osc meeting april 27, 2006 1 transmission cost allocation overview

OSC MeetingApril 27, 2006

1

Transmission Cost Allocation Overview


2

Cost Allocation SummaryRolled-in to Region- wide Rate

Rolled-in to “Zonal” Rate

Participant Funded

Other

CAISO X X X X

ISO NE X X X

PJM X X

SPP X X X

Entergy X X X

OTHERS X X X X


3

CAISO Cost AllocationRolled-in to Region-wide Rate

– New High Voltage Facilities • 200KV or greater

– Capital Additions to existing High Voltage Facilities

– Can be either reliability or economic upgrades– Included in CAISO Tariff High Voltage Access

Charge


4

CAISO Cost AllocationRolled-in to Zonal Rate

– New Low Voltage Facilities • Below 200KV

– Capital Additions to existing Low Voltage Facilities

– Can be either reliability or economic upgrades– Included in Utility specific Tariff as a Low

Voltage Access Charge


5

CAISO Cost AllocationParticipant Funded

– Independent Transmission Project Proposal– Not determined as part of CAISO Planning

Process– Project Sponsor

• Market Participant or Group of Market Participants• Participating Transmission Owner

– Project Sponsor pays full cost of upgrade


6

CAISO Cost AllocationGeneration Interconnection Upgrades

– Reliability Network Upgrades• Transmission facilities beyond the point of

interconnection required to safely and reliably connect generator to the grid

– Delivery Network Upgrades• Transmission facilities other than reliability upgrades

required to relieve operational constraints on the grid

• Economic upgrades are not required but may impact economic delivery of the generator


7

CAISO Cost AllocationGeneration Interconnection Upgrades

– Funded by the Interconnection Customer or Transmission Owner has option to fund

– Interconnection Customer entitled to repayment ($ for $) over 5 year period from Commercial Operation Date or make other reimbursement arrangements

– Interconnection Customer can receive Firm Transmission Rights in lieu of cash


8

ISO NE Cost Allocation

Rolled-in to Region-wide Rate– Regional Benefit Upgrades

• 115 KV and above• Meet all non-voltage level criteria for Pool

Transmission facility classification• Included in Regional System Plan as either a

Reliability Transmission Upgrade or a Market Efficiency Upgrade


9


Rolled-in to Region-wide Rate– Reliability Transmission Upgrade

• Not required by a generation interconnection• Needed for continued reliability

– Market Efficiency Upgrade• Not required by a generation interconnection• Designed to reduce the bulk power system costs to

load system-wide


10


Rolled-in to Zonal Rate– Local Benefit Upgrades

• Below 115 KV • Do not meet all non-voltage level criteria for Pool

Transmission facility classification

– Costs included in the local (zonal) service rates under the Tariff


11

ISO NE Cost AllocationParticipant Funded

– Localized Costs above the minimum requirements deemed necessary by the ISO NE for a Regional Benefit Upgrade

– Elective Transmission Upgrades• Merchant Transmission will have its own OATT to recover

costs

– Generation Interconnection Upgrades• Direct Assignment Facilities• Interconnection related Network Upgrades


12

ISO NE Cost AllocationParticipant Funded

– Elective Transmission Upgrades and Generation Interconnection Upgrades

• Eligible to receive Qualified Upgrade Awards• Revenues associated to additional Financial

Transmission Rights made possible by the Upgrades


13

PJM Cost Allocation

Rolled-in to Zonal Rate– Required Transmission Enhancements

• Based on Regional Transmission Planning Protocol - Schedule 6 of the PJM Operating Agreement

• Based on Coordinated System Plan pursuant to the PJM-MISO Joint operating Agreement

• Addresses both Reliability and Economic Upgrades


14

PJM Cost Allocation

Rolled-in to Zonal Rate– Reliability Upgrades - facilities required to

maintain system within reliability criteria– Economic Upgrades - facilities required to

alleviate transmission congestion which can not be appropriately hedged


15

PJM Cost Allocation

Rolled-in to Zonal Rate– Construction, Ownership and Cost

responsibility of Upgrades is designated by PJM to one or more Transmission Owners

– Cost responsibility is assigned to specific customers or groups of customers within the PJM zone(s) that receives the benefits of the Upgrades


16

PJM Cost AllocationParticipant Funded

– Interconnection Customers pay 100%• Attachment Facilities - facilities necessary to

connect customer to grid• Local Upgrades - facilities required to maintain

reliable local operations caused by the interconnection

• Network Upgrades - transmission facilities required "But For" this interconnection to maintain reliable operations


17

PJM Cost AllocationParticipant Funded

– Merchant Transmission • Requested by Participant but not required in the Regional

Transmission Plan

• Funded 100% by Participant

– Interconnection Customers and Merchant Participants are eligible to receive the revenue rights derived from the incremental Available Transmission Capability provided from the Upgrades


18

SPP Cost AllocationRolled-in to Region-wide Rate and Zonal Rate

– Base Plan Upgrades required for reliability• Included in the SPP Transmission Expansion Plan

• Network upgrades associated with new or revised Designated Resources if three conditions are met1. Commitment to DR is 5 years or more

2. DR shall not exceed 125% of Customer projected peak load

3. Upgrade cost is less than Safe Harbor Cost Limit - $180K multiplied by capacity value

• If conditions not met then may request a waiver


19

SPP Cost AllocationRolled-in to Region-wide Rate and Zonal Rate

– If Base Plan Upgrades are less than $100k then cost is allocated to the zonal rate where project is located

– If Base Plan Upgrades are greater than $100k then cost is allocated as follows:• 33% to the region-wide charge• 67% to the zonal charge allocated to the zones

based on MW-mile benefits


20

SPP Cost AllocationParticipant Funded

– Costs in excess of the Safe Harbor Limit are directly assigned to the Transmission Customer

– Economic Upgrades are elective upgrades and construction must voluntarily be paid for one or more entities


21


– Requested Upgrades are normally associated with transmission service requests• All requests during a specific timeframe are aggregated

and an optimal upgrade plan is developed to accommodate all ATC requests

• Costs for a given upgrade are allocated to each request which has an incremental power flow impact on the upgrade on a pro-rata basis in proportion to the total of all incremental impacts by requests in the aggregate study on the upgrade


22


– Transmission Customers and other entities that pay for Economic Upgrades, Requested Upgrades and/or pay costs above the Safe Harbor limit are entitled to receive transmission revenue credits

– SPP is currently preparing a FERC filing on proposed modifications related to the pro forma Large Generator Interconnection Procedure and Interconnection Agreement

• This filing may change the cost allocation for network upgrades associated with generator interconnections


23

Entergy Cost Allocation

New Transmission Pricing Proposal approved conditionally by FERC on April 24, 2006

Part of the Entergy Independent Coordinator of Transmission (ICT) Proposal still pending final FERC approval

SPP has been selected as the Entergy ICT


24


Rolled-in to Region-wide Rate– Reliability Transmission Upgrade

• Not required by a generation interconnection• Needed for continued reliability

– Market Efficiency Upgrade• Not required by a generation interconnection• Designed to reduce the bulk power system costs to

load system-wide


25


Rolled-in to Region-wide Rate– Base Plan Upgrades

• Necessary for long-term firm service commitments and maintaining reliable service for all LSEs in the Entergy region

• Costs recovered through the Entergy transmission revenue requirement in their Tariff


26

Entergy Cost AllocationRolled-in to Region-wide Rate

– Base Plan Upgrade categories• Long-term Firm Pt-to-Pt service commitments

• Network Integration Transmission Service commitments

• Generation commitments under the Network Resource Integration Service

• Maintain standards of safety and reliability applicable to the Entergy transmission system

• Meet service commitments that have degrade due to circumstances beyond Entergy's control


27

Entergy Cost AllocationParticipant Funded

– Supplemental Upgrades are subject to "higher of" pricing rules• If revenues exceed costs then costs will be

included in revenue requirement• If revenues are less than costs then service is

charged on an incremental basis


28


– Supplemental Upgrade categories• New generator interconnection costs under the Energy

Resource Interconnection Service (ERIS)• Generators requesting new Network Resource Integration

Service (NRIS)• Generators requesting designation as a Network Resource

under Network Integration Transmission Service (NITS)• New or expanded Firm Pt-to-Pt transmission service• Investments requested to reduce transmission congestion• Investments requested to increase transfer capability


29


– Supplemental Upgrade Rights• Schedule firm Pt-to-Pt over the duration of the reservation

without paying congestion• Deliver from Designated Resources to load without paying

congestion• Request Pt-to-Pt or designate a generator as a NITS resource

up to the ERIS requested• Allow a generator to be designated as a Network Resource to

any network customer after it passes the deliverability test for NITS


30

Next Steps ?

• Research other cost allocation solutions– MISO– Transcos– Vertically Integrated Utilities– Others

• Review and discussion at next OSC

osc meeting april 27, 2006 1 transmission cost allocation overview

Documents

firm transmission rights

nonvoltage level criteria

point of interconnection

reliability upgrades

region wide raterolled

economic upgradesincluded

economic delivery

kv capital additions