South Carolina Regional Transmission Planning St k h ld M … · 2014-10-15 · South Carolina Regional Transmission Planning St k h ld M tiStakeholder Meeting SCE&G Lake Murray Training

South Carolina Regional Transmission PlanningSouth Carolina Regional Transmission Planning

St k h ld M tiSt k h ld M tiStakeholder MeetingStakeholder Meeting

SCE&G Lake Murray Training CenterSCE&G Lake Murray Training Center

Columbia, SCColumbia, SC

August 4 2010August 4 2010August 4, 2010August 4, 2010

1

Purpose and Goals for Today’s MeetingPurpose and Goals for Today’s Meeting

• Review Initial Results of Reliability Assessments• Local Area • SERC • Multi-Party Local Area SERC Multi Party• Inter-regional • ERAG

• Discuss Proposed Changes to Expansion PlansDiscuss Proposed Changes to Expansion Plans• Discuss Alternative Solutions from Stakeholders• Present Activities of the CTPCAPresent Activities of the CTPCA• Present Activities of the Eastern Interconnection

Planning Collaborative (EIPC)

2

Planning Collaborative (EIPC)

3

Transmission Expansion Drivers:Transmission Expansion Drivers:– Criteria Testing

• NERC Reliability Standards• Internal Planning Guidelines• Internal Planning Guidelines

– Customer Needs• Distribution & Industrialst but o & dust a• Wholesale (cooperative & municipal)• Network• Firm PTP

– Generator Interconnection NeedsActual system performance (poor performance)– Actual system performance (poor performance)

4

Reliability Planning Study ActivitiesReliability Planning Study Activitiesy g yy g y

SCE&GSCE&G

5

NERC TPL StandardsNERC TPL StandardsNERC TPL StandardsNERC TPL StandardsTable 1Table 1

6

SCE&G Internal Planning CriteriaSCE&G Internal Planning CriteriaEvent resulting in the

l f i l t Voltage limit Thermal li itloss of a single component Voltage limit limit

Generator 95.0% 100%Transformer 95.0% 100%Transmission line 95.0% 100%Underground cable 95.0% 100%Capacitor bank 95.0% 100%

Event resulting in the lossof two or more components Voltage limit Thermal

limitOne bus segment 95.0% 100%Two bus segments (one bus tie breaker failure) 92.5% 100%Multiple circuits on a same structure 95.0% 100%All ti i l t 95 0% 100%All generation in any one plant 95.0% 100%Generator+ Transmission Line or Underground Cable 92.5% 100%Generator + Generator 92.5% 100%Generator + Transformer 92.5% 100%Generator + Capacitor bank 92.5% 100%Transformer + Transformer 92.5% 100%Transformer + Transmission Line or Underground Cable 92.5% 100%Transformer + Switch 92.5% 100%Transformer + Capacitor bank 92.5% 100%Transmission line + Transmission line 92.5% 100%Transmission line + Underground cable 92.5% 100%Transmission line + Capacitor bank 92.5% 100%Transmission line Capacitor bank 92.5% 100%Capacitor bank + Underground cable 92.5% 100%

7

Modeling AssumptionsModeling Assumptions

Basecase Development:– SCE&G Area: Detailed Data from Model Database ‐ Including Most Current Transmission Expansion Plan p

– SERC Region: Latest 2010 Series

Reduced Long Term Study Group Models

– North America: 2009 Series MMWG Models (Electrically Equivalenced)

8

Modeling AssumptionsModeling Assumptions• Dispersed Substation Load Forecast

– Summer/Winter Peak, Off‐Peak and Seasonal Load Levels• Existing Generation• Existing Generation

– Input from Generation Maintenance Schedule• Generation Additions

f l– Input from Generation Expansion Plan• Transmission Additions

– Input from Planners and Engineering• Firm Transmission Service

– Input from OASIS, Coordinate with Neighbors• Neighboring Transmission Systems Modeled• Neighboring Transmission Systems Modeled

9

Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study Procedure

Analysis Tools:Siemens PSS/E Power– Siemens PSS/E Power Systems Simulator

– PowerWorld Simulator– PowerWorld Simulator

– Automation Programs (Python NET)(Python, .NET)

10

Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study ProcedureStartStart • Run all NERC TPL Category A, B and C

contingencies, and selected D contingencies for each iteration and

Run Criteria Screening

each seasonal/loading condition (~100,000 contingencies per iteration)

• Violations may initiate transmission

Violations ?

Create/Change Project or

Create/Change Procedure and

YesYes

expansion studies or require operating procedures depending on probability and severity of problem

Update Model

E dE d

NoNo

Initiate Detailed EndEnd Alternative Studies

11

Reliability Planning Study ActivitiesReliability Planning Study ActivitiesReliability Planning Study ActivitiesReliability Planning Study Activities

Santee CooperSantee Cooper

12

S t C L l R li bilit St diS t C L l R li bilit St diSantee Cooper Local Reliability StudiesSantee Cooper Local Reliability Studies

•• Planning CriteriaPlanning Criteria•• Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study Procedure

William GaitherWilliam Gaither

y yy y

William GaitherWilliam Gaither

13

Planning CriteriaPlanning Criteria

• Santee Cooper Internal Planning CriteriaD t d i 1987– Documented in 1987

– Last revised in September, 2007

• North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) TPL Standards

14

SCPSA Internal Planning CriteriaSCPSA Internal Planning Criteria

Event Description Voltage limit

Delivery Point Bus, normal operating conditions 92.5% to 102.5%

Delivery Point Bus, emergency operating conditions 90.0% to 104.0%

Transmission lines, within continuous rating during normal operations

Transmission lines within emergency rating during contingency eventsTransmission lines, within emergency rating during contingency events

Transformers, within its max. 55 degree C rating during normal operations

Transformers, within 107 % of its max. 65 degree C rating during contingency events

15

NERC TPL StandardsNERC TPL StandardsTable 1Table 1

16

Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study Procedure• Power Flow Models

– Updated loads from current corporate load forecast and Central supplied load forecast

– Detailed data including the most current transmission expansion planexpansion plan

– Transmission associated with new generation– SERC Region: 2009 Series Reduced LTSG Modelsg– North America: 2009 Series MMWG Models (Electrically

Equivalenced)

17


• Analysis Tools– Siemens/PTI PSS/E Power Systems Simulator– Python Automation Programs– Microsoft Access and Excel

18

Reliability Study ProcedureReliability Study Procedure• Contingencies Tested:• Contingencies Tested:

– All Single Transmission Line Outages at 230 kV, 115 kV, and 69 kV– All Single Transformer Outages

All Si l B O t– All Single Bus Outages– All Single Generator Unit Outages– Selected Combinations of 2 Transmission Line Outages

S l t d C bi ti f 2 T f O t– Selected Combinations of 2 Transformer Outages– Selected Combinations of 2 Generator Unit Outages– Selected Combinations of 1 Transmission Line Outage and 1 Transformer Outage

S C f O G O– Selected Combinations of 1 Transmission Line Outage and 1 Generator Unit Outage– Selected Combinations of 1 Transformer Outage and 1 Generator Unit Outage

19


• Review results of tested contingencies• Identify contingencies that fail to meet planning criteriay g p g• Recommend project to correct facility not meeting criteria• Test recommended project against planning criteriap j g p g• If recommended project meets criteria add to transmission plan• If recommended project does not meet criteria, develop

alternative project and re-test until planning criteria met• Develop transmission plan based on recommended projects

20

VACAR Future Year AssessmentsVACAR Future Year Assessments

21

VACAR Power Flow Working GroupVACAR Power Flow Working Group

• Dominion Virginia Power• Duke Energy• Progress Energy Carolinas• SCE&G• Santee Cooper

22

VACAR Power Flow Working GroupVACAR Power Flow Working Group• Conduct joint studies as assigned by VACAR PTF• Exchange forecast loads, bulk power facility plans, and g , p y p ,

systems conditions• Assesses voltage and thermal limitsg• Publish report of the joint studies • Investigate improved study methods and proceduresg p y p• Make recommendations to the PTF for future studies

23

VACAR 2015 Summer Study VACAR 2015 Summer Study ScopeScopeScopeScope

• Part one - Update 2009 Series MMWG 2015 Summer Peak Case -Completep

• Part two - Assess using merged monitor and n-1 contingency files concentrated on 230 kV and above facilities, critical facilities below 230 kV ill b id d C l tkV will be considered. – Complete

• Part three - Assess using n-2 contingency file – Complete• Part four - Evaluate contingency combinations – Complete• Part four - Evaluate contingency combinations – Complete• Write Report and present to VACAR PTF - Complete• Finalize Report – August 13, 2010p g ,

24

VACAR 2015 Summer StudyVACAR 2015 Summer StudyResultsResultsResultsResults

• N-1 Thermal and Voltage AssessmentNeither Santee Cooper or South Carolina Electric & Gas show any – Neither Santee Cooper or South Carolina Electric & Gas show any thermal or voltage constraints for the 2015 Summer Study.

• N-2 Thermal and Voltage AssessmentN 2 Thermal and Voltage Assessment– Several elements exceed their rating under double contingency in

both Santee Cooper and South Carolina Electric & Gas control areas.

25

Okatie 230/115 kVLexington-Lyles 115 kVJasper-Yemassee 230 kVJasper Yemassee 230 kVMcIntosh-Jasper 115 kVAFY-Aiken Hampton 115 kVUrquhart-Graniteville 230 kVqCallawassie Tap-Okatie 115 kVSavannah River Services 230/115 kVVogtle-Savannah River Services 230 kVSavannah River Services-Canadys 230 kV

Batesburg-Monetta 115 kVVarnville 230/115 kVWinyah-Campfield 230 kVy pWinyah 230/115 kVBatesburg-Gilbert 115 kV

VACAR StudiesVACAR Studies

QuestionsQuestions??

28

SERC Future Year AssessmentsSERC Future Year Assessments

29

SERC Long Term Study GroupSERC Long Term Study Group• 2015 Summer

Future Year Study: CompleteComplete

• 2016 Summer Future Year Study: in Progress

30

SERC LTSGSERC LTSGPurposePurposePurposePurpose

• Analysis of the performance of the members’ transmission y psystems that identifies limits to power transfers occurring non-simultaneously among the SERC members.

• Analysis of the performance of the members’ transmission systems under normal conditions and loss of a single element.

31

SERC LTSGSERC LTSGSi ifi t F ilitiSi ifi t F ilitiSignificant FacilitiesSignificant Facilities

• Facility is a limit below the test level and transfer factors are b th t ffabove the cutoff.

• The number of different transfers/companies impacted.• If the facility requires the use of an operating guide.• If the outage of the facility results in overloads of several

i i ltransmission elements.• If actual TLRs have been called on the facility.

32

SERC LTSGSERC LTSG2015 Summer Future Year Study: Results2015 Summer Future Year Study: Results2015 Summer Future Year Study: Results2015 Summer Future Year Study: Results

• McIntosh to Jasper Tap 115 kV Interconnection (Southern-SCEG)• For the loss of the McIntosh – Purrysburg 230 kV line, this facility limits some

t f S th d th S th t b i S th h exports from Southern and the Southeastern sub-region. Southern has addressed this contingency event through planned system reinforcements.

• Urquhart to Graniteville 230 kV (SCEG)Li it th S th t t VACAR b i l t f d b • Limits the Southeastern to VACAR sub-regional transfer under base case conditions. Loading on this facility is impacted by generation dispatch in SCEG’s area. SCEG currently has a project that will alleviate the facility.

• Pee Dee to Marion 230 kV (SCPSA)• Pee Dee to Marion 230 kV (SCPSA)• Limits some export from SCPSA under contingency of the Kingstree-Kingstree

230 kV Line. SCPSA is currently evaluating potential solutions for this limit.

33

SERC LTSGSERC LTSG2016 Summer Future Year Study: Progress2016 Summer Future Year Study: Progress2016 Summer Future Year Study: Progress2016 Summer Future Year Study: Progress

• Develop Base Case for study – Complete

• Perform multiple iterations of linear analysis – Complete

• AC power flow verification – August 11, 2010

• Draft 1 of the report and preliminary results – September 9, 2010

• Final report draft published – December 3, 2010p p ,

34

SERC StudiesSERC Studies

QuestionsQuestions??

35

ERAG Future Year AssessmentsERAG Future Year Assessments

36

SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCSERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCInterregional Transmission SystemInterregional Transmission System

R li bilit A tR li bilit A tReliability AssessmentsReliability Assessments

37

SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFC• SERC East SERC East

VACAR (Duke, DVP, PEC, SCE&G, SCPSA)Central (TVA LGEE EKPC BREC)Central (TVA, LGEE, EKPC, BREC)

• Reliability First Corporation PJM (Pennsylvania New Jersey Maryland)PJM (Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland)MISO (Midwest Independent System Operator)

38

39

SERC EastSERC East--RFC Operating Studies RFC Operating Studies Working GroupWorking GroupWorking GroupWorking Group

A l i f i t i l t f d i • Analysis of interregional system performance during regional and sub-regional power transfersSt d f l d ti diti• Study of normal and contingency conditions

• Effects of selected multiple outages and simultaneous transfers on system performance transfers on system performance

40

SERC EastSERC East RFC Operating Studies RFC Operating Studies SERC EastSERC East--RFC Operating Studies RFC Operating Studies Working GroupWorking Group

• Identify transfer limits from and to each study region• Transfer limits are not ATC or TTC as required in FERC

Orders 888 and 889 and posted on OASIS• Results are conditional, not absolute or optimal• Identify facilities having thermal or selected

voltage/reactive limits for regional and sub-regional transfers

41


• FCITC - First Contingency Incremental Transfer Capability is the incremental transfer capability above the transfers is the incremental transfer capability above the transfers modeled in the base case

• FCCTC - First Contingency Total Transfer Capability is the CC C s Co ge cy o a a s e Capab y s ealgebraic sum of the FCITC and the base case region-to-region transfer

42


• Analysis of FCITC’s for selected simultaneous transfers among, or through study areas

• FCITC’s and FCTTC’s for non-simultaneous transfers• Appraisals for PJM, Midwest ISO and SERC East study

areas43

SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCReliability AssessmentReliability AssessmentReliability AssessmentReliability Assessment

• Interchange of power at peak load extremely sensitive to pricing

• Small pricing differentials can cause large power interchanges

44

Reliability Assessment Study AssumptionsReliability Assessment Study Assumptions

• Load forecasts and generation availabilityG hi di t ib ti f l d d ti• Geographic distribution of load and generation

• Transmission system configuration

45

Reliability Assessment Study AssumptionsReliability Assessment Study Assumptions

• Simultaneous inter-system power transfersR i l i t f ti i• Regional requirements for contingencies

• Phase Angle Regulator control settings

46

2014 S SERC E t2014 S SERC E t RFCRFC2014 Summer SERC East2014 Summer SERC East--RFCRFCReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study Resultsy yy y

• MISO to SERC East – No FCITC import limit at 4400 MW MISO to SERC East No FCITC import limit at 4400 MW. Increased from 4400 MW in 2009 Summer study

• SERC East to MISO – FCITC export limit of 1450 MW.SERC East to MISO FCITC export limit of 1450 MW.No limit found in 2009 Summer study

47

2014 Summer SERC East2014 Summer SERC East--RFCRFCReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study Results

• PJM to SERC East – FCITC Import limit of 3650 MW. Decreased from 4200 MW in 2009 Summer study

• SERC East to PJM – FCITC export limit of 1450 MW. Decreased from 4150 in 2009 Summer study

48

SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study ResultsReliability Assessment Study Results

• 500/230kV transformers moderately responsive to transfers

• Some contingency overloading of transformers may occur for imports into VACAR

49

SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCFuture StudiesFuture StudiesFuture StudiesFuture Studies

• Alternate between upcoming winter operational study and Near Term/Long Term assessments

• Next reliability assessment - 2021 Summer study, due November 2011

50

SERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCSERC EastSERC East--RFCRFCInterregional Transmission SystemInterregional Transmission System

R li bilit A tR li bilit A tReliability AssessmentsReliability Assessments

Questions?Questions?

51

MultiMulti--Party StudiesParty Studies

52

SCSC--PEC 2016 Summer StudyPEC 2016 Summer Studyyy

• Previous SC-PEC Summer 2016 Study (2009)

– Pee Dee Generating Station

600 MW• 600 MW

• 04/1/2014

– Pee Dee to Lake City 230 kV Line

53

SCSC--PEC 2016 Summer Study (2010)PEC 2016 Summer Study (2010)y ( )y ( )

• Pee Dee Generating Station deferred indefinitelyg y

• Pee Dee to Lake City 230 kV Line cancelled

• Progress Energy Transmission Plan revised

54

SCSC--PEC 2016 Summer StudyPEC 2016 Summer Studyyy

• Previous study results invalid resulting from Santee y g

Cooper and Progress Energy transmission plan

hchanges

• Revise study scope to incorporate revised e se study scope to co po ate e sed

transmission and generation plans.

55

SCSC--PEC 2016 Summer Study StatusPEC 2016 Summer Study Statusyy

• Revised Transmission Plans incorporated into 2016

Base Case

• Transfers completed by Progress Energy

• Schedule conference call to discuss preliminary Schedule conference call to discuss preliminary

results.

56

Propose Changes to Transmission Propose Changes to Transmission p gp gExpansion PlansExpansion Plans

SCE&GSCE&GSCE&GSCE&G

57

Transmission Expansion Plan Disclaimer

• The projects described in these presentations The projects described in these presentations represent the current transmission plans within the SCRTP footprint.

• The expansion plan is continuously reviewed and may change due to changes in assumptions.

• This presentation does not represent a commitment to build.

58

SCE&G Recently Completed Transmission ProjectsSCE&G Recently Completed Transmission Projectsy p jy p j

Columbia Industrial Park ‐ Hopkins 115kV Line Upgrade p pg

Urquhart ‐ Belvedere 115kV Rebuild to Double Circuit

Pineland Substation Add 2nd 230/115kV AutotransformerPineland Substation Add 2nd 230/115kV Autotransformer

Church Creek ‐ Savage Rd 115kV Rebuild to Double Circuit

l d l d S S b ild bl Ci iBelvedere ‐ Belvedere Sw. Sta. Rebuild to Double Circuit

59

SCE&G Active Transmission Projects (Aug 2010)SCE&G Active Transmission Projects (Aug 2010)j ( g )j ( g )

• Pepperhill ‐ Ladson Tap 115kV Upgrade 5/31/2010 2011

• Charleston Trans ‐ Charlotte St 115kV Line 5/31/2011 2012

• Graniteville Add #3 Autotransformer 5/31/2012

• Denny Terrace ‐ Pineland 230kV Line 5/31/2012

• Ritter 230/115kV Sub Construct 5/31/2012 12/31/2010 / / / / /

• Yemassee Add 3rd Autotransformer 5/31/2012

60

SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010‐‐20192019

i Ch l S 11 k i d /31/2010 201• Bayview‐Charlotte St 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2010 2014

• Lake Murray Add 2nd 336 MVA Autotransformer 5/31/2011 2013

• Aiken #3 to Aiken Hampton 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2012 2014Aiken #3 to Aiken Hampton 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2012 2014

• Pepperhill ‐ Summerville 230kV Line Construct 5/31/2012 2013

• Canadys‐Church Ck 230KV Increase Rating 12/31/2012

• Canadys‐Church Ck 230KV Rebuild to Dbl Circuit 5/31/2012 12/31/2015

• Edenwood ‐ Lake Murray Trans 230kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2013

• Cainhoy 230/115kV Substation Construct 5/31/2013• Cainhoy 230/115kV Substation Construct 5/31/2013

• Cainhoy ‐ A.M. Williams 115kV #1 Convert to 230kV 5/31/2013

• Bayview Tap ‐ Osceola 115kV Rebuild to Dbl Circuit 5/31/2013y p / /

61

h i 230/11 k S b i C /31/201

SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010‐‐2019 (continued)2019 (continued)

• Bush River 230/115kV Substation Construct 5/31/2014

• Yemassee ‐ Burton 115kV Rebuild 5/31/2014

• Mt Pleasant ‐ Bayview 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2014Mt Pleasant Bayview 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2014

• Aiken Hampton ‐ Aiken Trans 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2014 2015

• Belvedere ‐ Stevens Ck 115kV Rebuild to Dbl Circuit 5/31/201412/31/2012

• Lyles ‐ Denny Terrace 115kV #1 and #2 Upgrade 5/31/2014

• Okatie 230/115kV Sub Construct 5/31/2014

• St Andrews Queensboro 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2015• St Andrews ‐ Queensboro 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2015

• Lyles ‐Williams St 115kV Line Upgrade 5/31/2015

• Cainhoy ‐ Thomas Island 115kV Line Construct 5/31/2015 y / /

62

SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010SCE&G Planned Major Transmission Projects 2010‐‐2019 (continued)2019 (continued)

• Columbia Industrial Park 2nd 336 Autotransformer 5/31/2015 2018

• Faber Place ‐ Charleston Trans 115kV #1 and #2 Upgrade 5/31/2015

• Hopkins ‐ Edenwood 115kV Rebuild as Dbl Circuit 5/31/2015

• Pineland ‐ Killian 115kV Rebuild as Dbl Circuit 5/31/2015

• Cainhoy A M W 230kV #2 and 115kV #2 Lines Construct 5/31/2016 2017• Cainhoy ‐ A.M.W. 230kV #2 and 115kV #2 Lines Construct 5/31/2016 2017

• Cainhoy ‐ Hamlin 115kV Rebuild to Dbl Circuit 5/31/2016

• Lexington Junction 115kV Switching Station Construct 5/31/2016 2018

• Urquhart ‐ Graniteville 230kV Line #2 Construct 5/31/2016

• Queensboro 230/115kV Sub Construct 5/31/2018

63

V.C. Summer Unit #2 Related ProjectsV.C. Summer Unit #2 Related Projectsjj

• Denny Terrace ‐ Lyles 230kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2015• Denny Terrace Add 3rd 336 Autotransformer 12/01/2015

SCE&GSCE&G

• Denny Terrace Add 3rd 336 Autotransformer 12/01/2015• Lake Murray Add 3rd 336 Autotransformer 12/01/2015• Lake Murray ‐McMeekin 115kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2015• Lake Murray ‐ Saluda 115kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2015Lake Murray Saluda 115kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2015• Saluda ‐McMeekin 115kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2015• VCS2 ‐ Lake Murray #2 230kV Line Construct 12/01/2015• VCS2 ‐Winnsboro ‐ Killian 230kV Line Construct 12/01/2015

64

V.C. Summer Unit #3 Related ProjectsV.C. Summer Unit #3 Related Projects

• Saluda ‐ Duke 115kV Tielines Upgrade 12/01/2018h l bi / k / /

SCE&GSCE&G

• South Columbia 230/115kV Construct 12/01/2018• South Lexington 230/115kV Construct 12/01/2018• St George 230kV Switching Station Construct 12/01/2018• St George Canadys 230kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2018• St George ‐ Canadys 230kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2018• St George ‐ Summerville 230kV Line Upgrade 12/01/2018• VCS Sub #2 ‐ St George 230kV Double Circuit Construct 12/01/2018

65

Transmission Expansion Project CategoriesTransmission Expansion Project Categories1. Transmission Line Improvements1. Transmission Line Improvements

A. New Lines ‐ Construction of New 230kV or 115kV Transmission LinesB. Line Upgrades ‐ Increase Thermal Limits and/or Operating Voltage of

Existing LinesExisting Lines.

2. Transmission Substation ImprovementsA. 230/115kV Autotransformers

E t bli h N 230/115kV S b t ti I C it t E i ti• Establish New 230/115kV Substation or Increase Capacity at Existing Substations

• Adds Strong 230kV Sources at Load Centers• Allows 230 and 115kV Systems to Support Each Other• Allows 230 and 115kV Systems to Support Each Other

B. Capacitor Banks and Switching Stations• Can be More Economic Alternatives to More Costly Upgrades• Improves System Performance Under ContingenciesImproves System Performance Under Contingencies

66

SCE&GSCE&G New and Upgraded Lines 2010New and Upgraded Lines 2010‐‐20192019

New Lines

Upgraded Lines

67

SCE&G Transmission Substation Improvements SCE&G Transmission Substation Improvements 20102010‐‐20192019

New 230/115Autotransformers

Switching Stations

68

69

XX

70

XXX

71

XX

X

72

73

X

74

X X

75

X X

76

Propose Changes to Transmission Propose Changes to Transmission p gp gExpansion PlansExpansion Plans

Santee CooperSantee CooperSantee CooperSantee Cooper

77

Transmission NetworkCompleted Projects

• Replace Hilton Head Submarine Cable 04/02/2009• Replace Hilton Head Submarine Cable 04/02/2009• Varnville-Bluffton 115 kV Line Reconfiguration 03/31/2009• Shamrock 230-115-69 kV Substation 07/08/2009Shamrock 230 115 69 kV Substation 07/08/2009• Rebuild Georgetown Switching Station-Campfield

115 kV Lines 11/25/2009• Sandy Run-Orangeburg 115 kV Line 08/04/2009• Rebuild Burke Road Tap for 115 kV Operation 05/20/2010

78

Transmission NetworkNew/Modified Projects

• Fold Hemingway-Marion 230 kV Line into Lake City 06/2012

79

Fold Hemingway-Marion 230 kV into Lake City

80

Transmission NetworkPlanned ProjectsPlanned Projects

• Arcadia-Garden City #2 115 kV Line 12/2011C li F t 230 115 kV S b t ti 06/2012• Carolina Forest 230-115 kV Substation 06/2012

• Carolina Forest-Dunes #2 115 kV Line 06/2012• Orangeburg 230-115 kV Substation 12/2012g g• Pomaria 230-69 kV Substation 06/2013• Bucksville 230-115 kV Substation 06/2015

230 06/2016• Winyah-Bucksville 230 kV Line 06/2016• Bucksville-Garden City 115 kV Line 06/2017• Transmission Plans Associated with VCS #2 (2016)Transmission Plans Associated with VCS #2 (2016)

and VCS #3 (2019)81

Grand Strand Area

82

Myrtle Beach Area

• Issues:– Large load center served from remote resources – Tightly-integrated transmission system– Numerous contingencies impact “source” lines into the

area– Line loadings projected to exceed their normal rating

83

Carolina Forest 230/115 kV Substation

• Solution:– Construct the Carolina Forest

230/115 kV Substation

CarolinaForest

230/115 kV Substation– Construct 115 kV line from

Carolina Forest to Dunes 115-12 kV Substation115 12 kV Substation

• Benefits:– Provide another bulk source into

th t l t f M tl B hthe central part of Myrtle Beach– Relieve dependency on Perry

Road and Myrtle Beach S b t tiSubstations

84

Arcadia-Garden City 115 kV Line

• Problem:– Contingency:

O t f C fi ld P R d 230 kV Li• Outage of Campfield-Perry Road 230 kV Line• Severe or extreme events in the Myrtle Beach Area

– Result:• Arcadia-Litchfield 115 kV line section may overloady

– Base case loading projected to exceed normal rating in 2012

85

Arcadia-Garden City 115 kV Line• Solution:

– Rebuild the existing Garden City-Arcadia 115 kV Line as City Arcadia 115 kV Line as a double circuit line

• Benefit:– Provide another source into

southern portion of Myrtle southern portion of Myrtle Beach area.

86

Orangeburg-St. George-Varnville 69 kV System

Orangeburg 230/115 kV

SubSub

87

Pomaria 230-69 kV Substation

88

MarionBucksville Transmission Projects

Fold Hemingway-Red Bluff

Lake CityConway

Carolina Forest 230-115 kV Substation

Fold HemingwayMarion 230 kV Line

into Lake City

Bucksville 230-115 kV S b t ti

DunesPerry Road

Kingstree

Hemingway

ykV Substation

Garden City

Winyah-Bucksville 230 kV Line

Arcadia

Campfield

Georgetown

Arcadia-Garden City 115 kV Line #2

Winyah

89

VC Summer #2 Transmission Plan (ISD 2016)Flat Creek 230 69 kV Sub

Richburg 69 kV Sw. Sta.Flat Creek 230-69 kV Sub.

Winnsboro 69 kV Sw. Sta.C d 230 69 kV S bVC Summer Nuclear Plant

Lugoff 230-69 kV Sub.

Camden 230-69 kV Sub.

Pomaria 69 kV Sw. Sta.Blythewood 230-115-69 kV Sub.

90

Flat Creek 230 69 kV SubVC Summer #2 Transmission Plan (ISD 2016)

Richburg 230-69 kV Sub.Flat Creek 230-69 kV Sub.

Winnsboro 230-69 kV Sub.C d 230 69 kV S bVC Summer Nuclear Plant

Lugoff 230-69 kV Sub.

Camden 230-69 kV Sub.

Pomaria 230-69 kV Sub.Blythewood 230-115-69 kV Sub.

91

VCS #2 Transmission Projects

• Winnsboro 230-69 kV Substation 09/2013• VCS-Winnsboro 230 kV Line 11/2013• Richburg 230-69 kV Substation 06/2014• Winnsboro-Richburg 230 kV Line 08/2014• Richburg-Flat Creek 230 kV Line 10/2015

92

VC Summer Nuclear

Pomaria 69 kV SS

Newberry 230-69 kV Sub.

Blythewood 230-69 kV Sub.

Sandy Run 115 kV SS

VC Summer #3 TransmissionSandy Run 115 kV SS

Plan (ISD 2019)

Orangeburg 115-69 kV Sub.

Bamberg 69 kV SS

Sycamore 69 kV SS St. George 115-69 kV Sub.

Yemassee 230 kV SS

Varnville 230-115-69 kV Sub.

93

Blythewood 230-69 kV Sub.Pomaria 230-69 kV Sub.

VCS-Pomaria 230 kV Line

Pomaria-Sandy Run 230 kV LineNewberry 230-69 kV Sub.

VC Summer Nuclear

Sandy Run 230-115 kV Sub

Pomaria-Sandy Run 230 kV Line

VC Summer #3 Transmission Sandy Run 230-115 kV Sub.

Sandy Run-Orangeburg 230 kV Line

VC Summer #3 Transmission

Plan (ISD 2019)Orangeburg 230-115-69 kV Sub.

Bamberg 69 kV SS

St George 230 115 kV Sub

Orangeburg-St. George 230 kV Line

Sycamore 69 kV SS

St. George 230-115 kV Sub.

St. George-Varnville 230 kV Line

St. George 115-69 kV Sub.

Varnville 230-115-69 kV Sub.

Yemassee 230 kV SS

94

VCS #3 Transmission Projects• VCS-Pomaria #2 230 kV Line 05/2014• Sandy Run 230-115 kV Substation 04/2016• Pomaria-Sandy Run 230 kV Line 05/2016• Sandy Run-Orangeburg 230 kV Line 05/2017• St George 230-115 kV Substation 04/2018• St. George 230-115 kV Substation 04/2018• Varnville 230-115 kV Substation 05/2019• St. George-Varnville 230 kV Line 06/2019

95

Stakeholder Input andStakeholder Input andppAlternative Discussion OnAlternative Discussion On

Proposed Changes toProposed Changes toProposed Changes toProposed Changes toTransmission Expansion PlansTransmission Expansion Plans

96

Carolinas Transmission Planning Carolinas Transmission Planning Carolinas Transmission Planning Carolinas Transmission Planning Coordination AgreementCoordination Agreement

(CTPCA)(CTPCA)(CTPCA)(CTPCA)

97

SCRTP WebsiteSCRTP WebsiteSCRTP WebsiteSCRTP Website

www.scrtp.com

98

Eastern Interconnection Planning Eastern Interconnection Planning Eastern Interconnection Planning Eastern Interconnection Planning CollaborativeCollaborative

(EIPC)(EIPC)(EIPC)(EIPC)

99

What are Interconnects?What are Interconnects?

100

What is the EIPC?What is the EIPC?• Eastern Interconnection Planning Collaborative

• Planning Authorities throughout the Eastern Interconnect including U.S. and Canadaincluding U.S. and Canada

• Member geography covers over 600GW of connected g g p ycustomer demand

101

Who are the Planning Authorities?Who are the Planning Authorities?• Alcoa Power Generating• American Transmission Co.• Duke Energy Carolinas

• Midwest ISO *• Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia• New Brunswick System Operator

• Electric Energy Inc.• Entergy *• E.ON (Louisville/Kentucky Util.)

Florida Power & Light

• New York ISO *• PJM Interconnection *• PowerSouth Energy Coop.

Progress Energy Carolinas• Florida Power & Light• Georgia Transmission Corp.• IESO (Ontario, Canada)• International Transmission Co

• Progress Energy – Carolinas• Progress Energy – Florida• South Carolina Electric &Gas• Santee Cooper• International Transmission Co.

• ISO-New England *• JEA (Jacksonville, Florida)• MAPPCOR *

• Santee Cooper• Southern Company *• Southwest Power Pool• Tennessee Valley Authority *CO ss y y

102

*Principal investigators on DOE Project

What are the Objectives of the EIPC?What are the Objectives of the EIPC?1. Integration (“roll-up”) and analysis of approved local and

regional plans2. Development of possible interregional expansion

scenarios to be studied3. Development of interregional transmission expansion

information associated with the scenarios studied

The EIPC is committed to an open and transparent process that uses aroll-up of regional plans as a starting point and is consistent with FERCOrder 890 principles.

103

EIPC StatusEIPC Status• EIPC structure in place• 26 Planning Authorities signed (U.S. and Canada) with approximately

95% of the Eastern Interconnection c stomers co ered95% of the Eastern Interconnection customers covered• Website launched – www.eipconline.com• Formation of Stakeholder Steering Committee (SSC) completed and • Formation of Stakeholder Steering Committee (SSC) completed and

first SSC meeting was in Chicago on July 15-16, 2010• DOE announced $16M funding of interconnection studies proposal g p p• DOE/EIPC Contract finalized last week• DOE announced $14 M funding for State participation in the EIPCg p p

104

DOE Project DOE Project –– Primary TasksPrimary Tasks• Establish an open and inclusive Stakeholder process with

participation by all industry segments and state representatives C l t i t ti f i ti R i l l t f • Complete an integration of existing Regional plans to form an interconnection-wide model suitable for studies of the interconnection as a wholeinterconnection as a whole

• Develop potential “resource futures” through economic analyses conducted at the macro-level

• Complete interconnection-wide analyses of Stakeholder postulated resource scenarios including a transmission topology th t t th ithat supports those scenarios

105

DOE Project DOE Project –– Study ResultsStudy Results• Roll-up and integration of regional plans for 2020• Roll-up and integration of regional plans for 2020• 8 Macroeconomic “futures”

– Input assumptions determined by states/stakeholders– Input assumptions determined by states/stakeholders– Up to 9 sensitivities of input variables on each “future”– Provides useful information on future resource scenarios that are of

interest for future transmission analyses

• 3 Future resource scenarios with fully developed transmission build-out information that meet reliability requirements– States agreement with resource scenarios to be studied

• 2 Project reports – June 2011 and June 2012106

Draft EIPC Process FlowPolicy

Discussions

Analysis Group

Refines Existing

Models for EIPC Use

Determine Scenario

ProposalsWorkshop Study

Scenarios

Analysis Group

Completes Work

Develop Draft

Summaries and Reports

Public Input on Draft Reports

Publish Final

ReportsEIPC Use

Sub-Process

Regional Planning Processes

107

SectorsSectors and and SeatsSeats on SSCon SSC3 Transmission Owners and Developers3 Generation Owners & Developers (minimum 1 renewable and 1

nonrenewable)3 Other Suppliers e.g., Power Marketers, Distributed Generation, Energy

Storage (minimum 1 demand-side resources representative)3 Transmission Dependent Utilities (TDUs), Public Power & Coops e.g.,

Municipal utilities, Rural Co-ops, Power Authorities (minimum 1 Public P C TDU)Power or Coop TDU)

3 End Users e.g., Small consumer advocates, large consumers (minimum 1 state consumer advocate agency)

3 NGO li t h & l d d h bit t ti3 NGOs e.g. climate change & energy, land and habitat conservation10 State representatives1 Canadian Provincial representativeEx Officio Members: US DOE US EPA

108

Ex Officio Members: US DOE, US EPATOTAL: 29 members

Sector Caucus SelectionSector Caucus SelectionProcessProcess

PJM, 4 sectors, 3

nominations to ProcessProcess nominations to each MISO, 4

sectors, 3 nominations to

each

SPP 4 Sectors, 3

nominations each

S t

MAPP, 4 sectors, 3

nominations to each

Eastern Canada 4 sectors, 3

nominations to each

Sector Caucuses

ISO-NE, 4 sectors, 3

nominations to each

EU & NGO sectors EI-

wide, 27 nominations to each

NYISO, 4 sectors, 3

nominations

SIRPP, 4 sectors, 3

nominations

each

nominations to eachFlorida, 4

sectors, 3 nominations

to each

nominations each

109

Recent Activities and Target Schedule For 2010Recent Activities and Target Schedule For 2010

• July 6th – Announcement of SSC members

• July 15‐16 – 1st SSC meeting at Crowne Plaza in Chicagodd d l f h i d G– Address development of a charter – assigned to WG

– Determine role for SWG, appoint core members

– Start effort to create a 6‐12 month work plan p

– Learn more about scenario planning and macroeconomic work

• September‐October – Initial results from 2020 integrated regional case availableregional case available

• Fall 2010 – Initial work on macroeconomic analyses

110

EIPCEIPC

Questions?Questions?

111

SCRTP SCRTP -- Next MeetingNext Meeting

• Discuss Alternative Solution AnalysesSCRTP St k h ld G ill d l t 5 • SCRTP Stakeholder Group will propose and select 5 intra-regional economic transfers for study

• Proposed inter regional economic transfers will be • Proposed inter-regional economic transfers will be advanced to the SIRPP

112

South Carolina Regional Transmission PlanningSouth Carolina Regional Transmission Planning

St k h ld M tiSt k h ld M tiStakeholder MeetingStakeholder Meeting

SCE&G Lake Murray Training CenterSCE&G Lake Murray Training Center

Columbia, SCColumbia, SC

August 4 2010August 4 2010August 4, 2010August 4, 2010

113

Documents

South Carolina Regional Transmission Planning St k h ld M … · 2014-10-15 · South Carolina Regional Transmission Planning St k h ld M tiStakeholder Meeting SCE&G Lake Murray Training