1. Local Area Planning Update to TRANSAC – March 15, 2017
20pt Font – bold for presentation name, regular for date
Local Area Planning Update to TRANSAC – March 15, 2017

2. Describe problem conditions
Decision Rule - Matrix
Decision Rule Matrix
Problem:
Identify the Problem or event
Mitigation:
Briefly describe the mitigation proposed
Raw
Rank
Units
Data
Factor
Comment
Consequences of Event
MW Affected
Load
Note 1
Describe load lost, voltage or thermal problems, etc
Risk of Event
None
Describe problem conditions
Note 2
Describe under what conditions the problem occurs: normal, outage, load level, seasons affected, etc
Overall Risk
Conseq X Risk =
Result
Cost
TPV Rev Req
$ Cost --
List major cost components
Solution Duration
Years
Cost/Duration = $/year
Discussion
Any other notes or comments on problem or proposed mitigation.
Note 1: Calculate and enter consequences factor per details on priority matrix
Note 2: Calculate and enter risk factor per details on priority matrix
Title, 24pt font, bold, white
Body Copy/Bulleted Text, 22pt font, black (adjust as necessary)

3. Occurs now under normal and outage conditions at peak loads
Decision Rule - Example
Decision Rule Matrix - Example
Problem:
Low Voltage Helena - Three Rivers Area 100 kV System
Mitigation:
Option A: Cap Banks at E Helena, Three Rivers, Broadwater
Raw
Rank
Units
Data
Factor
Comment
Consequence of event
MW Affected 53
105
No risk of lost load, but voltages below FERC 715 minimums under normal system conditions, peak load.
Risk
Prob, Freq of event
Occurs now under normal and outage conditions at peak loads
0.25
Because problem occurs now under normal system conditions, but only at peak load, risk factor is 25%.
Con. X Risk
None
105 X .25
26.3
Cost
TPV Rev Req
$2.1M --
50 MVAR E Helena, 25 MVAR Three Rivers, 10 MVAR at $25K/MVAR
Solution Duration
Years
15+
Cost/Duration = 2.1/15 = $0.14M/year
Discussion
Installation of these cap banks provide a valid solution through E Helena and Three Rivers subs well developed and should accommodate cap banks, but new sub may be required at Broadwater or close vicinity. Solution could be staged in over time.
Title, 24pt font, bold, white
Body Copy/Bulleted Text, 22pt font, black (adjust as necessary)

4. Prioritizing Critical Problems
Consequence Factors
Consequences Factor =
(Stability + Thermal + Voltage Problems Factors) X Peak Load Affected
Consequences Rating Factors
Stability and Thermal Problems
Voltage Problems
Compliance Factors
Extreme – Interconnection wide Impacts, Widespread Outages 10
Outage
Yes
NERC TPL
1.5
Severe – Division Wide Impacts, multiple outages 5
Very Low < 80% No
NWE 1
Moderate – Localized Impacts, single outages 2
Low < FERC 715
2 - 3*
Voltage factor is 2 for violation of continuous limits; 3 for violation of emergency limits.
Minor – Small Impacts, no outages
High
None – No problems observed
None 0 
Note, compliance factor included in ranking calculation

5. Prioritizing Critical Problems
Risk & Likelihood Factors
Risk Factor =
TPL Category Factor X Seasonal Cond. Factor X Other Cond. Factor
Risk and Likelihood Factors
TPL Category
Seasonal
Other
Timing Factor P0
Normal
S Peak
0.12 1
Occurs under N-0
Planning Horizon (Yr)
Weight
P12
T Line
W Peak
Major
Long Line > 30 miles 5
P13
XFMR
SWPeak
0.25
Moderate
0.5
Med Line, miles 3
P22
Bus Fault
Light
Minor
0.1
Short Line < 10 miles 10
P23/P24
PCB Fault
Average
0.75
Sub
0.033
Substation Equipment 15 P6
TL-TL
All
1.00
Note, timing factor included in ranking calculation

6. Consequences Factor X Risk Factor X Compliance Factor X Timing Factor
Ranking Score
Ranking Score
Ranking Score =
Consequences Factor X Risk Factor X Compliance Factor X Timing Factor
Ranking Score (referred to as Expected Consequences in past plans) is used to rank and prioritize problems found. Additional factors have been added to weight the ranking score, taking into account:
NERC compliance requirements (rank higher)
Timing of a problem (far into the future could be ranked lower)
Different contingencies that create the same problem (a problem that could occur due to two different outages is ranked higher…risk is greater).
Additional Seasonal variations or other factors.

7. Uncertainty Scenarios
Suggestions:
High Renewable Resources System Wide
Existing Projects dispatched to capacity
Extreme Localized Growth
Bozeman area extensively studied in 2016
Other?
Loss of Thermal Plants heavily studied already
Loss of Hydros studied recently as well

8. Next Steps
Quarters 6 & 7
Finalize Mitigation Plans under review or in progress
Run Uncertainty Scenarios
Perform Reactive Resource Assessment
Quarter 8
Send out Draft of “The Book” for stakeholder review
Conduct Public Meetings
Finalize “The Book” and close out the 2016/2017 Local Area Planning Cycle

9. Questions?
Text, 60pt font, white

10. End Slide