Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2003 PD Índices Distribución
2003 PD Índices Distribución
2, APRIL 2003
449
I. INTRODUCTION
SURVEY of U.S. utilities was taken to determine the calculation of interruption information that is then used to
calculate reliability indices. From this survey, significant insight
was gained about practices used to record and measure the data
used to calculate reliability indices. This paper will outline, explain the purpose of, and show the response to the survey. The
information received in the main topic areas of the survey will
be discussed with further information regarding the issues. The
process for calculating the information used in interruption measures can vary greatly. The next section will examine what similarities exist between utilities and discuss ways to standardize
comparison between utilities that use like processes for calculating the information behind the reliability measures. The final
section will provide a conclusion on how to gain further consistency among utilities and drive consistency between utilities.
450
451
(i.e., earthquakes in California, tornadoes in the Midwest, hurricanes in Florida). Where regulatory bodies are involved, the
criteria becomes more stringent and tends to match the 10% or
more of the customers impacted and extraordinary events that
are outside of the utilities control. In most of these cases, regulators allow these events to be excluded from the data used to
calculate reliability statistics.
It is generally felt that the utilities do not design their systems for these events due to the magnitude of cost that would
be imposed on the ratepayers. The events noted were: earthquakes, floods, forest fires, hurricanes, ice storms, tornadoes,
tsunamis, off distribution system events (transmission and generation), and other natural events. It seems that the regulatory
bodies are tending to drive more consistency in this area.
E. Computerized Interruption Reporting and Reporting to
Customers
Question 1Does your utility have a computerized interruption program that the interruption data is input into, and generates the reliability indices information? Y or N.
Answer 1Of the 78 utilities responding, 73 (94%) said that
they have a computerized interruption program that the interruption data is input into, and generates the reliability indices
information.
Question 2Can you provide historical interruption information to a customer upon request? Y or N.
Answer 2Of the 75 utilities responding, 73 (97%) said that
they can provide historical interruption information to a customer upon request. However, it is clear that not all interruptions can be communicated to customers since not all interruptions are stored in the utilities interruption databases noted in
Section IV-C, which discusses at what level interruptions are
reported in the interruption database.
Discussion: A high percentage of utilities use a computerized model to generate the reliability indices. The cause codes
used to classify interruptions by utilities are a major source
of uncertainty. Tree interruptions, lighting, bird or animal, and
car pole are some of the typical types used, but unknown and
catch-all categories usually make any analysis of the information more subjective than a true root cause analysis. The variability in the data source and quality of data best classifies reliability analysis as qualitative reliability based upon field experience and accuracy of the targeted improvement. Reliability
programs typically rely upon this qualitative approach to measure program effectiveness. The use of a computerized system
may allow consistency and better comparisons of data between
years, but the lack of quality input data limits the usefulness of
the analysis.
There also seems to be a direct link between the use of a
computerized system and the inclusion of step restoration (discussed in Section IV-B). Step restoration is a process that is
better handled by a computerized system to calculate SAIDI.
There were 47 utilities accounting for step restoration while 73
of the utilities have computerized systems. It is thought the 26
other utilities rely on a computerized system using a spreadsheet-based system to keep track of the data. Also, knowing 47
utilities have a computerized system and 73 utilities can provide
452
data to customers gives further evidence that the 26 other utilities are likely using a spreadsheet-based system versus a more
intelligent system that mimics the switching completed in the
restoration process. Generally, the more sophisticated the computerized system is, the more likely the data are consistent and
closer to actual system performance.
TABLE I
SIMILARITIES AMONG RESPONDING UTILITIES
AND
WAYS
TO
VI. CONCLUSION
Regulatory agencies are driving for consistency between
utilities. These agencies are also focusing on ensuring that
industry restructuring is accomplished without deterioration of
reliability. The IEEE needs to incorporate a process behind [1]
to ensure that consistent data calculation processes are being
used with [1] to calculate the reliability indices. For reliability
index comparisons between utilities, IEEE should consider
defining utility groupings for comparison purpose that are
based upon how the data are collected and calculated by the
utility.
IEEE Definition Areas Needed:
consistent definition of a major event;
generate reliability indices for the transmission/generation
system separately from the distribution system;
consistent definition of what is to be included in the data
used to calculate the reliability indices (i.e., exclude planned
interruptions, momentaries, etc.);
define what characteristics of a utilitys interruption data
calculations should be reviewed prior to comparing the reliability indices with those of another utility. If the characteristics
do not match, then the comparison is not applicable;
group and compare only like utilities that calculate the data
used in [1] reliability indices calculations;
the definitions already in use in [1] should be included to
ensure consistency;
new measures such as number of sustained interruptions per
mile or value of service should be defined by [1] to gain further
consistency.
REFERENCES
[1] Trial-Use Guide for Electric Power Distribution Reliability Indices,
IEEE Std. 1366-1998.
Dan J. Pearson (M85) was born in Portland, OR, in January 1958. He received
the B.S.E.E. degree from Oregon State University, Corvallis.
He has been with Portland General Electric and Pacific Gas and Electric,
Portland, OR. His utility specialties are transmission and distribution reliability
and capacity.
453