File - First Quartile Consulting

beepedblacksmithUrban and Civil

Nov 29, 2013 (3 years and 19 days ago)

98 views

Transmission Lines


June 26
-
28, 2013

Savannah, GA

2013 Transmission & Distribution Benchmarking

Data Review Conference

Agenda


Introduction


Statistics and System Activity


Financial


Profiles and Drilldowns


Practices


Next Steps




Picture source: www.energy.gov

2

Key benchmarking Issues in Transmission


Transmission Systems are unique and designed
to serve a particular geography, customer base,
and other generation source and load
constraints.


Costs are particularly uneven over time, so really
need to be evaluated on a longer time horizon.


FERC capital additions do not reflect actual
spending because of CWIP; Activity

based
costs provide a more realistic spending level as
well as the purpose of expenditures.


There is no agreement on cost normalization;
asset base is the best predictor, but circuit miles,
structure miles, MWh transmitted, MW
-
miles can
be used to

“triangulate” your performance.


Reliability is based primarily on

availability

, but
also on contribution to

End use


Customer
reliability.



Regulatory


NERC regulations; other Regulatory bodies


NERC compliance audits


NERC performance standards (TADS)

System Challenges


Distributed Generation


Interconnections (e.g. Windmill Farms)


Aging infrastructure


New transmission corridors


ROW management under increasing regulations
and restrictions


Capacity Constraints


Transfer Capability Crisis (mitigated by the
recession)


Intelligent Grid (or more intelligent Grid)


Upgrading EMS systems


Equipment lead times

Organizational Challenges


Aging Workforce
--

Brain Drain


Contractor Management


Cross
-
silo prioritization and involvement in
projects

Industry

Methodology

3

Statistics

and

System Activity

Landsnet


National Grid, Iceland

4

Transmission versus Distribution


For purposes of this survey, we define distribution to be a voltage level of
45kV and below. The distinction is somewhat arbitrary, but picks a point
between 69kv which is generally considered a transmission (or at least sub
-
transmission) level and 21kV which would generally be considered
distribution.


It is unrealistic to ask utilities to redefine their cost or reliability reporting on
the basis of these definitions. However, a utility that has very different
definitions may want to restate these statistics to better compare their
performance.


Distribution Voltage Classes


5kV class (>1kV, <=9kV)


15kV class (>9kV, <=15kV)


25kV class (>15kV to <=26kV)


35kV class (>26kV to <=36kV)


44kV class (>36kV to <=44kV)

Transmission classes >=45kV


<69kV class (>=45kV <69kV)


69kV class (>=69kV <100kV)


100kV class (>=100kV <200kV)


200kV Class (>=200kV <300kV)


300kV Class (>=300 kV <400 kV)


400kV and above

5

Transmission Lines Demographic Profile

Min

Mean

Max

# of Bars

Service Territory



Wage Rate: Transmission Journey Level Line Worker

$33.50

$38.13

$41.85

8



Transmission Staffing: FTEs per
$100M Transmission Assets



4.06

15.68

35.69

10

ROW Miles Managed per Structure Mile

79%

101%

127%

5



Line work done while the line is energized: Transmission

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

5

System
-

Demographics



Transmission Structure mile per Transmission Circuit

4.27

12.93

38.70

8

Transmission Voltages on system by circuit





<69kV

0.0%

4.8%

40.4%

12

69kV

0.0%

14.8%

37.8%

12





100kV class

17.1%

53.0%

89.7%

12

200kV Class

0.0%

15.3%

53.9%

12





300kV Class

0.0%

8.9%

23.9%

12

400kV and above

0.0%

3.4%

9.5%

12

Transmission structures on system





Wood poles

0.00%

46.31%

91.05%

13

Steel poles

0.55%

17.60%

84.27%

13





Concrete poles

0.00%

1.48%

14.34%

13

Steel lattice towers

0.07%

34.60%

85.61%

13

6

ADD Financial Demographics: depreciation, assets, CWIP

Transmission voltage levels

Source: Question ST120,
Page 25

1
0
0
k
V
 
c
l
a
s
s
 
4
8
%
 
2
0
0
k
V
 
C
l
a
s
s
 
1
8
%
 
3
0
0
k
V
 
C
l
a
s
s
 
6
%
 
<
6
9
k
V
 
6
%
 
6
9
k
V
 
1
8
%
 
4
0
0
k
V
 
a
n
d
 
a
b
o
v
e
 
4
%
 
2012
Group
Composite

7

Demographics: Wood poles comprise
the majority of structures

Source: Question ST150, Page 22

Source: Question ST150,
Page 23


W
o
o
d
 
p
o
l
e
s
 
4
7
%
 
S
t
e
e
l
 
p
o
l
e
s
 
1
9
%
 
C
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
 
p
o
l
e
s
 
1
%
 
S
t
e
e
l
 
l
a
c
e
 
t
o
w
e
r
s
 
3
3
%
 
2012 Group
Composite

8

Length of circuits

Source: Question ST120, Page
28

This is circuits/mile


we
need the inverse

Circuit miles/structure miles

9

Source: Question ST120, Page
26

New
transmission lines

Several companies have
major building programs
underway

Source: Question SA40, ST120,
Page 20

10

Wood Pole Inspections

Source: SA65, p26

Seem to be lower
rates than
Distribution

11

Transmission Line Spending forecast

Source: Question CP125
, Page 39


No pattern emerging

12

Issues found: Transmission Line
System Statistics and Activity

Page #

Q #

Primary Issue

Who

ST 24

Miles per circuit calculation (inverse)

1QC

ST25

Sort by voltage level using 69kv first

1QC

ST 27

Delete; by structure mile adds little value

1QC

ST26

Pole inspection rates

1QC

13

Financial



Overview of the Cost Model

Working with an adjusted FERC model

Conceptual transmission tower design by Choi Shine Architects


2012 YE

2011YE

Mean

Q1

Q2

Q3

# of
Bars

Mean

Q1

Q2

Q3

# of
Bars

O&M Costs

Trans Lines O&M Expense per
Circuit Mile

$8,197

$2,851

$5,833

$8,254

12

$9,155

$3,397

$6,753

$10,958

16

Trans Line O&M per MWh
transmitted

$0.58

$0.24

$0.45

$0.59

11

$0.67

$0.33

$0.49

$0.79

15

Trans Line O&M per Total Trans
Assets

2.72%

1.81%

2.06%

3.59%

11

3.16%

2.28%

2.99%

4.30%

16

Investment Rate





















Trans Line Capital Spending less
New Lines per Asset [Activity
Based]

7.80%

11.93%

5.83%

2.62%

10

6.59%

9.29%

5.75%

2.24%

12

Trans Line Cost Profile

15

FERC: Specific Adjustments


The following page is a schematic of how basic FERC cost data will be adjusted for this benchmarking
study.


A&G costs will be excluded


Utilities are asked to adjust their costs to exclude costs typically
reported as A&G (e.g. pensions and benefits) from their O&M data.


General plant costs will be excluded


Utilities are asked to adjust their costs to exclude costs
typically reported as General Plant (e.g. IT/Communications infrastructure) from their T&D Capital
data.


Other T&D Capital exclusions:


Transmission: Land acquisitions and extraordinary items


Distribution: Land acquisitions, street lighting and extraordinary items


Other O&M exclusions:


Transmission: Wheeling, Rents/Leases, IT costs, extraordinary items. If you charge IT
support to account 569, you should exclude it.
Regional Market Expenses (Accts 575, 576).


Distribution: Streetlight Maintenance, Rents/Leases, IT costs, extraordinary items. If you
charge IT support to

Distribution O&M accounts
, you should exclude it.


If you normally charge R&D, such as EPRI dues, to O&M, include it, unless it is an unusually
large amount for this year


Substation costs will be allocated from Transmission and Distribution accounts, and similar
adjustments made.


The goal of the exclusions is to provide a fairer comparison of T&D operational performance, by
excluding certain costs that relate to demographic differences not under the control of T&D
management.

16

Substations

General
Plant

FERC Costs

Transmission

Capital

Trans Lines

Exclusions

Trans
Substations

O&M

Trans Lines

Exclusions

Trans
Substations

Distribution

Capital

Dist Lines

Exclusions

Dist
Substations

O&M

Dist Lines

Exclusions

Dist
Substations

A&G

FERC: The ADJUSTED FERC COST MODEL

FERC provides a general framework


Certain costs must be excluded to provide fair comparisons that focus on operations


Substation costs must be separated out, including certain allocations

17

TOTAL T
-
Line Spending
--

CAPital + O&M (FERC)

Source: Questions TF20, TF65, Page 7


A variation in allocations
among companies, but
looks reasonable.

18

#34 outlier

Allocation of Transmission spending (FERC) to
Substations

CAPITAL

O&M

19

Source: Questions TF5, Page 28


Source: Questions TF20, Page 29


ADJUSTMENTS TO capital additions (FERC) DATA

Very few adjustments to
Capital Additions (FERC)
beyond Substation
allocations . . .

Source: Question TF5
, Page 27

FERC vs. Activity
p10

Debi: delete “per circuit mile”

20

#34 no substations

WHEELING is major o&M adjustment beyond subs

#26,27????

Source:
Question TF20,
Page 28

FERC vs.
Activity

p11

21

Transmission Line assets

Since we use assets as a
key denominator,
differences in asset base
are worth exploring

Source: Question TF65

ST p35

22

T
-
Line Spending (FERC)

Source: Questions
TF 20, TF Page 2


CAPITAL

O&M

Source: Questions
TF4, TF Page
4


23

CWIP (FERC) as a % of Capital Spending (Activity)

#17,28,30 high CWIP

Source:
Question TF80, TF5, Page
27

24

Financial



Overview of the activity
-
based
Cost Model

Photo source: Scientific American

ACTIVITY
-
BASED Cost Model

While FERC has the benefit of being a uniform system of accounts, there are
several important shortcomings:


FERC capital spending lags behind actual spending; costs for large projects
go into a Construction Work in Progress (CWIP) account and are not
transferred until the assets are placed into service, sometimes a several year
lag.


FERC capital accounts generally follow plant accounts and units of property
(e.g. poles, towers, and fixtures)


not the typical reasons why utilities spend
(e.g. new business)


FERC O&M accounts tend to be more activity
-
oriented, but do not
necessarily track important categories (e.g. vegetation management)


For those reasons, a simplified Activity
-
Based
Costing system was developed to
get current year spending by activity. The following diagram depicts the Activity
-
Based approach

26

Activity
-
Based Cost Model

Activity
-
Based
Costs

Transmission
Lines

Transmission
Subs

Distribution Subs

Distribution Lines

Transmission Line Capital


Serve New: Extension to new customers


Expand: Capacity Additions


Sustain: Replace/Repair in kind


Sustain: Service Restoration


Sustain: Line Relocations


Sustain: Transmission Operations Center


Other


CIAC

T&D Substation Capital


Serve New: New Substations


Expand: Capacity Additions


Sustain: Repair/replace
-
in
-
kind


Sustain: Service Restoration


Other


CIAC


Distribution Line O&M


Maintenance


Vegetation Management


Service Restoration


Distribution Operations Center


Other

T&D Substation O&M


Maintenance


Service Restoration


Distribution Operations Center


Other

Transmission Line O&M


Maintenance


Vegetation Management


Service Restoration


Transmission Operations Center


Other

Distribution Line Capital


Serve New: Extension to new customers


Expand: Capacity Additions


Sustain: Replace/Repair in kind


Sustain: Service Restoration


Sustain: Line Relocations


Sustain: Distribution Operations Center


Other


CIAC

27

Transmission Line Capital
spending (
Activity
-
based) on sustain is decreasing



Spending Category

2013

Q2

2012

Q2

2011

Q2

Total Capital Spending

6.6%

5.3%

Less Serve New

1.0%

0.6%

Subtotal Cap Add &
Sustain

5.6%

4.7%

Less Capacity Adds

3.4%

1.9%

Subtotal: Sustain

2.2%

2.8%

The

replacement


rate can be estimated by successively subtracting activities,
such as serve new, capacity adds, line relocations, and storm restoration.

Complete for 2013

28

T
-
Line CAPITAL (ACTIVITY)

Mean

7.1 %

Quartile 1

8.5 %

Quartile 2:

5.3 %

Quartile 3:

4.6 %

2012

Other 2012


23 n/a


32 Capital OH; R&D; Admin


28 Reliability Improvements.


18 Special Projects and
Environmental/Legislative/Regulat
ory Mandated Projects


17 Not applicable


20 improvements to system
reliability,
misc

equipment,
technology upgrades

Other 2013

17, 34, 37, 39, NA

28 Not Applicable

35 Reliability Improvements.

38 Civic Improvements and
Environmental/Legislative/Regulatory

31 022108 Chesney to Pester 69.67
-

Project cancelled

16 other

18 Primarily fiber optic installation

Source:

Question TF45, TF65, Page 14


29

NOTE: consider adding
improvement/reliability
category

Capital: FERC vs. Activity

Activity>>FERC: #28, 38


Activity << FERC: #31


Activity not
reported:
#17,23,30,34

Source:
Question TF20, TF65, Page
25

Most companies provided activity
costs; activity costs are close to
FERC with a few exceptions;
changes in CWIP can explain
differences.

30

Depreciation expense as a % of Assets

Depreciation expense is a benchmark for

replacement


spending

#28, 34 Very low depreciation rate

Source:
Question TF65, TF75,
Page 10

Annual Depreciation as a % of assets

Accumulated depreciation as a % of assets

2012 Q2 Asset Replacement Rate = 2.8%

31

Vegetation Management

Expense/Acre Managed

Expense/Miles Managed

Expense/Mile Trimmed

Expense/Acre Trimmed

Source: Question
TF55, Page 9
-
12

Q2 2012 (N=2)

Q2 2012 (N=5)

Q2 2012 (N=5)

Q2 2012 (N=4)

32

Data somewhat
different than last
year; but not
many data points.

O&M Expense (Activity)

2012 Other


23
n/a

32 management/admin

18 FERC 560, 561,566, and 568.

27 NA

29 Transmission contracts, O&M
related to construction, Planning

17 Not applicable

20 Expense related to capital projects

2012

Source:
Question TF65, TF55, Page 20

33

2013
Other


37 n
/a

22 management
/admin

35 N/A

34 N/A

31 N/A

39 N/A

17 Land Rights/ROW

16 Other

18 Remaining Transmission operations

O&M: FERC vs.
Activity should be the same

Activity O&M should be
equal to FERC O&M

Source:
Question TF20, TF65,
Activity

vs. FERC Page 24


Activity O&M << FERC O&M

#31, 38


Missing Activity: #30


34

Issues found: transmission financial

Page #

Q #

Primary Issue

Who

TF 3, 5, 7, 24

Outlier on a spending per circuit basis

#38

TF8, ST35

Duplicated; delete ST35

1QC

TF27

No substation allocation

#34

TF53

Missing activity capital

#17, 23, 30,
34,

TF53

Activity capital much different than FERC

#28, 31, 38

TF54

O&M
Ferc

vs. activity missing or different

#30, 31, 38

35

Transmission Line

Practices and initiatives

Transmission Line Practices/initiatives

This questionnaire is organized around the following topics:


Asset Management


Condition based maintenance
,
Role of Asset
Management, replacement programs, and problematic equipment


Planning/Engineering/Design


Improvement initiatives, changes to
standards, measures


T
-
line Field Activities


Initiatives underway for construction, maintenance
and line reliability


Work management systems


WMS Vendor and efforts to improve
usefulness


Contractor Productivity


Challenges, measures and initiatives


Transmission Operations Center (TOC)


Changes, challenges,
initiatives,


Right of Way


Growth inhibitors, ROW uses, challenges and practices.


Transmission Automation


Technology initiatives underway


NERC Standards


Impact of NERC standards on transmission
organizations, especially Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP), Protection
and Control (PRC), and Facilities Design (FAC).


Maintenance



Inspections.


37

WHAT KEEPS YOU UP AT NIGHT WORRYING
ABOUT YOUR SYSTEM?”

Aging assets (5)

35
Older air switch performance, older single pole wood lines, older wood pole lines and
trees.

32 The increasing age, deteriorating condition, and decreasing reliability of several classes of
equipment in the system
-

despite continuing efforts at cost effective Condition Based
Maintenance (CBM).

23 Aging infrastructure, limited O&M budgets, pipe
-
type cable

18 Aging infrastructure, lack of personnel and aging workforce

28 Safety, Wooden Cross
-
Arms, Aging assets.

Lack
of funds (2)

38 Maintaining a good maintenance program AND meeting O&M targets.

16 Proper maintenance cycles to match funding/compliance requirements.

Specific equipment (2)

27 Vibration Dampers

39 Structure failure in a difficult location.

Major
storm (1)

22 Since our system has been well
-
maintained for over 15 years and was designed with
intended circuit redundancy, worry is limited to adverse weather conditions that may exceed
our structural design conditions such as periodic category 5 hurricanes, tornados, and major
ice storms.

Other

34 Safety and reliability; Accurate records


2011


Aging Assets (4)


Specific Equipment (3)


Lack of Funds (1)


Major Storm (1)

2012


Aging Assets (3)


Lack of Funds (3)


Specific Equipment (2)


Major Storm (2)


Major Equipment (1)

2013


Aging Assets
(5)


Lack of Funds (2)


Specific Equipment (1)


Major Storm (1)


Other (
1
)



Source: Question TP15, Page
6

38

NFRASTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT PROGRAMS UNDERWAY

W
ood
poles/
crossarms

mentioned (
5)

22 We replace all pre
-
form static wire splices with compression splices. We
replace all EPDM rubber polymer insulators with silicone.

23 Pole replacement, limited transmission structure replacements

39 A program to replace our wood transmission structures is in its second year.

16 wooden
crossarms
, rotted poles, insulators, etc. are replaced through routine
maintenance.

35 Transmission lines that are rebuilt for increased capacity utilize steel or
concrete poles to replace existing wood poles. Wood
crossarms

are replaced with
steel
crossarms
. Porcelain insulators are

replaced with polymer insulators.

Other (6)

28
There is a replacement program for each asset class.

27 Damper replacement, conductor sampling and shield wire sampling

38 Replacing oldest transmission lines. Removing oil circuit breakers from the
system.

34 Replace electro
-
mechanicals, line reliability, lines with UFLS to microprocessor

32 Replacement programs currently underway are transmission re
-
conductoring

and static wire replacements.

18 Targeted Asset Replacement Projects and Personnel Additions


Wood Pole Age Distribution

[2011 Data] shows 44%
greater than 33 years old;
this compares to towers
(19%) and steel poles (11%)

Wood Pole Age

Group

Composite

39

Source: Question TP18, Page 7

Problematic equipment

Wooden
elements (4)

28 Wooden elements, spacer dampers, large volume of towers that need painting, corroding tower grillages.

35 Twist sleeves, wood
crossarms

and braces that are nearing end of life.

16 Old wooden structures. Old switches.

18 wood poles, insulators, cast hardware, and non galvanized steel

Sub grade and static wire corrosion

22 Sub
-
grade corrosion and static wire corrosion are the most significant issues we have. Coastal insulators are
also of recent concern, and we have an EPRI project to design a new style of

contamination resistant insulator for testing in 2011/2012.

Vibration
dampers (2)

27 Vibration Dampers and 'U' Bolts

38 None at this time

34 Electromechanical relays

Tower
foundations (2)

32 Deteriorating transmission lattice tower foundations; aged conductors and shield wire; poor grounding systems;
and underground HPFF transmission circuits with splice joint movement due to Thermal Mechanical Movement or
Bending (TMM or TMB).

39 345kV foundations are cracking and
spalling
; 345kV access roads are deteriorating.

Aging equipment

23 Equipment older than 40 years

40

Source: Question TP20, Page 7

Improvements in permiting

Early engagement/planning with
stakeholders (5)

28 Early engagement and consultation with First Nation (Aboriginal), Public and government agencies is effective .

35 We work within the State's Public Utility Commission Rules for all transmission line projects.

31 Work with regulatory agencies and allow opportunities to comment on proposed alignment that could affect the
feasibility of a project.

39 Transmission Planning studies ensure that NERC TPL and FAC standards are thoroughly addressed to
demonstrate need and that the system with the addition of proposed projects are adequate.

16 The planning process happens before permits & certifications are pursued.

Bundling
of
work (2)

27 Bundling of work initiative started.

38 Because our Utility Coordination area have become experts in dealing with permits and certifications from the
City, they have been empowered to assist project managers in the acquisition and negotiation of these permits and
certifications.

Data
management (2)

34 Most of the permits are now submitted on line as opposed to previous paper submittals

23 Maintain data base of required permitting

One
-
stop permitting

22 We have initiated a one stop permit request for each project utilizing the services of our Land & Right of Way
personnel. Coordination between the Transmission Planning division and Regulatory Advisors who coordinate the
regulatory approval process for new transmission lines is facilitated by organizational structure. Both groups report to
the same Director.

Other

18 No formal process for certification. As needed basis.

41

Source: Question
TP30
, Page 10

Standards changes

ROW

28 Standards are reviewed regularly, and changed to ensure long term reliability at lowest cost. Examples include
performing maintenance too often, or too little, with appropriate scope based on performance of the asset. Specific
standards that have recently changed include: 1. ROW Width Standards, 2. Vertical Clearance Standards, 3.
Underwater and Helicopter Inspection Standards.

Line compensation equipment

35 Added standards for line compensation equipment required for CREZ (competitive renewal energy zone)
transmission line construction.

Composite poles

27 Introduction of composite poles in wetlands. Looking to introduce composite poles in entire program

High temperature conductors

38 Using high
-
temperature ACSS/TW to allow higher ampacities, tends to reduce structure loads and reduces overall
wire weight for the same ampacity vs. conventional AAC and ACSR for the same ampacity

34 Install ACSS conductor to obtain higher line ratings

Lightning protection

31 We have been re
-
evaluating our lightning protection based upon the IEEE Guide for Improving the Lightning
Performance of Transmission Lines. We have been looking at outages associated with weather events and trying to
reduce momentary outages.

345kV Standards

23 updated 345kV AC standards as part of regional line project

Polymer post insulators

16 We have changes the attachment detail for polymer post insulators

Other

22 Meet with user groups to identify required standards needs

17 The substation standards have been recently renewed in support of the development of compatible units that are
used for construction estimates.


42

Source: Question TP35, Page 11

Improved scheduling is the most mentioned
Maintenance
practice initiatives

Scheduling (3)

35 Improvement in work management system including inventory and scheduling of
maintenance.
Geomedia

mapping of transmission lines.

16 Scheduled inspection of all lines. O&M maintenance budgets are tight so this can impact
the desired schedule.

18 Using crews from other areas for patrols, helps put a new set of eyes on the system. Once
we find issues we are correcting them ASAP.

Condition Assessment (2)

32 UG & OH Condition Assessment using the CMMS model.

31 Development and implementation of Cascade Transmission (asset management system)

Prioritization (2)

28 Work as an integrated planning team to prioritize maintenance works.

38 Minimize overtime and critical lines first

EPRI corrosion

22 Development of a sub
-

grade corrosion inspection and mitigation program in cooperation
with EPRI.

Equipment

27 new pole setting equipment to increase safety and minimize manpower.

Energized work

39 The introduction of Live Line maintenance

Other

23 inspection and
replacement

34 Monthly meetings with Transmission Engineering




2012 Categories

Organization

Equipment

EPRI
corrosion program

Asset management

Work management system

Energized work

Intrusive pole inspections

43

Source: Question TP60, Page 15

Initiatives to improve
field activities

Scheduling (5)

28 New systems for scheduling and bundling of work.

35 Requesting a two year budget cycle so engineering is complete prior to scheduling

construction
resources and clearance requests.

38 Just in time delivery of materials


23 job site show
-
ups

39 The elimination of excessive travel, job site show up, advanced hot stick training for

500kv
.

Right
size crew

22 Right size the crew for the job. Send appropriate number of resources to safely

complete
the job
--

change from job to job. Additional resources are used on other.

Job
site Show
-
Up when practical for projects of significant duration and distance
from


the service center. The crew shows up at the nearest Service Center and gets
mileage


from their assigned work location. This reduces drive time thereby increasing wrench time
.


Leave
large pieces of equipment on ROW or nearby substation with security service.

Equipment

27 New pole setting machine for line or dead work.

Safety

34 Enhance safety and monthly meetings with Transmission Engineering

Contracting

18 We contract out T
-
Line Construction.

31 Bidding of projects to multiple contractors.

Mobile computers

16 The Transmission Asset Management System (TAMIS) using mobile
computers

44

Source: Question TP55, Page 14

2010 Categories


Contractor changes


Aerial device/helicopters


Safety


QA/QC


Standardization

2011 Categories


Contractor Changes


Training


Updating Standards


Scheduling

New Equipment


Change Crew Hours


Hazard Assessment


Crew Size


2012 Categories


Equipment changes


Multi
-
year scheduling


Contracting changes


Scheduling/Coordination


Earlier Material/ROW


Right size crew

Work management system

SAP (3)

22 We utilize SAP for work orders, time reporting, and financial

resource
planning which was installed in 1999, and we use an

in
-
house developed Access Database workforce
management


system
for work
scheduling. SAP has periodic version changes

and
the WFMS program is revised annually as needs change.

27 SAP
-

2008

38 SAP/Project Management Database

In
-
house (2)

28 STARR
-

this is an internal maintenance data program

implemented
early 2000, it is upgraded quarterly.

23 Internal

Cascade (1)

34 CASCADE

Primavera
(1)

35 Primavera P6. ROW and Construction Management GIS system is in progress.

Maximo

(2)

39
Maximo
,
Implimented

in 2012 version 7.5

17 The work management system is IBM
Maximo

for Utilities 7.1 and it was implemented 4/18/2010. The next
scheduled u (1)
pgrade

is version 7.5 and is expected to be implemented in 2014

Passport

18 We currently use Passport as our work management system, but are in the process of assessing all aspects of our
WM system and processes to improve overall productivity and schedule compliance.

None

31 No system



45

Source: Question TP85, Page 22

SYSTEM

2013

ID#S

2013


2012

201
1

2010

SAP

#22,27,38

3

3

4

3

Maximo

#17,39

2

0

2

2

Primavera

#35

1

1

1

1

Cascade/Pas
sport

#34

2

0

1

1

Logica

0

0

0

1

1

IN
-
HOUSE

#28,33

2

1

1

1

None

#31

0

1

0

0

Transmission Operations Center (TOC)
initiatives

New Facilities (5)

28
In 2008 we consolidated from 1 system and 5 area control centers to 1
centralized control center plus full backup
centre

at remote location.

27 Backup center at
Richview

-

on going testing for NERC requirements

34 New Control Center with video wall replacing the static map board

31 None. until May 2013, new control center combined with Generation Ops
including modern video display wall
.

New Software (4)

18 Relocated to a larger facility.

23
EMS cutover completed in June 2012

16 Added state estimator & contingency analysis tools in 2012, resulting in a
more reliable BES.

22
CEII


46

Source: Question TP120, Page 27

Public Resistance and NERC compliance are the
MAJOR FACED
BY ROW MANAGEMENT

Public Resistance (5)

27 Increased public resistance to required vegetation control activities, particularly in urban areas, where there is growing

demand for 'green space. Planting of incompatible vegetation on ROWs, unauthorized
enroachment

onto ROW land( extending
backyards, development, grading,
etc
), increasing demand for notifying parties above and beyond adjacent land owners or
applicable agencies, increased regulation with respect to endangered species is driving increased communication , with
regulating authorities , operational constraints and increased planning and documentation requirements

34 Property owner cooperation, trained labor, & local regulatory constraints

31 Achieving 100% on herbicide applications on transmission rights
-
of
-

Way due to property owner refusals on herbicide
application on their property.

23 landowner, environmental

39 Permit renewal, environmental regulation, vegetation and structure access

NERC (3)

22 Near term challenges include avoiding grow
-
ins & fall
-
ins within the ROWs to stay compliant with NERC standard FAC
-
003
-
01 and proposed changes; customer education on transmission practices; increased tree mortality with the recent drought
conditions; continued identification of avian nesting sites; and modifying practices to meet new state regulations resulting
fro
m
recent federal court rulings associated with herbicide usage. Long term challenges are keeping vegetation management costs
from escalating & managing changes for NERC regulations.

28 cost pressures vs. expectation of perfection in VM to avoid outages
-

per increasingly stringent NERC standards; public
expectation of ROW management and demand for 'green belts'

38 Surrounding urbanization and associated pressure this brings; NERC oversight and audit

Drought

35 Continuing to respond to regulatory issues, persistent drought and stressed trees.

Other

17 Total functioning GIS for work tracking; Federal agencies impacts to best practices.

16 Major challenges include that the utility operates lines and facilities


Source: Question TP180, Page
36

47

Top 5 TECHNOLOGIES BEING DEPLOYED FOR
TRANSMISSION AUTOMATION

1.




Microprocessor
Relays [2; 1]

2.


Cyber
security [3; 2]

3.



Digital Fault Recorder [1; 3]

4.



Synchrophasors

[6; 8]

5.


Human Machine Interface (HMI) Control [4; 4]

6.


Remote Sectionalizing [5; 7]

7.



Flexible AC Transmission (FACTs) [8; 5]

8.


Electronic Feeder Monitoring [7; 6]


Rank


Technology [2012; 2011 Rank]



Source: Question TP200, Page
39

48

TOP 5 CLASSES OF NERC STANDARDS BASED ON THEIR
IMPACT ON TRANSMISSION ORGANIZATION

Rank


12

11 Standard

1.


1
. Critical Infrastructure Protection

2.


2
. Protection and Control

3.


3. Facilities Design Connections and Maintenance

4.


4. Personnel Performance Training and Qualification

5.


5. Transmission Operations

6.


8
. Resource and Demand Balancing

7.


5
. Modeling Data and Analysis

8.

10. Nuclear

9.

7. Transmission Planning

10.

11
. Emergency Preparedness and Operations

11.

9
. Communications

12.

12
. Interchange Scheduling and Coordination

13.

13
. Interconnection Reliability Operations and
Coord


14.

14
. Voltage and Reactive

Source: Question TP205, Page 39

49

Not updated for 2013

Issues found: Transmission Practices

Page #

Q #

Primary Issue

Who



50

Thank you for your Input and Participation!

51

Corporate Offices

California

400 Continental Blvd. Suite 600

El Segundo, CA 90245

(310) 426
-
2790

Maryland

3 Bethesda Metro Center Suite
700

Bethesda, MD 20814

(301) 961
-
1505


New York | Texas | Washington | Wisconsin

First Quartile Consulting is a utility
-
focused consultancy providing a full range of consulting services including continuous
process improvement, change management, benchmarking and more. You can count on a proven process that
assesses and optimizes your resources, processes, leadership management and technology to align your business
needs
with

your customer’s needs.


Visit us at
www.1stquartileconsulting.com

| Follow our updates on
LinkedIn

About 1QC

Satellite Offices

Debi McLain

Debi.McLain@1QConsulting.com

760
-
272
-
7277


Tim.
Szybalski

Tim.Szybalski@
1QConsulting.com

301
-
535
-
0590

Dave Canon

Dave.Canon@1qconsulting.com

817
-
980
-
7909


Dave Carter

Dave.Carter@1qconsulting.com

414
-
881
-
8641


Your Presenters



Ken
Buckstaff

Ken.Buckstaff@1QConsulting.com

310
-
922
-
0783