20170815Utah_DPU Set 4 (1-18).docx

PATRICIA E. SCHMID (#4908)
JUSTIN JETTER (#13257)
Assistant Attorney Generals
Counsel for the DIVISION OF PUBLIC UTILITIESSEAN REYES (#7969)
Attorney General of Utah
160 E 300 S, 5th Floor
P.O. Box 140857
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-0857
Telephone [phone]
BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF UTAH
In the Matter of Rocky Mountain Power’s Application for Approval of a Significant Energy Resource Decision and Voluntary Request for Approval of Resource Decision
_________________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)_________________-__
DOCKET NO. 17-035-40
Division of Public Utilities
4th Set of Data Requests to
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
August 9th, 2017
_________________________________
Please send an electronic copy and a paper copy of your Data Response to:
Erika Tedder – Paralegal
Division of Public Utilities
160 E 300 S, 4th Floor
Salt Lake City, UT 84114
PLEASE E-MAIL YOUR DATA
RESPONSE TO ERIKA TEDDER
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Response should include where applicable native WORD and EXCEL documents with intact formulae.
Your Data Response is not consideredreceived until an electronic copy is furnished and received.
Link Testimony. Referring to Mr. Link’s Testimony (Link) (lines 156-160), please provide the power flow and dynamic stability studies that the Company relies upon to support the incremental transfer capability of the new transmission line and to support the ability to enable 1,270 MW of new resources. Include all appendices and power flow modeling reports used in preparing these studies.
Vail Testimony. Referring to Mr. Vail’s Testimony (Vail) (lines 332-341):
Please identify the other resources in the area that may be redispatched at time of high wind production to accommodate PTC-producing wind energy.
Please describe the criteria used to determine the acceptable level of redispatch (congestion) in the determination that 1,270 MW of additional wind could be accommodated by the Transmission Projects.
Please provide all studies and analysis conducted to determine the amount of new wind resources above the incremental transfer capability of the Transmission Project that could be accommodated.
Link Testimony. Referring to Link (lines 169-173):
Please provide the studies that the Company prepared to quantify the three additional value streams (EIM participation, transmission reliability, and line loss). Include all appendices and power flow modeling reports used in preparing these studies.
Please describe how these additional value streams are included in the economic analysis of the Project.
Link, Vail Testimonies. Referring to Link (lines 216-217, 556-565) and Vail (lines 357-359 and 390-406):
Please provide the congestion analysis and/or studies that describe the congestion on the current system and quantify the congestion relief that the Project will provide. Include all appendices and power flow modeling reports used in preparing these studies.
Please provide historical outages data on the 230 kV transmission-system elements relieved by the proposed Aeolus-to-Bridger/Anticline Line and all system analysis, studies, workpapers and models with formulas intact that indicate an average de-rate of 146MW over approximately 88 outage days per year as described in Mr. Link’s testimony.
Please provide all system analysis, studies, workpapers and models that support elimination of the modeled derate on the 230 kV transmission-system from eastern Wyoming to the Aeolus area in simulations that included the Combined Projects.
Link, Vail Testimonies. Referring to Link (lines 216-217) and Vail (384 – 389), please provide the system studies that describe the voltage control issues in the existing system and support the conclusion that the Transmission Projects will solve the voltage control issues. Include all appendices and power flow modeling reports used in preparing these studies.
Vail Testimony. Referring to Vail (lines 362-368):
Please provide all documents and studies that support the conclusion that the Transmission Projects are considered network transmission assets under the OATT.
Please provide citations to the documents that describe the FERC precedent for ratemaking. Include any FERC orders or determinations on the ratemaking treatment on the Transmission Projects.
Vail Testimony. Referring to Vail (lines 290-295)
Please explain the re-assignment of costs to the wind resource facilities. Provide any documents describing this process that is to be provided to the prospective wind facilities in the 2017R RFP process and the proposed language to be included in the interconnection agreements.
Is the design of the 230 KV System Upgrades fixed or will it change depending on the location of the winning wind facilities?
On lines 362-368, the Transmission Projects (which includes the 230 KV System Upgrades) are described as network transmission assets that will be included in the Company’s transmission rates. Please explain how the costs to be allocated to the wind facilities are to be included in the Company’s transmission rates.
Does the Company anticipate allocating any portion of the Transmission Projects to the QFs referenced in Mr. Teply’s testimony (line 101-107) or any other QFs that may enter into contracts with the Company?
If the Company procures less than 1,270 MWs from QFs and from wind facilities through the 2017R RFP that require interconnection with the 230 KV System Upgrades will the Company reduce the scale of the Transmission Projects to reduce the cost of the Transmission Projects? What is the minimum wind resource capacity in eastern Wyoming to support the Company’s plan to build the Transmission Projects?
Vail, Teply Testimonies. Referring to Vail (lines 302-311) and Teply (lines 158-170):
Please provide the Company’s analysis regarding the change in PTC benefits to ratepayers if the Transmission Projects are not completed by the end of 2020. If no analysis has been prepared, please explain why that analysis has not been done and provide a full description of the changes that the Company expects if the Transmission Projects in 2021, 2022, and 2023. Provide any documents or reports used in support if the Company’s analysis and descriptions.
Please provide the Company’s analysis regarding the change in PTC benefits to ratepayers if any of the 1,270 MW of wind generation facilities are not completed by the end of 2020. If no analysis has been prepared, please explain why that analysis has not been done and provide a full description of the changes that the Company expects if the wind facilities are completed in 2021, 2022, and 2023. Provide any documents or reports used in support if the Company’s analysis and descriptions.
Please provide a copy of the project management plan for the Transmission Projects and provide any updates to the project timeline that have occurred since Exhibit RMP_RAV-10 was prepared.
Please provide the Company’s plan for acquiring the necessary rights-of-way.
Please provide the Company’s assessment of the risks and uncertainties in the Transmission Project schedule.
Vail Testimony. Referring to Vail (lines 431-433, 512-521):
Please provide the documents, studies or reports that support the statement that the Company currently meets or exceeds applicable reliability standards in eastern and central Wyoming.
If the Transmission Projects and Wind Projects in this application are not constructed, is there any need for improvements to the eastern and central Wyoming System? Please provide documents, studies, or reports that examine the need for system improvements in this region and any solutions that would be implements to address those needs in the event the Transmission Projects and Wind Projects are not constructed.
Referring to Link (372-374), please describe the assumptions regarding system upgrades in central and eastern Wyoming in the case that excludes the Combined Projects. If those assumptions are not based on the studies provided in response to part b of this question, please provide the studies relied upon as the basis for the assumptions used in that case.
Vail Testimony. Referring to Vail (lines 472-478):
Please provide the system studies, with appendices, conducted to evaluate the N-1-1 performance of the system with the Aeolus-Anticline line.
Please explain the nature of the curtailment of the TOT 4A path and indicated whether this curtailment is of customer load, Firm Transmission Service, Conditional Firm Transmission Service. Is this curtailment allowable curtailment in response to an event under TPL-001-4?
Vail Testimony. Referring to Vail (lines 495-511):
Please provide the documentation of the Three Phase Rating Process approval for the Transmission Projects, including the studies conducted in that process.
Please provide the documentation and associated studies supporting the statement that the Aeolus-to-Anticline line will strengthen the Company’s transmission capacity and flexibility when complemented with other Energy Gateway projects.
Please provide documentation of the current status of the other Energy Gateway projects referenced in that statement.
Vail Testimony. Referring to Vail (lines 529 – 546):
Did the Company evaluate any alternative transmission projects or paths that would facilitate the interconnection of the Wind Projects? If so, please provide all studies, analysis, workpapers, models associated with alternative Transmission Projects evaluated by the Company with formulas intact.
Did the Company consider transmission alternatives for lower amounts of wind energy development in eastern Wyoming? If so, please provide all studies of those alternatives.
Did the Company consider any 345 kV alternative solutions? If yes, please provide all studies and analysis of those solutions. If no, please explain why 345 kV solutions were not considered.
Vail Testimony. Referring to Vail (lines 523-528), please provide the system loss studies and cost saving analysis referenced in this passage.
Link Testimony. Referring to Link (lines 568-575), please provide all system analysis, studies, workpapers and models that support the 11.6 average MW of energy (102 GWh/year) that will flow from eastern Wyoming each year as a result of reduced line losses associated with the Aeolus-to-Bridger/Anticline Line.
Vail TestimonyReferring to Vail (lines 537-546), please provide the studies that support the statement that the projects described delayed the Transmission Projects to 2020.
Vail TestimonyReferring to Vail (lines 281-290):
Please provide studies or other documentation supporting the cost estimated for the Transmission Projects.
Please provide any assessment conducted of the uncertainty in those estimated costs.
Please indicate how the Company proposes to proceed with respect to cost recovery if the actual costs exceed the estimates provided in this testimony.
Vail TestimonyReferring to Vail (190-191), please describe all attributes and associated costs incorporated into the design of the Aeolus substation that have been included to facilitate future expansion of the Aeolus Substation for additional resources.
Vail Testimony. Referring to Vail (lines 199-200), please describe all attributes and associated costs incorporated into the design of the Anticline substation that have been included to facilitate future expansion of the Anticline substation for future 500 kV transmission lines.