20150225PAC to Staff 1-27.pdf

3Effi*.
i :, .: i : :: . i An TDACORP Company
?t}ii i:iB 25 Plt h: 25
JULIA A. HILTONCorporateGounset li.r ':.1 i- i:r:'l.r'. [e-mail] l.l f l'l-l-i l::'- l.l\ii l,lil--rliil'-)i'
February 25,2015
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Jean D. Jewel!, Secretary
ldaho Public Utilities Commission
472 West Washington Street
Boise, ldaho 83702
Re: Case Nos. IPC-E-14-41and PAC-E-14-11
Exchange of Certain Transmission Assets - PacifiCorp's Response to the
First Production Request of the ldaho Public Utilities Commission Staff
Dear Ms. Jewell:
Enclosed for filing in the above matters please find an original and three (3)
copies of PacifiCorp's Response to the First Production Request of the ldaho Public
Utilities Commission Staff.
!f you have any questions about this filing, please contact Ted Weston, PacifiCorp
Manager of Regulation, at (801 ) 220-2963 or me at (208) 388-611 7.
Very truly yours,etw
Julia A. Hilton
JAH:kkt
Enclosures
1221 W. ldaho 5t. (83702)
P.O. Box 70
Boise, lD 83707
JULIA A. HILTON (lSB No. 7740)
ldaho Power Company
1221West ldaho Street (83702)
P.O. Box 70
Boise, ldaho 83707
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
ihilton@ idahopower.com
Attorney for ldaho Power Company
DANIEL E. SOLANDER (lSB No. 8931)
Rocky Mountain Power
201 South Main Street, Suite 2300
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Telephone: (801 ) 2204014
Facsimile: (801 ) 220-3299
daniel.solander@pacifi corp.com
Attorney for PacifiCorp
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION
OF PACIFICORP DBA ROCKY
MOUNTAIN POWER AND IDAHO POWER
COMPANY FOR AN ORDER
AUTHORIZING THE EXCHANGE OF
CERTAIN TRANSMISSION ASSETS
?$i5 $:[a ?5 Pi{ L: 25
i;-'::,",:li f lt-ll i'-;l L,(Ji,:i, ,.,9111,
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
CASE NOS. IPC-E-1441
PAC-E-14-11
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO
THE FIRST PRODUCTION
REQUEST OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC
UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF
COMES NOW, PacifiCorp dlbla Rocky Mountain Power and Pacific Power
(collectively referred to as "PacifiCorp" or "Company"), and in response to the First
Production Request of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission Staff to PacifiCorp dated
February 4,2015, herewith submits the following information:
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMM]SSION STAFF - 1
REQUEST NO. 1: What are the average monthly operation and maintenance
expenses currently associated with the plant in service that is proposed to be
transferred to ldaho Power from PacifiCorp?
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 1: Please refer to PacifiCorp's response to the
lndustrial Customers of ldaho Power's ('lClP") Request for Production No. 7 in this
proceeding.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Mark Pau!, PacifiCorp, and
it is sponsored by Richard Vai!, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 2
REQUEST NO. 2: What are the average monthly operation and maintenance
expenses estimated to be associated with the plant in service that is proposed to be
transferred to PacifiCorp from ldaho Power?
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 2: Please refer to PacifiCorp's response to
lClP's Request for Production No. 7 in this proceeding.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Mark Pau!, PacifiCorp, and
it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF.3
REQUEST NO. 3: Will there be any financial gain or loss associated with the
transfer of assets? lf so, please provide the specific details and associated assets.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 3: There will be no financial statement gain or
loss associated with the transfer of assets. The parties are purchasing and selling
assets with nearly equivalent net book values. !t is currently anticipated that there will
be a payment from ldaho Power Company ("ldaho Power") to PacifiCorp in the amount
of $352,862 at closing to level the value of the transaction for both parties. This
represents the difference in net book value between the assets purchased and sold
under the purchase and sale agreement. The purchase and sale agreement provides
for a true-up adjustment for the fina! net book values not later than 180 days after
closing.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Brian Fritz, PacifiCorp, and
it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 4
REQUEST NO. 4: PIease provide the proposed journal entries associated with
the transfer of assets.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 4: The parties' respective proposed journal
entries were included within the joint Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC")
203 filing in Docket No. EC15-54-000, which can be accessed at the following link:
http://elibrarv.ferc.oov/idmws/common/OpenNat.asp?fi lel D= 1 37 1 7306
For PacifiCorp's proposed journal entries, please refer to page 331.
The record holder and sponsor for the response to this Request is Mark Ward,
Director of Finance and Accounting, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 5
REQUEST NO. 5: Please quantify the financial benefits to PacifiCorp customers
for the transparency, flexibility, and reliability accomplished by this transfer.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 5: No financial benefits to customers have
been quantified for these system benefits. However, the companies have dedicated
significant executive, legal, operational, technical, and regulatory resources towards
managing both the ongoing administration of the Legacy Agreements and associated
interpretation questions. The elimination of these activities will result in avoided need
for administrative and legal resources; however, the specific amount of costs avoided
has not been quantified as mentioned above.
The record holder and sponsor for the response to this Request is Richard Vail,
Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 6
REQUEST NO. 6: What future anticipated projects, including capital,
maintenance, and operational, will no longer be needed as a result of this transfer of
assets? Please list each project that wil! not be undertaken or revised as a result of this
asset transfer.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 6: There would be no changes to future
anticipated projects for PacifiCorp's capital 10-year plan, maintenance, and operations.
The record holders for the response to this Request are J.D. Podlesnik and Jack
Vranish, PacifiCorp, and it is sponsored by Richard Vai!, Vice President of
Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 7
REQUEST NO. 7: Please provide a schedule showing the plant in service by
specific plant account, original cost, current book value, current depreciation expense
and accumulated depreciation for the assets to be transferred to ldaho Power.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 7: Please refer to PacifiCorp's response to
lClP's Request for Production No. 5 in this proceeding.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Brian Fritz, PacifiCorp, and
it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 8
REQUEST NO. 8: The Joint Purchase and Sale Agreement (JPSA) requires
ldaho Power to be responsible for the 230 kV Upgrades necessary to provide
PacifiCorp with 510 MW of long-term firm point-to-point transmission service on ldaho
Power's transmission system. (Application, JPSA, pg. 27, Section 2.g(bXxiv).) Please
specify the specific equipment purchased or upgraded, and the location of these
required investments along with an explanation of whether there will be any impacts to
path ratings, the flexibility of transmission transfers, or transmission capacity.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 8: Please refer to ldaho Power's response to
the ldaho Public Utilities Commission ("|PUC") Staffs Request No. 8 to ldaho Power
Company.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 9
REQUEST NO. 9: Regarding the benefits discussed in Richard Vail's direct
testimony, please describe whether the asset exchange eliminates the need for
additional transmission investments in order to serve retai!, wholesale, or generation
customers. (Application, Vai! Dl, pg. 7, lines 15-17.)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 9: The purchase and sale agreement does not
eliminate the potential need for additional transmission investments for PacifiCorp in
order to serve retail, wholesale, or generation customers. The purchase and sale
agreement, however, provides for ownership of a transmission connection into the
Goshen area that PacifiCorp does not currently own. The transmission connection will
be used to provide load service and support reliability of service in certain outage
conditions. PacifiCorp's Transmission Planning organization will continue to perform
ongoing reliability, load, and interconnection studies that identify future transmission
investments.
The record holder for the response to this Request is J.D. Podlesnik, PacifiCorp,
and it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 1O
REQUEST NO. 10: Please explain PacifiCorp's transmission scheduling process
and whether any manual scheduling processes will be replaced by automatic process(es)
following the execution of the Joint Ownership and Operations Agreement (JOOA).
(Application, Grow Dl, pg. 12, lines 12-14.) !f so, please provide a detailed description of
the automatic scheduling process(es), including the development and expected
implementation date. Further, please provide additional details regarding the capabilities of
the automatic scheduling process for inter-hour dispatch or dynamic transfers of energy.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 10: PacifiCorp's transmission scheduling
processes are automated using Minneapolis Consulting Group's Control Area Scheduling
('CAS') software. PacifiCorp, as both a Balancing Authority and Transmission Service
Provider, utilizes an auto-approval tool through CAS to evaluate and respond to each on-
time Arranged lnterchange or emergency Arranged lnterchange that it receives submitted
by customers using electronic tags (or "e-Tags") in accordance with the timing requirements
for the Western Electricity Coordinating Council ("WECC").
PacifiCorp does not anticipate any scheduling process changes at this time as a
result of executing the JOOA.
PacifiCorp's scheduling system was updated to accommodate inter-hour 1S-minute
scheduling per FERC Order No. 764 and consistent with WECC guidelines. PacifiCorp's
systems automatically process dynamic and pseudo type e-Tags. There is no change to
dynamic transfer processes anticipated as a result of the transaction.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Kathryn Downey, PacifiCorp,
and it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 11
REQUEST NO. 11: Lisa Grow's testimony says that the Parties are to create a
method to determine and allocate losses for the use of the transmission system within
the other Party's Balancing Authority Area. (Application, Dl Grow, pg. 13, lines 8-12.)
Please provide a description of the previous method, the new method, and the
associated implementation time line.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 11: Please refer to ldaho Power's response to
IPUC Staffs Request No. 10 to ldaho Power Company.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 12
REQUEST NO. 12: Please provide copies of the Phase 1 , and if available the
Phase ll, Environmental Site Assessments for the properties proposed to be transferred
to ldaho Power under the JPSA.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 12: There will be no real property transfers
under the JPSA; therefore, there will be no Phase I and Phase ll Environmental Site
Assessments that pertain to the JPSA transaction.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Brian Fritz, PacifiCorp, and
it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 13
REQUEST NO. 13: Please provide a list of the FERC accounts used in the
calculations presented in Exhibit No. 8 (Application, Dl Vail), along with a list of the
FERC accounts used in the current Energy Cost Adjustment Method (ECAM). Please
explain how the transmission expenses and revenues are expected to change as a
result of the asset exchange, by FERC account or other tracking method.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 13: Please refer to the attachment which
identifies the FERC accounts used in the calculation presented in Exhibit No. 8.
The following FERC accounts are used in the ECAM:
o Account 447 - Sales for resale, excluding on-system wholesale sales and
other revenues that are not modeled in GRIDo Account 456 - REC and SO2 emission revenueso Account 501 - Fuel, steam generation; excluding fuel handling, start-up fuel
(gas and diesel fuel, residual disposal) and other costs that are not modeled
in GRID. Account 503 - Steam from other sourceso Account 547 - Fuel, other generationo Account 555 Purchased power, excluding the Bonneville Power
Administration residential exchange credit pass through if applicableo Account 565 - Transmission of electricity by otherso Account 908 - Demand Side Management costs
As noted in the direct testimony of Rick Vail, ongoing expenses following the
closing of the exchange will be similar to expenses incurred today. Any impacts
estimated on wheeling expenses are discussed in the testimony of Greg Duvall. Please
also see PacifiCorp's responses to IPUC Staffs Request Nos. 1 ,2, 16, and 19.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Nathan Adent, PacifiCorp,
and it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 14
REQUEST NO. 14: Please provide supporting documentation for the load
forecasts and the projected date of the future service requirements, plus the current
transmission use by retail, wholesale, and generation customers served in the Jim
Bridger Area, West of Kingport Area, and North of Goshen Area. (Application, Vail D!,
ps. 8-15.)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 14: PacifiCorp's network transmission
customers provide a 1O-year load and resource forecast. This information is used for
transmission planning purposes and an annual Load and Resource Study is prepared
utilizing these data. Please refer to the confidential table for load information extracted
from the most recent (2014) Load and Resource Study for loads submitted in what is
generally referred to as the "Goshen Area." A confidential map is also included for a
better geographical representation of these loads. PacifiCorp does not serve any load
in the immediate Jim Bridger area. The area west of Kinport is ldaho Power's service
territory and as such PacifiCorp does not serve any load in this area. Please refer to
Attachment 2 for additiona! information on Open-Access Same-Time lnformation
System ("OASIS") rights/total transmission capacity (TTC).
The confidential attachments will only be provided to those parties that have
executed the Protective Agreement in this matter.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Robyn Kara, PacifiCorp,
and it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 15
REQUEST NO. 15: Please provide supporting cost estimates associated with
Rick Vail's testimony regarding the lower upgrade costs to PacifiCorp customers.
(Application, Vail Dl, pg. 12, lines 4-8.)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 15: There are no cost estimates. The
testimony is referring to the cost savings associated with jointly-owned assets where
future upgrade costs are shared between owners.
The record holder and sponsor for the response to this Request is Richard Vail,
Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 16
REQUEST NO. 16: Please provide an explanation of whether Bonneville Power
Administration, Avista, or ldaho Power transmission wheeling revenue for PacifiCorp will
be impacted (i.e., increased or reduced) following the proposed acquisition of assets.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 16: lmpacts to PacifiCorp's wheeling revenue
from third-party transmission customers are not specifically known at this time. Post-
closing, the purchased assets wi!! be included in PacifiCorp's FERC Form 1 and
incorporated as an input into the transmission formula rate annual update published
May 15 of each year. Because the assets being purchased and sold are of roughly
equal value, it is not anticipated that PacifiCorp's transmission rate will appreciably
increase as a direct result of this purchase and sale, but actual impacts will not be
known until the rate update is completed as the transmission formula rate is derived
from a number of inputs and factors influencing the rate.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Brian Fritz, PacifiCorp, and
it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 17
REQUEST NO. ,l7: What are the estimated changes to the ldaho-Northwest
path ratings following the anticipated Walla Walla Hurricane Iine upgrades?
(Application, Angel DI, pg. 18, lines 12-14.)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 17: Please refer to ldaho Power's response to
IPUC Staffs Request No. 23 to ldaho Power Company.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 18
REQUEST NO. 18: Please explain whether there are any areas within
PacifiCorp's Balancing Authority Area where an Energy lmbalance Market, or Security
Constrained Economic Dispatch, has not been implemented. Please also explain how
the proposed acquisition of assets may create new opportunities or improved
functionality for load balancing within shortened intervals (i.e., 5 minute). Please
provide a general overview of additional investments that may be required in the future
in order to increase this type of dispatch functionality.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 18:
(a) No, PacifiCorp's East and West Balancing Authority Areas (BAA) have
been fully incorporated into the Energy lmbalance Market ('ElM").
(b) The acquisition of new transmission assets will increase the utilization
transmission capacity available to the ElM. This increase will allow for a larger pool
resources to be dispatched when short-term load/generation imbalances occur.
(c) The acquisition of new transmission assets wil! enable more diversity and
the potential addition of new Participating Resources to the ElM.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Bruce McAllister,
PacifiCorp, and it is sponsored by Greg Duvall, Director of Net Power Costs, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 19
of
of
REQUEST NO. 19: Please explain whether the asset exchange will cause any
increases or decreases in retail customer rates.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 19: Please reference Exhibit No.8, p. 1,
attached to the direct testimony of PacifiCorp witness Richard Vail. From 2016 through
2025, PacifiCorp estimates the purchase and sale will result in a $1.6 million present
value savings to retail customers in all states served by PacifiCorp.
The record holder and sponsor for the response to this Request is Richard Vail,
Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 20
REQUEST NO. 20: The JPSA includes Planned lmprovements (Application,
JPSA) to be completed by both ldaho Power (Schedule 1.1(e)) and PacifiCorp
(Schedule 1 1(0). Please explain whether there will be any impacts to path ratings, the
flexibility of transmission transfers, or transmission capacity as a result of the listed
improvements.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 20: The planned improvements shown in the
Schedule wil! not impact path ratings, flexibility of transmission transfers, or
transmission capacity.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Brian Fritz, PacifiCorp, and
it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 21
REQUEST NO. 21: Please provide the current OATT formula Excel spreadsheet
and calculations, and the anticipated revised OATT formula Excel spreadsheet as a
result of the elimination of the various legacy agreements.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 21: PacifiCorp's current Open Access
Transmission Tariff ("OATT') transmission formula rate spreadsheet and calculations
published May 15, 2014, for the 2014 transmission formula rate annual update include
the 2013 True-Up (i.e., calendaryear 2013 rate) and the2014 Projection (i.e., June 1,
2014 May 31, 2015 rate) and are posted on PacifiCorp's OASIS at:
http://www.oatioasis.com/ppdindex.html (see folder location: "PacifiCorp OASIS
Tariff/Company lnformation" / "OATT Pricing" I "2014 Transmission Formula Annua!
Update" I "2013 True-Up" or "2014 Projection"). A revised OATT transmission formula
rate spreadsheet and calculation has not been completed at this time as the formula
rate calculation and result is influenced by a number of inputs and factors. Please refer
to PacifiCorp's response to IPUC Staffs Request No. 16 for more information.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Shayleah LaBray,
PacifiCorp, and it is sponsored by Richard Vai!, Vice President of Transmission,
PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 22
REQUEST NO. 22: Please provide a copy of the responses submitted to the
Western Electricity Coordination Council WECC) for the 2014 Operational Practices
Survey Report along with an explanation of whether any of the practices are anticipated
to be revised during 2015, including as a result of the proposed asset exchange.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 22: Please refer to Attachments 1-3 for copies
of the PacifiCorp Operational Practices Survey reports.
201 4 Operational Practices Survey:
Part 1: Near-Term Operations: Next-Dav Studies
PacifiCorp does not anticipate any need or requirement to change any of our
current processes related to our "Next-Day Studies" in order to maintain
compliance after the purchase and sale with ldaho Power. All current "Next-Day
Studies" already include portions of the ldaho Power system that could have an
impact on the PacifiCorp system.
Part 2: Lonq-Term Operations: Seasonal Studies
PacifiCorp does not anticipate any need or requirement to change any of our
current processes related to our "Seasonal Studies" in order to maintain
compliance after the purchase and sale with ldaho Power. All current "Seasonal
Studies" already include portions of the ldaho Power system that could have an
impact on the PacifiCorp system.
Part 3: SituationalAwareness, Protection Svstems. Anqular Separation. EMS
PacifiCorp does not anticipate any need or requirement to change any of our
current processes related to our "Situational Awareness" in order to maintain
compliance after the purchase and sale with ldaho Power. Currently, the
PacifiCorp EMS has visibility into the ldaho Power system to adequately identify
any operational issues, including state estimator and real time contingency
analysis.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Brent Roholt, PacifiCorp,
and it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 23
REQUEST NO. 23: Please explain how the Parties plan to coordinate
compliance with NERC- or State-required physical and cyber security program
requirements given the proposed asset exchange.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 23: Please refer to ldaho Power's response to
IPUC Staffs Request No. 30 to ldaho Power Company.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 24
REQUEST NO. 24: Please explain how the Parties currently ensure the
accuracy and sharing of near term studies and whether the current methods will be
revised following the proposed asset exchange. lf so, please further explain how the
Parties will ensure the interconnection-mode! and near-term-studies are accurate in the
future.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 24: Because of the joint ownership of the Jim
Bridger power plant and the contractual arrangements between the parties for
transmission service, planning for these facilities has been and will continue to be
conducted cooperatively and, where relevant, related system studies are shared to
enhance planning and operational coordination between the parties. The parties, as
Transmission Operators, must comply with all requirements of the North American
Electric Reliability Council (NERC) Reliability Standards which include requirements for
coordinating with neighboring Transmission Operators. ln addition, WECC base cases
are utilized by both parties to model the electrical system for study purposes, and both
parties contribute to the development of these cases. The proposed purchase and sale
will not change either party's interest in or commitment to coordinated planning.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Dave Hagen, PacifiCorp,
and it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 25
REQUEST NO. 25: Please explain how the Parties plan to ensure the accuracy
and sharing of long-term operation studies, including shoulder periods, relay settings,
remedial action scheme impacts, and outage coordination following the proposed asset
exchange.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 25: Please refer to ldaho Power's response to
IPUC Staffs Request No. 32 to Idaho Power Company.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 26
REQUEST NO. 26: Please explain how the asset exchanges and upgrades to
the ldaho - Northwest Transmission (Hemmingway - Summer Lake 500 kV, Walla
Walla - Hurricane 230 kV, and Midpoint - Hemmingway 500 kV) and associated
substations revise the costs and benefits of the proposed Boardman to Hemmingway
transmission expansion.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 26: Please refer to ldaho Power's response to
IPUC Staffs Request No. 33 to ldaho Power Company.
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBL]C UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 27
REQUEST NO. 27: Please explain whether SCADA installations exist or are
planned for the Goshen Load Area to assist with load shedding or curtailment practices.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 27: The Company currently has System
Control and Data Acquisition ("SCADA") load shedding capabilities in the Goshen load
area that includes two transmission blocks. One transmission block of 103 megawatts
("MW') consisting of 23 circuits can be shed with one dispatch command or if less load
is required to be shed, individual circuits can be shed in this block and a second
transmission block of 138 MWcan be shed with one dispatch command. These load
estimates are for summer peak loading; the amount of load shed is dependent on
system conditions that are driving the load shed action.
ln addition, the Company plans to add additional SCADA control capability to 18
substations. This will provide the Company the ability to selectively shed individual
distribution circuits instead of shedding a!! load at the transmission level in the Goshen
load shed area.
The record holder for the response to this Request is Lou Seppi, PacifiCorp, and
it is sponsored by Richard Vail, Vice President of Transmission, PacifiCorp.
DATED this 25th day of February 2015.
DANIEL E. SOLANDER
Attorney for Rocky Mountain Power
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 28
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 25th day of February 20151 served a true and
correct copy of PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF upon the following named
parties by the method indicated below, and addressed to the following:
Commission Staff
Daphne Huang
Deputy Attorney General
!daho Public Utilities Commission
472 WestWashington (83702)
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-007 4
PacifiCorp
Daniel E. Solander
Rocky Mountain Power
201 South Main Street, Suite 2300
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
lndustrial Customerc of Idaho Power
Peter J. Richardson
RICHARDSON ADAMS, PLLC
515 North 27th Street (83702)
P.O. Box 7218
Boise, ldaho 83707
Dr. Don Reading
6070 Hill Road
Boise, ldaho 83703
X Hand Delivered
U.S. Mail
Overnight Mail
FAXX Email [e-mail]
Hand DeliveredX U.S. Mail
_Overnight Mail
-FAx
X Email [e-mail]
Hand Delivered
U.S. Mail
Overnight Mail
FAXX Email [e-mail]
_Hand DeliveredX U.S. Mail
Overnight Mail
FAX
=:,' [e-mail]
C),wuso
PACIFICORP'S RESPONSE TO THE FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
OF THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF - 29
Christa Bearry, Legal Assistant
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
CASE NOS. IPG-E-1441 and PAC-E-14-11
RESPONSE TO STAFF'S REQUEST NO. 13
N19
..i N'
88
rt .i
oi o;
d
Hs *
Hc 3
o-6. =6-
a
5;
.i
{3
(5
de
o
ocn6(L
Y 66 Y-: NN:XI eeBBE JJ E g *
6
E
r f .9,:2 E 6aI ;i ;ti.E Eg EO5 i:r3i! E !T p !5 :1':3i iEii : !- Eol ts E': u u2E fr frS
a;
=.9
6,Eu9-tlE-e E!.qE eig! 3I5-.'; ; -i e;B E E ' E
E.- *E:Ei'EtsEe--8; i P EEE!E9!E r i
"t"t5EEiEti3
PaTi5H" .3 ; S.s=.i s e E EEaEEi t ,i !E-Eir-? ,E , iEI!;EE EF *E:EiEAfSE Ege*o""E!&=ai<d EE!i:!5sE T"E*EEi; T
I4id EnsH$ei!H ;;$ E3.'e
c- r-IE
o-
E
-o Oo
!Na
c
* 9-R68.-!3
o
E
o-6. =o-ooc
C
u E9 P3"E -ts
ocoG - - - - oo -
dri ;d-
o o o r ?r +
r\, 1
E1-E'
;EEEq6iE
!r-6AE-o
cFoc fls
E9E
E, fl"iEt
ft 6s^= s6F-l =.:I9= gPio
= =Eo ar
a^xE" E ?oE E ec I :g :;E.E E* ESfZ =sraEE i t iT t J
E! Js!EE!E E EE
t-ila ;E- 5
d
J
o60id.958*
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
CASE NOS. IPC-E-1441 and PAC-E-14-11
RESPONSE TO STAFF'S REQUEST NO. 14
o o
(oN(o
oo$
@C\(o
oo$
TLo(L
<LdFztU
C)o
=
zU)d]-
zU'm-
oF
=tr
lJ.
EB
ss
oFF
ooo.
uoo-
FIltso
FI
ool)(!o-
!
Eotr]\tsoo-c
=iFo6
=-Y.=U'OA E ,?F.E ; 'H <.i? H .eo5..r E o'-s -O =-frEI sa ErfiE>a q.t .=E.gEEoo IE EF giEE<gP 8-f Es troE
H55 €'E .g# EiEf;
EiilrEEHEEEI
CL
oo
'6
ago.
a
tr
.9o
.!2
Eog
IELF
tro
L5o
THIS ATTAGHMENT IS
CONFIDENTIAL
AND WI LL BE PROVIDED
TO THOSE PARTIES THAT
HAVE SIGNED THE
PROTECTIVE
AGREEMENT
IN THIS MATTER
BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
CASE NOS. IPC-E-1441 and PAC-E-14-11
RESPONSE TO STAFF'S REQUEST NO.22
2014 Operational Practices Survev
The annua! Operational Practices Survey is an important toolWECC uses to fulfill its role as the
Reliability Assurer in the Western lnterconneclion. The WECC Operations Performance Analysis
Department conducts the Operationa! Practices Survey to identity processes, best prac'tices, and
opportunities for improvement and to discern trends by comparing survey responses across years.
lndividual responses to the 2014 Operational Practices Survey are confidentialand will not be shared
with any entity or person other than the submitting entity. WECC may share a list of the entities
surveyed and their response status, i.e., has or has not responded. Responses are not shared with the
WECC Compliance Department or persionnel. Responses to the survey do not constitute a compliance
submission or indicate compliance or non-compliance with any Reliability Standard.
Please direct questions about the Suruey to Tim Reynolds, Reliability Vulnerability Straff Specialist,
[e-mail].
Part 1: Near-Term Operations: Next-Day Studies
This is Part 1 of the 3-part 2014 Operational Practices survey. This part of the survey addresses near-
term operations, specifi cally next-day studies.
The questions that follow are generally applicable to TOPs, GOPs, RCs, and BAs; however, the
applicability of specific questions is indicated. Please fill out those questions applicable to your
company. Fields outlined in red are required. This form and your responses can be saved. When you
have completed all of your responses, please submit the form in one of two ways:
1)
2)
3)
Automatic Submission
To submit etectronicatty, lCurct< neREl
From the pop-up box, sel-ect you emai! method
lf you select Desktop Email Application (e.9.,
Outlook), an email will be automatically
generated. Send the email.
Entity 1"r"' PacifiCorp
Entity Acronym; PAC
Entity Registration Number (NCR):
Contact person: Brent Roholt
1;g". Director, Transmission Operations
Emait : brent. [e-mail]
phone: [phone]
Manual Submission
Send the completed PDF form to
oosu rvev@wecc. biz and reference
Operational Practices Survey
Response in the subject.
Registered Function
(select allthat apply)
Balancing Authority (BA)
Reliabili$ Coordinator (RC)
Oumer (GO)
Transmission Owner (IO)
Operator (GOP)
Operator (TOP)
Planning Coordinator (PC)
ransmission Planner (TP)
2014 Operationa! Practices Survey Part 1 Page 2
Question 1: Applicable to TOPs and RCs
Which of the following do you include in your next-day studies? (Select allthat apply)
Planned internal transmission/generation outages
Planned external (neighboring TOP) transmission/generation outages
Pre-contingency conditions within appropriate thermal and voltage limits
Post-contingency conditions within appropriate thermal and voltage limits
stability to identify stability !imits
ransient stability to identify stability limits
Contingency analysis
Calculation of required reactive reserves for defined areas
Expected generation reserve commitments
lnternal projected loads
External projected loads
Expected net interchange
Modeling and simulation of remedial action schemes
Natural Gas supply for generation
Question 2: Applicable to TOPs and RCs
How do vou check studies for and data
ay studies are run on both the on line and off line models. The Peak RC also
and if any discrepancies are found an phone conversation is held to review
come to a consensus.
Question 3: Applicable to TOPs
Describe how projected load, interchange, and generation are calculated (determined) for input
into the next-day studies.
Load estimates are generated using neural network calculations and applied to the
model. Generation is generically ramped to match except where there are
ion outages which are also modeled.
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 1
Question 4: Applicable to TOPs
Do you validate projected load, interchange, and generation values with actual values?
[alyes
n*o
Page 3
Question 5: Applicable to TOPs
Are there sub-100-kV facilities in your transmission system that can adversely impact the Bulk
Electric System?
Yes (lf Yes, proceed to Question 5.a)
No (lf No, proceed to Question 5.b)
Question 5.a. Are the facilities modeled in your next-day studies and simulated as contingencies?
flvefitto. Are the facilities modeled for real-time operations and simulated as contingencies in real-
time contingency analyses?
Ives[r.ro. Are the facilities monitored in real-time for pre- and post-contingency exceedances?
flv"'[r.ro. What events would trigger a re-evaluation of the sub-100-kV facilities in your transmission
system to determine which facilities would be added or dropped?
Not applicable.
Question 5.b. Have you performed studies to identify any sub-100-kV facilities that may have an adverse
imoact on the Bulk Electric Svstem?'
filv"d-lruo
currently have multiple projects underway to improve our load and
nal studies of our sub-100kV facilities as well as real time monitoring and experience
not identified any sub-100-kV facilities that may have an adverse impact on the Bulk E
Additional comments (optional):
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 1
Question 6: Applicable to TOPs
Do p, post your next-day studies on the PEAK RC website?
l3lVes (lf Yes, proceed to Question 6.a)
n*o (lf No, proceed to Question 6.b)
Page 4
Question 6.a. ls this the primary way you share next-day studies with your neighboring BAs and
TOPs?
Iv".ffiruo. Have you confirmed that allyour neighboring TOPs and BAs have access to the Peak
RC website?
!vesfllruo. Do you sharelour next-day studies in other ways?
[v".[ruoo Please
Question 6.b
How do you share your next-day studies?
Not applicable.
Question 7: Applicable to TOPs
ln reviewing your neighboring TOPs' next-day studies, which of the following applies?
(Select One)
We review all neighboring TOP next-day studies every day
We review some neighboring TOP next-day studies every day
We review neighboring TOP next-day studies only if the entity contacts us
Direct contact with neighboring TOP's and BA's occurs any time that
is required or issues arise. lt is assumed that none of our
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 1 Page 5
Question 8: Applicable to TOPs
With regard to how often your next-day studies are updated, which of the following applies?
(Select one)
We evaluate our next-day studies every day to determine whether the study performed
the day prior or another recent "similar day study" needs to be updated.
We perform a master study (e.9., seasonal study) and update our next-day study as
needed
We perform a master study (e.9., seasonal study) but do not update it untilthe next
season/year
Question 9:Applicable to TOPs and RCs
On average, how many buses externalto your system are monitored in next-day analysis
simulations for pre- and post-contingency conditions? (Select one)
1-2
34
5-6
>6
None
Other (Explain below)
Question 10: Applicable to TOPs
Who, within your company, receives a copy of your next-day studies? (Select all that apply)
Internal operators
Management
Transmission planners
tr
n
n
E*" uodate our next-day studies daily.
VV
Enn
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 1
Question 11: Applicable to TOPs
Do you receive the RC Next-day Operations Planning Analyses?
lVes (tf Yes, proceed to Question 11.a)
ElNo (lf No, proceed to Question 11.b)
Page 6
Question 11.a
With regard to how you use the RC Next-day Assessment, which of the following
applies? (Select one)
We do not complete our next-day studies untilthe RC Next-day
Assessment is reviewed
We complete our next-day studies then compare them to the RC Next-
day Assessment
We review the RC Next-day Assessment but do not compare it to the
next-day study
We receive the RC Next-day Assessment but do not review it unless
requested or noticed by the RC
Question 11.b
Question 12:Applicable to TOPs
lf applicable, have you met with all of the GOPs in your territory to identify information sharing
needs?
Not applicable because we have no GOPs
Yes
No
lf no, do you plan to meet with them and when?
Question 13: Applicable to TOPs
With regard to the information provided by the GOPs for the next-day studies, which of the
following applies: (Select one)
Bru the information that is needed is provided within an acceptable timeframe
[_lSome information provided is adequate but some needed information is omitted
[ff'" information is incomplete and resutts in frequent follow-up phone calls or meetings
[Otn"r (Explain below)
lf the RC analysis results in any issues, the RC planner doing the study
the appropriate entities directly prior to posting the results.
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 1 PageT
Question 14: Applicable to TOPs
With regard to question 13, in cases where information provided by the GOPs is consistently
incomplete, what information is missing?
Not applicable.
Question 15: Applicable to TOPs, BAs, and RCs
Would any of the following make your next-day studies more effective? (Select all that apply)
More visibility into neighboring BAs or TOPs
Updated tools to perform the next-day studies
More training for operators to perform next-day studies
Metrics to improve accuracy of the next-day studies
Peer reviews of next-day studies for best practices and feedback
Other (Explain below)
Question 16:Applicable to GOPs
Have you ever met with your TOP to identiff what information needs to be shared for them to
perform next-day studies?
Ives
[*o
Question 17: Applicable to GOPs
Which of the following do your next-day assessments address: (Select all that apply)
funit outages
Tf orecasted generation one day out
fZfor"""sted generation for multiple days out
EllJff,ri"r, issues with Automatic voltage Regulators or Power system stabilizers on
[lOn, potential issues with protection systems or remedial action schemes
notn"r (Explain below)
T,/
{,/
{
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 1
Question 18: Applicable to GOPs
What would make next-day assessments more effective?
Page I
o comment.
2014 Operational Practices Survev
The annual Operational Practices Survey is an important toolWECC uses to fulfill its role as the
Reliability Assurer in the Western lnterconnection. The WECC Operations Department conducts the
Operational Practices Survey to identify processes, best practices, and opportunities for improvement
and to discern trends by comparing survey responses across years.
lndividual responses to the 2014 Operational Practices Survey are confidential and will not be shared
with any entity or person other than the submitting entity. WECC may share a list of the entities
surveyed and their response status, i.e., has or has not responded. Responses are not shared with the
WECC Compliance Department or personnel. Responses to the survey do not constitute a compliance
submission or indicate compliance or non-compliance with any Reliability Standard.
Please direct questions about the Survey to Tim Reynolds, Reliability Vulnerability Staff Specialist,
[e-mail].
Part2: Long-Term Operations - Seasona! Studies
This is Part2 of the 3-part 2014 Operational Practices survey. This part of the survey addresses long-
term operations, specifically seasonal studies.
The questions that follow are generally applicable to TOPs, TPs, and PCs; however, the applicability of
specific questions is indicated. Please fill out those questions applicable to your company. Fields
outlined in red are required. This form and your responses can be saved. When you have completed all
of your responses, please submit the form in one of two ways:
1)
2)
3)
Automatic Submission
To submit etectronicatly, lffil
From the pop-up box, sel6clffiEiTinethod
lf you select Desktop EmailApplication (e.9.,
Outlook), an emailwill be automatically
generated. Send the email.
Entity Name: PacifiCorP
Entity Acronym: PAC
Entity Registration Number (NCR/WCR):_
Contact person: Brent Roholt
Title: Director, Transmission Operations g
Email: [e-mail] n
Phone:[phone] u
Manual Submission
Send the completed PDF form to
opsu rvev@wecc. biz and reference
Operational Practices Survey
Response in the subject.
Registered Function
(select all that apply)
Balancing Authority (BA)
Reliability Coordinator (RC)
Generator Owner (GO)
Transmission Owner (TO)
Generator Operator (GOP)
Transmission Operator (TOP)
Planning Coordinator (PC)
Transmission Planner (TP)
,/
{
{/
{
{/
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part2 Page 2
Question 1: Applicable to TOPs, TPs, and PCs
Which of the following do you include in your seasonal studies? (Select all that apply)
fZeUnneO internaltransmission/generation outages expected to last for the
majority of the season
TleUnneO external (i.e., neighboring TOP) transmission/generation outages expected
to last for the majority of the season
Voltage stability to identiff stability limits
Transient stability to identify stability limits
Pre-contingency conditions within appropriate thermal and voltage limits
Post-contingency conditions within most severe thermal and voltage limits
Contingency analysis
Calculation of required reactive reserves for defined areas
Expected generation reserve commitments
lnternal projected loads
External projected loads
Expected net interchange
Natural Gas supply for generation
Relay settings
Modeling and simulation of RemedialAction Schemes
Other (Explain)
heavy and light load WECC base cases are used, and it is assumed that
al loading in these models are reasonable unless we have specific
nformation to the contrary.
Question 2: Applicable to TOPs, TPs, and PCs
values are coordinated with WECC seasonally as part of the WECC base case
development. Where specific changes are known they may be modeled in addition
during specific studies.
Question 3: Applicable to TOPs, TPs, and PCs
Do vou validate proi and oeneration values usino actual data?
Historical data is used to determine if peak values are reasonable with respect to
interchange, path flows, and loading.
{
{./
./
{
/
How do vou calculate proiected load and qeneration in vour seasonal studies?
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part2 Page 3
Question 4: Applicable to TOPs and TPs
With what entities do you share adverse or unexpected conditions identified in your seasonal
studies? (Select all that apply)
f r.r"ignooring BAs
f r.r"ignuoring TOPs
Er.r"ignooring PCs
f rn" nc
Question 5: Applicable to TOPs, TPs, and PCs
Do you always perform seasonal studies for shoulder periods?
fv""
E*o
Question 6: Applicable to TPs, PCs, and RCs
How do you communicate to appropriate operating personnel information about elements that
Question 7: Applicable to TPs, PCs, and RCs
How do you manage those elements referred to in question 6 in near-term operational planning
studies (e.9., outage studies, day-ahead studies)? (Select all that apply)
TltOentified elements are monitored in realtime
MtOentified elements are included in Real-Time Contingency Analysis (RTCA) studies
TltOentified elements are highlighted in the next-day studies
E]o" elements are monitored regardless of the seasonal study
l-lotn"r (Explain)
a general rule, both seasonal and realtime studies include all expected
as well as a contingency analysis including all single and known
ible multiple contingencies. Where specific issues have been identified or are
further be oerformed.
necessary, operating procedures or temporary operating memos are created
distributed, or meetings can be held to discuss. lndividual elements that have
impacts can be identified in the EMS as well as in the outage management
so that any planned or actual outage can raise the appropriate flags.
2014 Operational Practices Survey Parl2
Question 8:Applicable to TOPs and TPs
Do you consider relay settings in your seasonal planning process?
f V"r (lf Yes, proceed to Question 8.a)
E *o (lf No, proceed to Question 8.b)
Page 4
Question 8.a
Do you participate in a regional review of relay and/or RAS scheme implementations
and coordination?
f v"t
E*o
Question 8.b
Question 9: Applicable to TOPs and TPs
How do you coordinate your seasonal studies with other groups? (Select allthat apply)
A regional or sub regionalstudy group
Directly with neighboring TOPs
Directly with the RC
Directly with other PCs
Via email without follow-up
Other (Explain)
via the PEAK Reliability Reliability Coordinator website.
Question 10: Applicable to TOPs and TPs
How do you utilize seasonal studies within the company? (Select allthat apply)
with the transmission operators
with management
with transmission planning
with substation operations
(explain)
,/
./
{
/
,/
seasonal studies are available to all of the above, only those portions of the
that determine potential issues are coordinated, and then the coordination
is performed on an as needed basis with whoever is appropriate.
2014 Operational Practices Survey Paft2 Page 5
Question 11: Applicable to TPs and PCs
How do you evaluate the impacts of major transmission outages under heavy transfer
Generally this involves powerflow and contingency analysis tools unless further
analysis is deemed necessary.
Question 12: Applicable to TPs, PCs, and RCs
How do you evaluate the impact of major transmission outages under heavy transfer conditions
on sub-100-kV facilities, especially those operated in parallel with the BPS, to identify any
potential system cascading risks?
this involves powerflow and contingency analysis tools unless further
is deemed necessary.
Question 13: Applicable to TPs and PCs
How do you ensure that seasonal studies address the interaction of various protection systems,
especially special protection systems that are designed to mitigate undesired post-contingent
conditions?
Protection systems are considered in the seasonal studies as appropriate.
Question 14: Applicable to TPs and PCs
Do you benchmark models against realsystem conditions and events?
[V"r (lf Yes, proceed to Questions 14.a)
rons
E*o
Question 14.a. Does the benchmark include severe and/or unusual system conditions?
ffives E*o. How do you resolve differences between model results and actual system
conditions?
ldentify what the difference is. Then change it.
2014 Ooerational Practices Survev
The annual Operational Practices Survey is an important toolWECC uses to fulfill its role as the
Reliability Assurer in the Western lnterconnection. The WECC Operations Department conducts the
Operational Practices Survey to identify processes, best practices, and opportunities for improvement
and to discern trends by comparing survey responses across years.
lndividual responses to the 2014 Operational Practices Survey are confidential and will not be shared
with any entity or person other than the submitting entity. WECC may share a list of the entities
surveyed and their response status, i.e., has or has not responded. Responses are not shared with the
WECC Compliance Department or personnel. Responses to the survey do not constitute a compliance
submission or indicate compliance or non-compliance with any Reliability Standard.
Please direct questions about the Survey to Tim Reynolds, Reliability Vulnerability Staff Specialist,
[e-mail].
Part 3: Situational Awareness, Protection Systems, Angular Separation, EMS
This is Part 3 of the 3-part 2014 Operational Practices survey. This part of the survey addresses
situational awareness, protection systems, angular separation, and EMS topics.
The questions that follow are generally applicable to TOs, TOPs, GOs, GOPs, BAs, TPs, and PCs;
however, the applicability of specific questions is indicated. Please fill out those questions applicable to
your company. Fields outlined in red are required. This form and your responses can be saved. When
you have completed all of your responses, please submit the form in one of two ways:
Automatic Submission
1) To submit electronicalrv,lCarc*l2) From the pop-up box, select you email method
3) lf you select Desktop EmailApplication (e.9.,
Outlook), an emailwill be automatically
generated. Send the email.
Entity Name:PacifiCorp
Entity Acronym: PAC
Entity Registration Number (NCR/WCR):
contact Person: Brent Roholt
t,,,". Director, Transmission Operations
Emai! : brent. roholt@pacifi corp.com
Manua! Submission
Send the completed PDF form to
opsu rvev@wecc. biz and reference
Operational Practices Survey
Response in the subject.
Registered Function
(select allthat apply)
Balancing Authority (BA)
Reliability Coordinator (RC)
Generator Owner (GO)
Transmission Owner (TO)
Generator Operator (GOP)
Transmission Operator (TOP)
Planning Coordinator (PC)
Transmission Planner (TP)
/
{,/
,/!,/
,/
Phone:[phone]
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 3
Situational Awareness
Question 1: Applicable to TOPs, BAs, GOPs, PCs and RCs
Which of the following Reliability Tools do you use for situational awareness?
(Select allthat apply)
RTCA
Real-time Line Outage Distribution Factor (LODF) calculations
SCADA realtime displays and overview
State estimation
Real-time voltage stability analysis
Real-time transient stability analysis
Alarm Tools
Page2
M Signat error detection for both analog and digital inputs (e.g. heart beat)
Power Flow
{
{:
:
,/
! otner (Explain)
Question 2:Applicable to TOPs, BAs, GOPs, and RCs
For which of the following analyses do you rely on another entity to perform?
(Select allthat apply)
RTCA
Real{ime Line Outage Distribution Factor (LODF) calculations
SCADA realtime displays and overview
State estimation
Real-time voltage stability analysis
Real-time transient stability analysis
Alarm Tools
Signal error detection for both analog and digital inputs (e.9. heart beat)
Power Flow
Other (explain)
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 3 Page 3
Question 3: Applicable to TOPs, TPs, RCs, and PCs
What is your process to ensure consistency between real-time and planning models in order to
maintain accurate network models?
When specific issues are studied for real time or near future outages, operational
planners regularly perform the studies on both the online and offline tools as a double
check on the results. When these show discrepancies they are investigated.
Question 4: Applicable to TOPs, BAs, and RCs
Following a contingency on your system, on average, how long does it take the real-time tools
to perform an updated analysis of System Operating Limits or other contingency conditions?
(Select one)
<1min
2-3 min
4-5 min
>5min
Question 5: Applicable to TOPs, BAs, and RCs
Do you have a procedure for the loss of real-time tools?
E"t
lf yes, do you share the procedure with the RC?
Iv"t
E*o
lf yes, do you share the procedure with all neighboring TOPs?
!v"tI*o
lf no, please explain.
Question 6: Applicable to TOPs and BAs
Have you read the WECC Pre- and PostContingency Plan Guideline that was approved by the
Operating Committee on May 20,2014 (tin$?
Yes
No
VtrTtr
E*o
atr
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 3 Page 4
Question 7: Applicable to TOPs and BAs
Do you have pre-contingency measures in place?
Yes
No
Question 8: Applicable to TOPs and BAs
Do you have post-contingency measures in place?
Yes
No
Question 9: Applicable to TOPs, and BAs
lf applicable, which of the following do your pre- and/or post-contingency measures consider?
(Select allthat apply)
Adjustment or re-dispatch of generation to ensure acceptable system performance
(operating within Facility Ratings, bus voltage limits, stability limits, and any other SOL or
IROLs) while implementing proposed transmission or generation outages
Adjustment of generation and interchange schedules to ensure adequate reserves and
regulating margins are maintained
M nequest or dispatch of reserves as necessary from Reserve Sharing Group, if applicable
M provision of notification procedures prior to or following a forced outage
M U"""rsary actions to resynchronize and reconnect to the lnterconnection
Actions to determine whether a manual load shed is needed to prevent imminent
separation from the lnterconnection, voltage collapse, or other adverse consequence
Direct actions to return the system to a secure state following a major system
disturbance
Other (Explain)
Question 10:Applicable to TOPs, BAs, and RCs
Which of the following best describes what you consider appropriate post-contingency mitigation
actions for an exceedence of the highest available Facility Rating or bus voltage limit (an RTCA
exceedence)? (Select all that apply)
l-lnOlusting generation or transmission as necessary within 30 minutes
fZRrtor"ted responses such as RAS or automatic capacitor switching
atr
Vtr
E*o action because they are RTCA results, not current system conditions
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 3 Page 5
Question 11: Applicable to TOPs and RCs
lf a pre- or post-contingency measure is created, do you provide training to your operators to
ensure understanding?
Yes
No (Explain)
Protection Svstems
Question 12:Applicable to TOPs, TOs, GOPs, and GOs
For which of the following do you share overload trip settings with the RC and neighboring
TOPs? (Select allthat apply)
Transformers
Transmission lines
Vtr
Only special schemes and settings are shared. Standard relay settings are not
speciflcally shared except as requested.
Question 13:Applicable to TOs and GOs
When calculating relay settings, how do you perform stability studies?
PSSE and Powerworld simulation
Question 14:Applicable to TOs and GOs
How do you coordinate the results with impacted neighboring GOPs, TOPs, BAs, and PCs
before the settings are in place?
Direct contact between relay groups, unless prior contact with the planning authorities is
warranted.
Question 15: Applicable to TOs, TOPs, TPs, and PCs
What is your process for reviewing the purpose and impact of RemedialAction
Schemes/Special Protection Systems in your footprint to ensure they are properly classified,
serve their intended purposes, are coordinated properly with other protection systems, and do
not have unintended consequences to reliability of the BPS?
lnterdepartmental group meeting including the planing, operations, engineering and
relay departments.
How frequently do you conduct a review?
Annually and as necessary
M otn"r (Explain)
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 3 Page 6
Question 16:Applicable to TOPs, BAs, and RCs
Do you have the ability to determine standing angles in real time following a major transmission
outage?
lf yes, how do you determine that angle?
Online State Estimator solution.
Question 17:Applicable to TOPs, BAs, and RCs
Do you have the ability to determine expected post-contingency standing angles (in a RTCA or
similar tool) in real-time?
f v"t E*o
f v""E*o
lf yes, how do you determine that angle?
Online State Estimator solution.
Question 18:Applicable to TOPs and TOs
Have you checked the sync-check relays on major transmission paths within the last five years
to identiff potentia! issues with phase angle settings?
f ves
lf yes, please answer the following questions:
o Did you identify phase angle settings that were too conservatively set based
on historical oerformance?
Yes
No
r Did you identify phase angle settings that were too conservatively set based
on transmission studies?
rDo to perform this routine sync-check analysis again?
es lf yes, on what interval? As system changes occur or
issues are identified
E*o
lf no, when do you plan to perform the analysis?
Vtr
you ple
ly' lYes
E*o
r plan to
f v"t
E*o E
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 3 PageT
Question 19: Applicable to TOPs and BAs
Do you have plans in place for reducing angles to within synch-check relay settings to allow
prompt reclosing of lines?
[ZY"'
fl*o
Question 20:Applicable to TOs and GOs
Do you have any RemedialAction Schemes (RAS) that are identified by the WECC Remedial
Action Scheme Review and Assessment Plan (Li!$?
fiv"t
lf yes, please answer the following questions:
o How many RAS have you identified?
13
During each
operated?
of the following time periods, how many times has any RAS
2013 Q1:
2013 Q2.,
2013 Q3:
2013 Q4:
2014 Q1:
2014Q2:
o Do you have any plans to add another RAS that will be identified by the
WECC RemedialAction Scheme Review and Assessment Plan in the next 5
years?
flves
Ll*ofl *o
lf no, do you have plans to add a RAS that will be identified by the WECC
Remedial Action Scheme Review and Assessment Plan in the next five years?
l-lves
E*o
3
1
1
1
1
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 3
Enerqv Manaqement Svstems (EMS)
Page 8
Question 21: Applicable to TOPs
Within in your company, which of the following functions is within the purview of the EMS staff?
(Select allthat apply)
l_l u"t*ork infrastructu re
./
./
/
{./
/
{
lZ oisplays/User i nterface
Real-time database
Data historian
Advanced applications
Automatic Generation Control (AGC)
Training simulator
SCADA - Control Center
SCADA - Field
Control center hardware support
Other (Explain)
Question 22: Applicable to TOPs
How many of your EMS support staff are dedicated solely to your EMS?
11- EMS SCADA 3 - EMS Network App's
Question 23: Applicable to TOPs
On average, how many years of relevant experience does your EMS staff have?
staff average - 20 years of experience
Question 24: Applicable to TOPs
Do you rely on vendors for EMS support or event response support? (Please explain)
We rely on our internal support staff to respond to events on the system. The vendor
is engaged when the problem is associated with their software.
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 3 Page 9
Question 25: Applicable to TOPs
ln which of the following does your EMS support staff participate? (Select all that apply)
NERC Continuing Education Training courses
I n-house operations training
Job shadowing in the department they support (e.g. dispatch, scheduling)
System Dispatch training
Substation awareness
Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT)
Vendor training
Other training (explain)
Question 26: Applicable to TOPs
Which of the following apply to the formal technical training provided to your EMS support staff?
(Select allthat apply)
Training is provided to new support staff
Training is provided to existing staff on a periodic basis
Training is conducted by company staff
Training is conducted by the vendor
Other (explain)
Question 27: Applicable to TOPs
How old is your EMS (i.e., when did it come online)?
Our EMS went online in November 2006.
Question 28: Applicable to TOPs
When was your EMS last upgraded?
We are currently upgrading our EMS and plan to implement in 2015.
Question 29: Applicable to TOPs*
ffi,,,|sJe
prans to update ""ffi,:,our EMS?
lf yes, what is your timeline?
We plan to implement in 2015.
/
{
,/
./
,/
,/
I Real+ime viewing (e.g. alarms, state estimation, etc.)
I Rnatyzing system events
I_l gencrrmarking models
! Otner (Explain)
Do you have plans to use synchrophasor data? (Please explain)
PacifiCorp provides data for the WISP project, but otherwise does not
utilize the data.
Question 32:Applicable to TOPs
Do you communicate planned outages to the RC's Coordinated Outage System (COS)?
Yes
How often? As outages are scheduled
No
Do you use another process to inform the RC of changes? (Please explain)
Question 33:Applicable to TOPs
What, if any, suggestions do you have to improve the COS to meet your needs with regard to
outage reporting and coordination? Do you communicate planned outages to the RC's
Coordinated Outage System (COS)?
Do you use information in the COS to perform Next-Day studies?nv." M*"
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 3
Other
Question 30:Applicable to TOPs, GOPs, RCs, TOs, GOs, TPs, PCs, and BAs)
Question 31: Applicable to TOPs and BAs
Does your company use synchrophasor data?
nv".t_I
ln which of the following ways is it used?
Page 10
What measures could WECC or others take that would help you address gaps in practices
regarding the reliable operation of the Western lnterconnection?
E*o
V
tr
2014 Operational Practices Survey Part 3 Page 1 1
Question 34:Applicable to TPs and GOs
Which of the following documents have you or others in your company read and utilized?
(Select allthat apply)
nC"n"r"ting Unit Model Validation Policy (Link)
nC"n"r"ting Facility Data, Testing and ModelValidation Requirements (Link) (GO)
|.lG"n"'"tingFacilityModelValidationRequirements@)(Go)
nc"n"r"ting Unit Baseline Test Requirements (Link. see Aooendix B) (GO)
Question 35:Applicable to all Registered Entities
This year, WECC issued this survey in three parts in an attempt to ease the burden that one
large survey created for entities. We would like your input on this approach, as well as any
improvements we might make to this process. Please provide your input below.