2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment - NERC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Scenario Letterd) Provide a table, sorted by subregion, of significant transformer additions required tosupport bulk power reliability under this Scenario Case:Transformer Project NameHigh-SideVoltage(kV)LowSideVoltage(kV)InserviceDate(s)Description/Statuse) Provide a listing of any other significant substation equipment (i.e. SVC, FACTScontrollers, HVdc, etc.) additions that are different than the Reference Case.5. Operational Issues (Known or Emerging)Are there are potential operating issues different from the Reference Case which mayimpact reliability during the next ten years? Would you expect additional operating guidesand/or changes in interface limits resulting from this Scenario Case?6. Reliability Assessment AnalysisDescribe the assessment process for the Scenario Case used by the Region and subregions.(Cite reports documenting the studies in a footnote or reference).a) Compare the projected capacity margins between the Scenario Case and the ReferenceCase. Also, compare them to the Regional, subregional, state, or provincialrequirements.i) If applicable, do the assumptions change between the two cases to establishthe Regional/subregional capacity margin criteria or target margin level?ii) Does the amount of resources internal to the Region or subregion that isrelied on to meet the criteria, target margin level, or forecast load for theassessment period change when compared to the Reference Case?iii) Does the amount of resources external to the Region/subregion that relied onto meet the criteria, capacity margins, target margin level or forecast loadfor the assessment period change when compared to the Reference Case?iv) If performed, describe the resource adequacy studies (i.e. Loss-of-LoadExpectation, Expected Unserved Energy, etc.) for the Scenario Case.v) Discuss how resource adequacy changes between the Scenario Case and theReference Case.vi) Compare the resource adequacy of the Scenario Case and Reference Case ifpeak demands are higher than the 50/50 demand forecast in the ReferenceCase.b) Compare unit retirements between the two cases and any potentially significant impacton reliability. What measures would have to be taken to mitigate the reliabilityconcern?c) Is there any difference in deliverability of resources between the Scenario Case andReference Case? What might have to be done to ensure that the resources aresufficient and deliverable to meet your load requirements at the time of system peak?d) If you are assuming substantial increase in wind penetration, how would you plan toaddress reactive and frequency response support requirements during ramping andwind variations.2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment Page 187
Scenario Lettere) Describe any anticipated changes to market structure, ancillary service requirements,etc., necessary to implement the Scenario Case.f) Compare the fuel supply vulnerability in your Region/subregion between theReference Case and the Scenario Case. If significant changes would result to yourfuel mix compared with the Reference Case, please identify the changes and anyimpact that might have on potential fuel supply or delivery problems.7. Other Region-Specific Issues that were not mentioned aboveDescribe any other significant differences between the Scenario Case and ReferenceCase assessments that might affect reliability over the ten-year study period.8. Region DescriptionList the number of members, Balancing Authorities, and other organizations (associatemembers, for instance) in the Region. State the season in which the Region typicallyexperiences its peak demand, the number of square miles in the Region, the states thatcomprise the Region and the approximate total population served.Page 1882009 Long-Term Reliability Assessment
Page 1 and 2:
2009 Scenario ReliabilityAssessment
Page 3 and 4:
Table of ContentsTable of ContentsN
Page 5 and 6:
Executive SummaryTransmission Criti
Page 8 and 9:
Background Information for this Rep
Page 10:
Scenario Reliability Assessment Sum
Page 13 and 14:
Scenario Reliability Assessment Sum
Page 16 and 17:
Scenario Reliability Self-Assessmen
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141: Scenario Reliability Self-Assessmen
Page 164 and 165: Regional Reliability Scenario Self-
Page 180 and 181: About This Reporto Nuclear scenario
Page 182 and 183: Joint Coordinated System PlanThemat
Page 184 and 185: Joint Coordinated System Plan2009 S
Page 186 and 187: Scenario LetterScenario LetterDecem
Page 188 and 189: Scenario LetterIn an effort to add
Page 192 and 193: Reliability Assessment Subcommittee
Page 194 and 195: Reliability Assessment Subcommittee
Page 196: the reliability of theto ensurebulk
show all

2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment - NERC

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?