Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword or section
Like this
0Activity
P. 1
Feb 15 PFeb 15 PSC filing re Dunkirk mothball.pdf

Feb 15 PFeb 15 PSC filing re Dunkirk mothball.pdf

Ratings: (0)|Views: 9 |Likes:
Published by Matthew Leonard
Case 12-E-0577 – Proceeding on Motion of the Commission to Examine Repowering Alternatives to Utility Transmission Reinforcements – Estimated Cost of Transmission Upgrades
Case 12-E-0577 – Proceeding on Motion of the Commission to Examine Repowering Alternatives to Utility Transmission Reinforcements – Estimated Cost of Transmission Upgrades

More info:

Published by: Matthew Leonard on Mar 19, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/19/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 
Carlos A. GavilondoSenior Counsel II
February 15, 2013
Via Electronic Filing
Hon. Jeffrey Cohen, Acting SecretaryState of New York Public Service CommissionOffice of the SecretaryThree Empire State PlazaAlbany, NY 12223-1350
Re: Case 12-E-0577 Proceeding on Motion of the Commission to ExamineRepowering Alternatives to Utility Transmission Reinforcements – Estimated Cost of Transmission Upgrades
Dear Acting Secretary Cohen:Pursuant to the Commission’s January 18, 2013
Order Instituting Proceeding and  Requiring Evaluation of Generation Repowering 
(“
 January 18 Order 
”) in this case, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation d/b/a National Grid (“National Grid” or the“Company”) hereby submits information relating to estimated costs of anticipatedtransmission system upgrades to address long-term reliability needs resulting fromretirement of the Dunkirk Power LLC generating facility (“Dunkirk”) located in Dunkirk, New York.In the
 January 18 Order 
, the Commission noted that the Company wasimplementing transmission reinforcements to reduce reliance on Reliability SupportServices (“RSS”) arrangements for some or all of the generation in the intermediate-term(one - four years), and directed National Grid to submit information on the anticipatedcosts of transmission reinforcements to address the entire long-term impact of theDunkirk mothballing that could take four or more years to complete.
 Id.
at 2. TheCompany has identified the following five transmission reinforcement projects to addressthe long-term reliability concerns from the shutdown of Dunkirk:
 
Addition of two 33.3 MVAr capacitor banks on the two Dunkirk 115kV bus sections($2.5 million).
 
Addition of a second 75 MVAr capacitor bank at the Huntley 115kV switchyard ($1.4million).
 
Reconductoring of the two 115kV lines between Five Mile Road and Homer Hill, eachapproximately 7.4 miles in length ($18.0 million).
300 Erie Blvd. West, Syracuse, New York 13202T: 315/428-5862

F: 315/ 428-5355

carlos.gavilondo@nationalgrid.com
      
 
 www.nationalgrid.com
 
Acting Secretary CohenFebruary 15, 2013Page 2 of 3
 
Reconductoring of one mile of the Niagara – Gardenville #180 line ($4.0 million).
 
Reconductoring of 14 miles of the Packard – Erie #181 line ($37.1 million).Implementing the foregoing projects is expected to address all N-1 problems and greatly mitigate N-1-1 exposure
 
resulting from the shutdown of Dunkirk through at least 2021.The first three projects (Dunkirk and Huntley capacitor banks and reconductoring between Five Mile Road and Homer Hill) are included in the Company’s current capitalinvestment plan, and are planned to be in service within three years. The total costs of thesethree projects ($21.9 million) reflect conceptual grade engineering estimates (-25% to +50%).Implementation of these three projects is necessary to enable the Company to eliminate relianceon RSS arrangements.The last two projects (reconductoring on the #180 and #181 lines) are not in theCompany’s current capital plan; however, the Company estimates these projects could be placedinto service no later than 2018 - 2019. The total costs of these two projects ($41.1 million)reflect investment grade engineering estimates (-50% to +200%). These two projects areintended to address additional, less severe thermal overload conditions resulting from theDunkirk shutdown. Using operational measures to address the issues in the short term can beaccepted on a temporary basis, but the issues must be mitigated in the long-term. These two projects are anticipated to be included in the analysis comparing the required transmissionupgrades and the Dunkirk repowering proposal.Detailed information regarding the need for the five projects is set forth in the September 26, 2012 study titled “Review of Dunkirk Mothball Notice – Part 2; Review of AdditionalSolutions Associated with Dunkirk Mothball Notice” (“Dunkirk Part 2 Study”). A redacted copyof the Dunkirk Part 2 Study is included as Attachment 1 to this letter, and a confidential versionwill be filed with the Records Access Officer. To the extent there are other significant changesaffecting the transmission system beyond those studied in 2012, additional reinforcements may be needed.In the
 January 18 Order 
, the Commission also directed National Grid to solicitinformation from Dunkirk about the costs and benefits of repowering that facility, and toevaluate the repowering against proposed long-term transmission alternatives to addressthe long-term reliability concerns and provide a report and recommendation to theCommission based on that evaluation. The Company expects to issue an RFP to Dunkirk  by February 19 requesting information on the potential repowering of that facility. TheCompany anticipates receiving information from Dunkirk by March 19, 2013. TheCompany will evaluate the information received from Dunkirk to compare therepowering alternative with the identified transmission upgrades and will submit a reportand recommendation to the Commission based on its analysis by April 18, 2013.
 
Acting Secretary CohenFebruary 15, 2013Page 3 of 3Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you for your attention to this matter.Respectfully submitted,
 /s/ Carlos A. Gavilondo
 Carlos A. Gavilondocc: Denise GerbschTammy MitchellCase 12-E-0577 Active Parties List (via DMM)

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->