U.S. Transmission Capacity & Reliability

U.S. U.S. Transmission Transmission Capacity & Capacity & ReliabilityReliability

Are we willing to do what it takes to

preserve the transmission option?David R. Nevius -

NERC

About NERCAbout NERCHistoryMembersPurposeReliability Assessment

Transmission Transmission AssessmentAssessment

Loadings increasing$$ and weather are the driversMore curtailments requiredNot designed for current levels and directions of transfersMost planning is short termMargins are thin

Few Few Transmission Transmission AdditionsAdditions

Only 7,500 miles plannedMost additions driven by need to connect new generatorsNo significant improvement to long-distance transfersLess weight place on reliability in justifying transmission

C a p a c i t y , D e m a n d , a n d T r a n s m i s s i o n

Transmission Growth Transmission Growth vs. vs. Generation and Generation and Demand GrowthDemand Growth

18%

Increase

5% Increase

System System CongestionCongestion

Impediments to New Impediments to New TransmissionTransmission

Opposition and litigationUncertain cost recovery Impacts vs. benefits?Who has responsibility to build?Siting across multiple jurisdictionsFederal agenciesRisky Business - Who will invest?

Recent DelaysRecent DelaysAEP 765 kV (WV-VA) delayed from 1998 to 2004 – U.S. Forest ServiceConnecticut - Long Island Cable rejected by Connecticut Siting Council

Previous Studies Previous Studies and Reportsand Reports

Moving Power – Flexibility for the Future (NGA 1987)Electric Power Wheeling and Dealing (OTA 1989)Keystone Policy Dialog – Model Siting Code (1994)

Previous Previous RecommendationsRecommendations

Reasonable time frames and deadlinesClear decision criteria, need standards, and rules for cost recoveryEarly involvement of landowners, public, and regulatorsOne-stop siting and certification processCriteria for preferred sites - corridorsRegional or federal siting authority

ERCOT - One Model ERCOT - One Model that Works!that Works!ISO responsible for transmission planningLoad serving entities request Planned Transmission Service (Firm)ISO & TSPs determine upgrades to meet criteriaAnnualized costs charged to load (pro rata)Single jurisdiction – predictable process90-mile 345 kV line certificated AND constructed in less than 2 years!

Maintaining Maintaining TransmissionTransmissionas an Optionas an Option

Must change how transmission is certified and sited

Recognize multi-state nature and benefits of transmission in siting and certification processesRegional siting authorities?Role for RTOs?Federal role in siting?

Unless processes changed, major transmission will simply not be developed!

The ChallengeThe ChallengeConcerted and cooperative effort to reform siting processesAll know what has to be doneUnless processes are fixed, will continue to work around congestion and constraints

NERCNERC

www.nerc.com