Transend - Appendix 5 Renewal capital expenditure - Australian ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Renewal Capital Expenditure TNM-GR-809-0929 Issue 1.0, January 2009 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 – Replacement Reyrolle 110 kV circuit breakers 8 Table 2 – Key asset replacements that comprise the 110 kV substation redevelopment projects 13 Table 3 – Circuit criticality ratings 14 Table 4 – Replacement of current transformer makes and types 17 Table 5 – Replacement of voltage transformer makes and types 18 Table 6 – Disconnector makes and types 19 Table 7 – Revised revenue proposal ($2008–09) 20 Table 8 – Revised revenue proposal ($2008–09) 24 Table 9 – Revised revenue proposal ($2008–09) 27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 – Age profile of 110 kV circuit breakers as at 2008 7 Figure 2 – 110 kV circuit breaker replacement program overview 10 Figure 3 – 110 kV circuit breaker age profiles at 2003, 2008 and forecast in 2014 11 Figure 4 – Overview of the Reyrolle 110 kV circuit breaker replacements 12 Figure 5 – Reyrolle 110 kV circuit breaker comparison with the entire transmission circuit population 14 Figure 6 – Capacitive voltage transformer output voltage profiles 16 Page 4 of 28 © Transend Networks Pty Ltd UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Renewal Capital Expenditure TNM-GR-809-0929 Issue 1.0, January 2009 This document responds to the Australian Energy Regulator’s (AER’s) draft decision for the forthcoming (2009–14) regulatory control period. Transend’s revised revenue proposal seeks reinstatement of renewal capital expenditure deferred by the AER in its draft decision. This document supports Transend’s revised revenue proposal by providing further justification with respect to renewal capital expenditure for the: � 110 kV substation redevelopment projects associated with the replacement of Reyrolle type OS10 110 kV (Reyrolle 110 kV) circuit breakers; � Farrell and New Norfolk substations secondary system replacements projects; and � Burnie–Waratah 110 kV transmission line wood pole replacement project. In terms of Transend’s forecast renewal capital expenditure the proposed reduction is approximately a quarter of that expenditure category. In effect, a reduction of this magnitude would eliminate practically all of Transend’s proposed increase in renewal capital expenditure for the forthcoming regulatory control period. Transend is of the view that this would have a significant impact on the performance of the transmission system, and, in turn customers, over the medium to long term. Given the materiality of the proposed reduction in renewal capital expenditure, Transend has revisited the matters raised in the draft decision in relation to the renewal projects where the AER has concluded that reductions are warranted. The AER reached broadly positive conclusions in respect of Transend’s 2009–14 capital expenditure forecasts. These conclusions followed a detailed project-based review by the AER’s consultants, Worley Parsons and Nuttall Consulting, in addition to an examination of Transend’s governance and investment decision-making processes. A detailed project-based assessment of Transend’s asset renewal projects by Nuttall Consulting led the AER to conclude that particular asset renewal projects should be deferred until the next regulatory control period (2014–19). Transend has conducted its own internal review of forecast renewal capital expenditure after carefully considering the comments made by the AER and its consultants. This document provides information in support of Transend’s revised revenue proposal renewal capital expenditure forecast. The document comprises three sections, providing further information of the renewal strategies and projects. The remainder of this document is structured as follows: � Section A sets out Transend’s response to the matters raised in the draft decision regarding 110 kV substation redevelopment projects associated with the replacement of Reyrolle 110 kV circuit breakers; � Section B sets out Transend’s response to the matters raised in the draft decision regarding the Farrell and New Norfolk substations secondary system replacements projects; and � Section C sets out Transend’s response to the matters raised in the draft decision regarding the Burnie–Waratah 110 kV transmission line wood pole replacement project. Given the significance of the 110 kV substation redevelopment projects associated with replacement of Reyrolle 110 kV circuit breakers, Section A also includes an overview of both the 110 kV circuit breaker replacement program and the key investment drivers for the 110 kV substation redevelopments. Additional supporting information for each category of expenditure is included as attachments to this document. © Transend Networks Pty Ltd Page 5 of 28 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED
Page 1: APPENDIX 5 Transend, Renewal capita
Page 4 and 5: Renewal Capital Expenditure TNM-GR-
Page 14 and 15: Figure 4 - Overview of the Reyrolle
Page 16 and 17: Table 3 - Circuit criticality ratin
Page 18 and 19: Figure 6 - Capacitive voltage trans
Page 20 and 21: Current transformer make / type Mod
Page 22 and 23: 1.6.5 Protection and control Renewa
Page 32 and 33: CONTENTS 0BInvestment Evaluation Su
Page 34 and 35: 0BInvestment Evaluation Summary TNM
Page 38 and 39: 5 CUSTOMER CONSULTATION 0BInvestmen
Page 40 and 41: � implementation of revised maint
Page 42 and 43: Table 1 - Summary of economic analy
Page 44 and 45: CONTENTS 0BInvestment Evaluation Su
Page 52 and 53: 7.3 OPTION 3 - STAGED REPLACEMENT O
Page 56 and 57:
CONTENTS 0BInvestment Evaluation Su
Page 58 and 59:
0BInvestment Evaluation Summary TNM
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
4.8 BUS CONDUCTOR AND FITTINGS 0BIn
Page 64 and 65:
6 BENEFITS The direct benefits of r
Page 66 and 67:
7.2.3 DRAWBACKS The option has the
Page 68 and 69:
Figure 2 - Option 3: single line di
Page 70 and 71:
This option includes: � installin
Page 73 and 74:
INVESTMENT EVALUATION SUMMARY 0BInv
Page 75 and 76:
1 BACKGROUND 0BInvestment Evaluatio
Page 77 and 78:
4.1 CIRCUIT BREAKERS 0BInvestment E
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
� reduced burden on spare parts m
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
� replacement of the 110 kV Meado
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
� reduced burden on spare parts m
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
4.2 VOLTAGE TRANSFORMERS The 110 kV
Page 106 and 107:
4.3 CURRENT TRANSFORMERS 0BInvestme
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
The drawbacks for this option are t
Page 113 and 114:
INVESTMENT EVALUATION SUMMARY 0BInv
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
4.1.2 TUNGATINAH SUBSTATION 0BInves
Page 121 and 122:
4.3.2 TUNGATINAH SUBSTATION The 110
Page 123 and 124:
Tarraleah-New Norfolk No. 1 110 kV
Page 125 and 126:
� the possibility of a 220 kV con
Page 127:
Table 2 - Summary of Transend’s c
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
3.2.2 110 KV BUS BAR PROTECTION SCH
Page 136 and 137:
5. CUSTOMER CONSULTATION 0BInvestme
Page 138 and 139:
Table 3 - Summary of NPV cost analy
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
� loss of back-up protection func
Page 144 and 145:
Page 147 and 148:
INVESTMENT EVALUATION SUMMARY TITLE
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
INVESTMENT EVALUATION SUMMARY TITLE
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Burnie-Waratah 110 kV Transmission
Page 159 and 160:
CONTENTS Burnie-Waratah 110 kV Tran
Page 161 and 162:
1 BACKGROUND Burnie-Waratah 110 kV
Page 163 and 164:
2.3 MAINTENANCE Burnie-Waratah 110
Page 165:
Burnie-Waratah 110 kV Transmission
show all

Transend - Appendix 5 Renewal capital expenditure - Australian ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?