1. Steady-State Analysis of New England’s Interstate Pipeline Delivery Capability
Presentation to the
MA Electric Restructuring Roundtable
February 16, 2001
Richard Levitan
Levitan & Associates, Inc.

2. New England Natural Gas Supply Sources

3. New England Natural Gas Infrastructure
New England’s Major Interstate Pipelines
Iroquois • Portland
Algonquin • Maritimes & Northeast
Tennessee
Existing pipeline delivery capacity = 3.8 Bcf/d.
Daily LNG sendout capability at Everett = Bcf/d.
Expansion of Bcf/d for 1,550 MW Sithe New Mystic Station, possibly Island End
About 1.4 Bcf/d peak day deliverability behind the citygates
Liquids via truck  0.1 Bcf/d

4. New England’s Interstate Pipelines
Western Canadian Gas
thru TCPL, Iroquois
and PNGTS
Eastern Canadian
Gas thru M&N
thru Tennessee
Gulf Coast Gas
thru Algonquin
And Tennessee
LNG from
Algeria and
Trinidad
Tennessee
Iroquois
PNGTS
M&N
Algonquin

5. Primary Interstate Pipelines

6. Interstate Transportation Market Dynamics
14 pipeline projects placed in-service during 1999-’00
+ 2.0 Bcf/d in the Greater Northeast
New Pipelines in New England, M&N and PNGTS, result in MMcf/d (0.615 Bcf/d), or about 3800 MW
Counterflow capability through Dracut  Tennessee
Pressure and flow benefits improve network reliability
New LNG supplies from Trinidad
Commoditization of the “Supply Chain”
Repackaged Btu services • Synthetics
Increased liquidity • Risk management

7. Electric Assumptions - Reference Case
Reference case load growth forecast thru 2005
7,500 MW (winter) of new capacity by 2005
200 MW of capacity attrition CELT Report
Net Interchange:
firm contracts per 2000 CELT Report - (NY, NB, HQ)
modeling of post-HQ FEC deliveries - (HQ Phase II)
modeling of NEPOOL sales via proposed new interconnections (cross-sound cable)

8. Electric Assumptions - High Case
High case load growth forecast thru 2005
11,500 MW (winter) of new capacity by 2005
4,000 MW (winter) of capacity attrition
Net Interchange - Higher than Reference case:
firm contracts per 2000 CELT Report - (NY, NB, HQ)
modeling of post-HQ FEC deliveries - (HQ Phase II)
modeling of NEPOOL sales via proposed new interconnections (cross-sound cable & Bridgeport cable)

9. Merchant Entry in New England (High Case)

10. Steady-State Highlights
No pipeline delivery constraints on a peak day in Winter
No summer peak day pipeline deliverability constraints through 2005
Delivery constraints are apparent in Winter 2003
Shortfall in gas requirements  1,755 MW out of 8,946 MW assumed
There are 71 gas-fired units, 51 of which are dual fueled
Delivery constraints intensify by Winter 2005
Shortfall in gas requirements  3,226 MW out of 11,579 MW assumed
There are 75 gas-fired units, 54 of which are dual fueled
Theoretical mitigation potential thru back-up fuel

11. Projected Shortfalls in Gas Requirements (MW)*
2001
2003
2005
* 6970 Btu/kWh

12. Summary of Peak Day Scenarios – Total Regional Demand vs
Summary of Peak Day Scenarios – Total Regional Demand vs. System Capacity

13. Steady-State Modeling Results
Year
Scenario
Forecast
Pipeline Demand (MMcf/d)
Unserved Merchant
LDCs
Merchant Generators
Volumes
(MMcf/d)
Capacity
(MW)
2001
Winter Peak Day
High
2617
751
---
2003
Reference
2837
872
189
1164
Winter 60-Day
804 72
443
880
285
1755
861
191
1176
2005
907
241
1484
782 76
468
906
524
3226
867
513
3159
Summer Peak Day
406
1501
Unserved merchant capacity does not take into account back-up fuel capabilities.

14. ISO Contingencies Loss of Major Gas-Fired Generating Unit
No significant loss of pressure or flows
Interstate pipelines have the ability to divert and/or re-route gas along the 1100-mile transportation path
Loss of 2000 MW HydroQuebec Line
Winter Peak Day - System cannot transport any additional gas
Summer Peak Day - More than sufficient pipeline capacity to support replacement gas fueled generation

15. Gas Contingency Scenario 1
Increased horsepower requirements at other compressor stations
Fall in delivery pressures to levels that could disrupt plant operations
No observed impact on other pipelines
Available compression capacity at Burrillville on Algonquin derated from 11,400 hp to 5,700 hp

16. Gas Contingency Scenario 2
Available compression capacity at Agawam on Tennessee derated from 9,760 hp to 3,253 hp
Downstream compressor stations able to make-up for loss
No unacceptably low delivery pressures for merchant plants observed
No impact on other pipelines

17. Gas Contingency Scenario 3
7 miles of Tennessee’s 36-inch line at NY-MA border removed
Downstream compressors able to compensate for pressure loss

18. Mitigation Potential Case New Entry (MW) Back-up Fuel Capability
Peak Day Gas Available w/ Back-up Fuel Use
(MMcf)
Peak Day Transport Shortfall
Excess or Shortfall w/ Back-up Fuel Use
(MMcf/d)
Reference
7,551
2,263
382.5
241.0
141.5
High
11,579
5,890
971.5
524.0
447.5

19. Recommendations
Establish quality of interstate transportation arrangements
Advocate the streamlining of FERC’s pipeline certification process
Promote coordination of power and natural gas scheduling protocols
Increase understanding of merchant generators’ fuel-switching capabilities

20. Levitan & Associates, Inc. www. levitan
Levitan & Associates, Inc. Tel: