Decision on Atlantic-Lincoln 115kV Transmission Project Gary - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

decision on atlantic lincoln 115kv transmission project
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Decision on Atlantic-Lincoln 115kV Transmission Project Gary - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Decision on Atlantic-Lincoln 115kV Transmission Project Gary DeShazo, Director of Regional Transmission - North Board of Governors Meeting General Session May 21-23, 2008 Management is requesting approval of the Management is requesting


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Decision on Atlantic-Lincoln 115kV Transmission Project

Gary DeShazo, Director of Regional Transmission - North

Board of Governors Meeting General Session May 21-23, 2008

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Management is requesting approval of the Management is requesting approval of the Atlantic Atlantic-

  • Lincoln transmission project

Lincoln transmission project

This project is needed to meet federal reliability standards Standards are mandatory under the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) Estimated cost of $70M Composed of three components implemented in steps All components need to be in-service by June 2010

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

The Project is located in the Rocklin The Project is located in the Rocklin-

  • Lincoln

Lincoln city areas city areas

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

This one This one-

  • line diagram shows how the Project is

line diagram shows how the Project is integrated into the system integrated into the system

60 kV Ultra Rock Formica Pleasant Grove 230 kV Atlantic SPI-Lincoln Lincoln Sierra Pine Del Mar Taylor Rocklin Placer Penryn 115 kV 60 kV Gold Hill Rio Oso Horseshoe Flint Newcastle Halsey Auburn Mt Quarries Wise Drum Dutch Flat 1 Chicago Park PH Higgins Bell Dutch Flat 2 Brunswick 115 kV 230 kV 115 kV 230 kV 115 kV

Atlantic – Lincoln Long Term Plan

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

The project area is impacted by load growth and The project area is impacted by load growth and “ “interconnected interconnected” ” system needs system needs

Long-term planning investigation initiated by the ISO in 2003 Load growth area of 4% to 5% annually Five other alternatives were assessed The preferred alternative selected by the CAISO: The highest load serving capability Produces the required level of reliability Least environmental issues Can be implemented without CPCN or GO131D – therefore shortening the construction time Best overall benefits (cost-technical-environmental)