration to suppliers. The Ariba and Fieldglass platform provides a much more robustplatform for integrating with suppliers and supporting these initiatives.
IT Portfolio Simplification IT has commitments to reduce the complexity of the portfolio, which currentlyincludes multiple solutions, and a growing demand from other initiatives within the P2P scope. In order toaccomplish this goal, IT needed a stronger common solution set to concurrently accommodate the businessneed for greater efficiency, while reducing the number of solutions it supports. Adopting Ariba andFieldglass's industry leading solutions provides a much more robust common platform and easier integrationacross the external partners. As a result of this project, IT is expected to have a stronger common platformfor accommodating business need for greater efficiencies, while decommissioning existing solutions whereviable. Because IT will be aligned with SAP investment strategy, continued investment will allow furtherdecommissioning, as well as SCE to adopt new capabilities as they are developed.
G. Proposed OptionsThe scope of the project named “Supplier Portal Decommissioning” would include the following Keydeliverables,
1) Transition key Supplier Portal business capabilities into a standard SAP suite of solutions bydeploying capabilities in Fieldglass, ARIBA, SAP and Fiori.
2) Deliver Onboarding Capabilities as part of the Fieldglass solution deployment.3) Change Management to help rollout deployed ARIBA Capability across OU’s at an enterprise
level thereby leverage savings and efficiencies of adopting a cloud based procurement solution. The first deliverable would be completed by:
a) Adopting Fieldglass for Service & Time Management capabilities.b) Enabling Key Capabilties in SAP ECC, ARIBA, Fieldglass and FIORI.c) Deploying Plan to pay capabilities including Work management by leveraging standard capability
of SAP products as well as some customization to connect work management objects like TaskOrder Fieldglass with a combination Fiori technologies with SAP.
d) Enabling supporting capabilities such as Vendor/Internal user administration, attachments,catalogs & reporting.
e) Transition related capabilities like Vehicle Ordering into the new future state solution.f) Rollout the capabilities across the targeted OU’s.g) Decommission Hardware supporting these capabilities.
The second deliverable would be completed by:a) Adopting Onboarding capabilities within Fieldglass for Supplemental workforce (including
Contingent workers, independent contracts, SOW workers as well as Badge only).
390
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
INVESTMENT MEMO
(4 of 4)
b) Enable requirements related to Onboarding. This includes leverage existing capabilities withinFieldglass and ARIBA with new capabilities enabled by Onboarding.
a. Create and track record of supplemental workers and assignments in Fieldglass by laborcategory type: SOW Consultant, Contractor, Independent Consultant, Badge Only
b. Enable the onboarding and off boarding process and track status in system.c. Visibility to vendor profiles and contact information.d. Ability to track the workers rehire eligibility status, history of all projects and
assignments. (active & historical), training (current/past training records)e. Ability to edit records and audit trail of edits, trigger notifications & reminders and
handle exceptions.f. Store supporting documents like Statement of work, resumes, Non disclosure
agreement.g. Streamlined Intake process to determine SW type and labor classification and kicking off
the appropriate requisition process including approval processes.h. Trigger space & asset management requestsi. Reporting
Enablement of deliverables 1 and 2 is expected to ensure the Contingent Worker onboarding,maintenance & tracking various statuses would span across business process cycles starting fromrequisitioning process, identification of resources & assignments as well trigger requests to BMCRemedy tools for provisioning of assets and Invoicing.
Deliverable 3 (Change Management for ARIBA) would be completed by:Continuing the effort initiated in 2015 to rollout the ARIBA capability across multiple OUs.
391
Workpaper – Southern California Edison / 2018 GRC
Exhibit No. SCE-04 / Vol. 02 / Book C Witness: Various
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Tota
lO
ngoi
ng O
&M
0%0%
0%0%
0%0%
CO
TS L
icen
se-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
V
endo
r Lab
or0%
125,
000
$
75
,000
$
50
,000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
12
5,00
0$
SC
E IT
Lab
or0%
422,
975
$
25
3,78
5$
169,
190
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
42
2,97
5$
SI L
abor
0%1,
613,
000
$
995,
000
$
61
8,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
1,61
3,00
0$
In
tegr
atio
n &
Cus
tom
izat
ion
0%-
$-
$-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$La
bor S
ubto
tal
2,16
0,97
5$
1,
323,
785
$
837,
190
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2,
160,
975
$
O&
M O
ngoi
ng L
abor
Sup
port
0%-
$
-
$
A
nnua
l Lic
ense
Fee
s-
$
-
$
To
tal R
ecur
ring
O&
M-
$
-
$
Har
dwar
e0%
100,
000
$
10
0,00
0$
-$
-$
-$
-$
100,
000
$
O
S a
nd D
B L
icen
ses
0%-
$-
$-
$-
$
-
$-
$-
$To
tal H
W &
OS
and
DB
Lic
.10
0,00
0$
100,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
10
0,00
0$
Tota
l Pro
ject
Cos
t2,
260,
975
$
1,42
3,78
5$
83
7,19
0$
-$
-$
-$
2,26
0,97
5$
C
ontin
genc
y20
%45
2,19
5$
284,
757
$
16
7,43
8$
-$
-$
-$
452,
195
$
TOTA
L2,
713,
170
$
1,70
8,54
2$
1,00
4,62
8$
-$
-$
-$
2,71
3,17
0$
Test
imon
y *1,
700,
000
$
1,
000,
000
$
-
$
-
$
-
$
2,
700,
000
$
*Cos
t est
imat
es a
re ro
unde
d fo
r for
ecas
ting
purp
oses
.
CO
TS A
pplic
atio
n Pr
ojec
t
Arib
a D
eplo
ymen
t and
Sup
plie
r Por
tal D
ecom
mis
sion
Med
ium
CO
TS P
roje
ct$1
M to
$5M
392