PDi2 Playbook

STEP 7. EVALUATING OVERALL PROGRAM SUCCESS 40 Overall Program There are three primary settings where overall resiliency program performance may be discussed. Each is described below with the focus on how to effectively report results. Regulatory As is described in Step 1 DEFINING PROGRAM OBJECTIVES, it is critical to clearly determine and state what the utility is trying to accomplish. This is followed by selecting an appropriate resiliency metric that will demonstrate the results of the resilience program. As is described in Step 3 DEVELOPING THE PROGRAM PLAN, the selection of a metric like Total Length of Restoration (TLR) may prove appropriate. It is also typical that some set of maximum or minimum targets will be set by the Public Utility Commission (PUC) or legislative body. The reporting to a regulatory body should focus on the pursuit and achievement of the program objective to utilize as few overall metrics as possible, and perhaps a singular metric. As is described previously, routine data display may be required as a lack of storms or outages may make overall program success reporting impossible. Industry Industry reporting should utilize a format similar to the case studies contained within the Playbook. Clearly define the challenge, discuss and develop the solutions selected, and results achieved. Keep it simple and straight forward. As an example:  Challenge: How to align grid modernization and resiliency plans in two states served.  Solution: Analyzed worst-performing overhead circuits and discovered that 20% of the mileage is responsible for 60% of the outages in state 1 and 40% in state 2. Designed common programs and sought regulatory approval built around the concept that state Gross Domestic Product (GDP) can be improved by reducing outage duration and that the phased approach considers labor constraints to avoid paying premium time or overtime to get the work completed.  Result: Instituted a four-phase resiliency program founded on undergrounding strategies including approximately 200 miles per year. The forecasted benefit is a 37% reduction in outage minutes in targeted geographies. Media and Public Media and public reporting should focus on individual impacts and benefits, with the exception of a description of the balanced societal benefit achieved. As is described in MID-ATLANTIC UTILITIES UNDERGROUNDING PROGRAM CASE STUDY, the selection of neighborhoods, towns, and line segments originating from customer regions with a mix of income levels is prudent and one method to achieve societal benefits. This balance will achieve societal benefits of increased property values, reduced vegetation management, avoided costs from vehicle accidents, reduced fire sparking risk, improved service reliability, and improved emergency ingress/egress routes among others. Beyond societal benefit, think in terms of sound bites (#240 & #250):  A 99% improvement in both SAIDI (duration) and SAIFI (frequency) indices for those areas that have been converted.  A forecast reduction in TLR by 40-50% which impacts and generates benefits for all customers in the event of an outage.  249 miles undergrounded at an average cost of $422,496 per mile – significantly below the legislatively required maximum of $750,000.  Ratepayer bill impact of $1.98 based on usage of 1,000 kWh – significantly below the legislatively required maximum.  Fewer events per mile and shorter duration of an event were achieved

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjE3MDU=