SPP-MISO Annual Issues Review SPP-MISO IPSAC2/26/2019

1

Overview

• Recap of CSP Needs • M2M Payment History

• Stakeholder Submitted Issues• 2019 CSP Initiation

• SPP-MISO Staff Recommendation • IPSAC Endorsement to the JPC • JPC Process

• Next Steps

2

Review of CSP Needs

3

SPP and MISO – Needs Coordination & CSP

• MISO and SPP coordinated needs from the 2019 ITP and MTEP 19 to determine the subset of regional needs along the seam most appropriate to highlight in a potential 2019 SPP-MISO CSP

• CSP needs are identified for the purpose of providing the IPSAC transparency and a “picture” of the SPP and MISO regional needs along the seam

• “Joint Needs” refers to the same or similar needs that were identified in both the SPP and MISO regional processes

*Interregional Projects could be approved to address regional needs not included in the CSP needs highlighted at the IPSAC

4

5

2019 SPP-MISO “Joint” Economic Needs Flowgates Identified by SPP and MISO

INFO SPP ITP (Congestion Score in Thousands) MISO MTEP (Total Shadow Price) Gross M2Mpayments exchanged

between RTOsMonitored Element 2021 2024 F1 2024 F2 2029 F1 2029 F2 2023

Weighted2028

Weighted2033

Weighted

Neosho to Riverton 50 40 43 30 44 281 281 168 $ 26,963,285

Kerr to Maid Ckt #2 285 190 229 184 302 299 250 259 $ -

South Shreveport to Wallace Lake - 3 5 188 256 1 188 266 $ -

Hugo to Valliant 3 9 41 29 94 78 98 84 $ -

Sioux City to Sioux City 14 45 58 60 107 28 58 41 $ -

Marshall to Smittyville 50 40 43 30 44 96 65 79 $ -

6

Note: 1. Congestion score and total shadow price are the metrics used by SPP and MISO respectively within their regional processes for economic

congestion issue identification2. Future Weighted total shadow price was used for results from MISO MTEP economic analysis (MTEP analysis includes 4 equally weighted futures)3. M2M payments are from January 2016 – June 2018

7

Flowgates Identified by SPP and MISO

INFO SPP ITP (Congestion Score) MISO MTEP (Total Shadow Price) Gross M2Mpayments exchanged

between RTOsMonitored Element 2021 2024

F12024

F2 2029 F1 2029 F2

2023 Weighted

2028 Weighted

2033 Weighted

Raun to Tekamah 0 0 0 2 1 178 290 222 $ 545,685

Patmos to Fulton - 0 0 0 1 22 53 72 $ 501,239

Bull Shoals to Midway Jordan - 1 1 1 6 9 33 167 $ 60,298

Note: 1. Congestion score and total shadow price are the metrics used by SPP and MISO respectively within their regional processes for economic

congestion issue identification2. Future Weighted total shadow price was used for results from MISO MTEP economic analysis (MTEP analysis includes 4 equally weighted futures)3. M2M payments are from January 2016 – June 2018

MISO MTEP Seams Needs

SPP ITP Seams Needs

8

Flowgates Identified by SPP and MISO

INFO SPP ITP (Congestion Score in Thousands) MISO MTEP (Total Shadow Price) Gross M2Mpayments exchanged

between RTOsMonitored Element 2021 2024 F1 2024 F2 2029 F1 2029 F2 2023

Weighted2028

Weighted2033

Weighted

Hankinson to Wahpeton 0 65 92 172 419 0 1 7 $ -

South Brown to Russet - - 157 18 349 - - - $ -

Granite Falls to Marshall Tap 6 10 17 77 42 16 11 17 $ -

Grand Forks to Falconer - 2 7 12 105 - - - $ -

Note: 1. Congestion score and total shadow price are the metrics used by SPP and MISO respectively within their regional processes for economic

congestion issue identification2. Future Weighted total shadow price was used for results from MISO MTEP economic analysis (MTEP analysis includes 4 equally weighted futures)3. M2M payments are from January 2016 – June 2018

Stakeholder Submitted Issues

9

AEP Submitted Issues

10

Monitored Element/Area/IssueIncluded in

CSP?Gross M2M payments

exchanged between RTOs Notes

Fulton – Patmos (ESI) 115kV for loss of Longwood – Sarepta (ESI) 345kV Yes $ 501,239

MISO: Patmos – Fulton identified as top congested flowgate

SPP: Minimal binding in models (below 1.2 k$ in all scenarios)

Turk 138/115kV T2 for loss of ANO – Ft. Smith 500kV (OGE) or Turk Unit #1 No $ 79,780*

MISO: Minimal binding in models (2028 average 0.22 k$)

SPP: Minimal binding in models for similar flowgate

Neosho – Riverton 161 kV for loss of Neosho to Blackberry 345 kV Yes $ 26,963,285 Neosho – Riverton identified as joint

top congested flowgate

Neosho – Blackberry 345 kV for loss of Waverly to La Cygne 345 kV No $ -

Minimal or no binding in both MISO and SPP models; but tied to Neosho-

Riverton issue

* M2M payments observed for the same constraint under different contingency

KCP&L & Westar, Evergy Companies Submitted Issues

11

Monitored Element/Area/IssueIncluded in

CSP?Gross M2M payments

exchanged between RTOs Notes

High wind in MISO North Yes N/A

All these scenarios are studied as a part of regional planning processes

High wind in both SPP and MISO North Yes N/A

High north-to-south flows Yes N/A

High west-to-east flows Yes N/A

Liberty Submitted Issues

12

Monitored Element/Area/IssueIncluded in

CSP?Gross M2M payments

exchanged between RTOs Notes

SWPP_5375 NEORIVNEOBLC flowgate Yes $ 26,963,285 Neosho – Riverton identified as joint top congested flowgate

OPPD Submitted Issues

13

Monitored Element/Area/IssueIncluded in CSP?

Gross M2M payments exchanged between RTOs Notes

NE Nebraska/NW Iowa area issues Yes$ 545,685 (Raun – Tekamah)

$ - (Sioux City – Sioux City)

Raun-Tekamah (MTEP) and Sioux City – Sioux City (ITP) identified as

top congested flowgates in CSP

Council Bluffs – Omaha (multiple flowgates) No $ 1,181,740*

MISO: Minimal binding in models (2028 average of 0.13 k$)

SPP: Minimal binding in models (below 10 k$ in all scenarios)

Nebraska City – Omaha (multiple flowgates) No $ 1,671,551*MISO: No binding in models

SPP: Minimal binding in models (below 6 k$ in all scenarios)

Western OPPD (70th&Bluffs-S1214 161kV line flo Wagener-S3454 345kV) No $ -

MISO: Minimal binding in models (2028 average of 0.21 k$)

SPP: Minimal or no binding in models (below 2.5 k$ in all

scenarios)* M2M payments for top area flowgates only

Entergy Submitted Issues

• Entergy provided feedback regarding the study of historical congested flowgates for a potential new project type

• Full feedback document is posted with IPSAC materials

• Historical M2M based projects are not being considered for the scope of the 2019 CSP Study

14

2019 CSP Initiation

15

Recommendation and JPC Vote

• SPP and MISO Staff recommend performing a CSP in 2019• IPSAC Endorsement

• Any objections?

• JPC Process• The JPC will meet no less than twice per year

• MISO will serve as Chairman for 2019-2020• JPC will meet in March 2019 to vote on performing a 2019 CSP

• Each Party is permitted one vote• For approval each Party must vote in the affirmative• Provide IPSAC the outcome of the JPC vote via email

16

Next Steps

• Solution window closes March 1, 2019

• SPP and MISO to put together 2019 CSP Scope

• Schedule next IPSAC date• Tentative agenda:

• Provide a JOA filing update• Review Scope of CSP • Review submitted solution ideas

17

Activity Feb Mar Apr MayAnnual Issues Review

Stakeholder solution submissions (Closes March 1)

JPC Vote on CSP

CSP Scope DevelopmentSPP and MISO solution evaluation and coordination

Initial review of benefits

IPSAC Meeting – CSP update (tentative)

Appendix

18

Neosho to Riverton 161 kV FLO Blackberry/RP2POI02 to Neosho 345 kV

• Main Drivers: • West to East Bulk Transfers• Impacted by Load and

Generation in Corridor• Loss of 345kV causes overloads

on the 161kV system

• Additional Info: • Related to Eastern/Central OK

Target Area Flowgates• Current-day Operational Issue

19

Kerr to Maid 2 161 kV FLO Kerr to Maid 1 161 kV

20

• Main Drivers: • West to East Bulk Transfers• Impacted by Generation in

Corridor• Loss of one circuit causes the

other circuit to overload

• Additional Info: • Related to SE KS/SW MO Target

Area Flowgates• Current-day Operational Issue

S Shreveport to Wallace Lake 138 kV FLO Fort Humbug to Trichel 138 kV

21

• Main Drivers:• Impacted by Load Growth• Loss of CON causes power to

loop around the 138 kV system, utilizing the MON to transfer gen West to East

• Additional Info:• South Shreveport to Wallace

Lake 138 kV FLO 3 separate 138kV contingencies

Hugo Power Plant to Valliant 138 kV FLO Valliant to Hugo 345 kV

22

• Main Drivers:• West to East Bulk Transfers• Loss of 345kV causes overloads

on the 138kV system

• Additional Info:• Related to S Brown to Russett

FLO Caney Creek to Little City 138kV Need

• Current-day Operational Issue

Sioux City to Sioux City 230 kV FLO Raun to Sioux City 345 kV

23

• Main Drivers:• SPP:

• South to North Bulk Transfers• Loss of 345kV causes overloads on

230kV System• MISO:

• Existing queue and future projected wind driving north to south flows

• Additional Info:• Potentially related to Raun –

Tekamah 161kV flowgateidentified in MTEP models

Marshall to Smittyville 115 kV FLO Harbine to Steele 115 kV

24

• Main Drivers:• Impacted by Generation in

corridor

• Additional Info:• Related Reliability Needs (SPP):

• Marshall to Smittyville 115 kV FLO Harbine to Steele 115 kV

• Bailey to Seneca 115 kV FLO Harbine to Steele 115 kV

• Smittyville to Bailey 115 kV FLO Harbine to Steele 115 kV

Raun to Tekamah 161 kV

25

• Congestion Drivers: • Loss of the Raun – Sarpy County 345 kV line

overloads low voltage lines in the same flow corridor

• Existing and future wind generation located in southwest Minnesota (Split Rock, Buffalo Ridge area) increases north to south flow on Iowa/Nebraska border.

• Potentially related to Sioux City – Sioux City 230kV flowgate

• MISO Market Congestion (Jan 2016 – July 2018):

• Market-to-market payments (k$): 538• Total binding hours in day-ahead market: 301• Total binding hours in real-time market: 10

Fulton to Patmos 115 kV

26

• Congestion Drivers: • Loss of Sarepta-Longwood 345 kV line into

Arkansas overloads low voltage facilities• Retirement and siting assumptions in MTEP

process increase projected congestion

• MISO Market Congestion (Jan 2016 –July 2018):

• Market-to-market payments (k$): 237• Total binding hours in day-ahead market: 124• Total binding hours in real-time market: 62

Bull Shoals to Midway Jordan 161 kV

27

• Congestion Drivers: • Congestion observed during high hydro

generation conditions in the area• Contingency of Bufford – Bull Shoals 161kV

causes overloads

• MISO Market Congestion (Jan 2016 –July 2018):

• Market-to-market payments (k$): 60• Total binding hours in day-ahead market: 148• Total binding hours in real-time market: 13

• Main Driver(s):• Generation Driven

• Seams Considerations:• Potential seams coordination with MISO

• Additional Information:• Approved MTEP project relieves the congestion

in the 2019 ITP Study

28

Scenario F1 Y2 F1 Y5 F1 Y10 F2 Y5 F2 Y10Future Rank #6 #5# of Binding Hours 7 634 1,338 769 2,230Congestion Score 0 64,893 171,568 92,404 419,129Related to other need type No No No No No

Need: Hankinson to Wahpeton 230 kV FLO Buffalo to Jamestown 345 kV

• Main Driver(s):• West to East Bulk Transfers

• Additional Information:• Related to Hugo Power Plant to Valliant 138 kV

FLO Hugo to Valliant 345 kV Need• Related to Eastern/Central OK Target Area

29

Scenario F1 Y2 F1 Y5 F1 Y10 F2 Y5 F2 Y10Future Rank #6# of Binding Hours 0 0 29 695 1,265Congestion Score 0 0 0 157,254 349,051Related to other need type No No No No No

Need: South Brown to Russett 138 kV FLO Caney Creek to Little City 138 kV

• Main Driver(s):• South to North Bulk Transfers• Loss of 345/115kV transformer causes

overloads on 115kV system

• Additional Information• Tie line between SPP and MISO• Need identified in 2017 ITP10 and 2017 CSP

Studies

30

Scenario F1 Y2 F1 Y5 F1 Y10 F2 Y5 F2 Y10Future Rank #24# of Binding Hours 47 91 0 144 284Congestion Score 6,176 9,686 77,171 17,255 42,449Related to other need type No No No No No

Need: Granite Falls to Marshall Tap 115 kV FLO Lyon County 345/115 kV Transformer

• Main Driver(s):• South to North Bulk Transfers• Loss of 230kV causes overloads on 115kV

system

• Additional Information• Tie line between SPP and MISO

31

Scenario F1 Y2 F1 Y5 F1 Y10 F2 Y5 F2 Y10Future Rank #21# of Binding Hours 0 31 0 75 506Congestion Score 0 2,111 11,532 7,258 105,276Related to other need type No No No No No

Need: Grand Forks to Falconer 115 kV FLO Drayton to Prairie 230 kV

SPP Seams Reliability Needs

32

Monitored Element Contingency Model Additional Info

Southland - Norfork 161 kV Multiple 2, 5, 10 Year Summer Peak

MISO Board approved project from MTEP18 relieves the congestion and reliability need

South Shreveport – Wallace Lake 138kV Multiple 10 Year Summer

Peak Identified as Economic Need

Marshall – Smittyville 115kV Harbine - Steele City 115 kV 2, 5, 10 Year Light Load Identified as Economic Need

Grand Forks - Falconer 115 kV Drayton - Prairie 230 kV 10 Year Winter Peak Identified as Economic Need