February 22, 2023 • 31 mins
“The objective is the reliability of the grid,” VP of System & Resource Planning Zach Smith says about the process his group oversees studying the impacts of connecting new electric resources to the grid. Because of state policies and technological advancements, more developers are seeking to connect to the grid, creating more demands on the New York ISO in overseeing the study process.
Smith is a frequent guest of the Power Trends podcast. His conversations on grid planning, reliability, and resource interconnection are routinely among the most popular of our series. In this episode, he discusses how the NYISO is required to study the impacts of new resources like large wind, solar and battery storage facilities seeking to connect to the electric system.
“It’s being able to integrate new resources onto the grid as we transition to a renewable future,” he says. “That means that as we connect these new resources, we analyze their impact, and identify upgrades to maintain the performance of the system.”
State and federal clean energy policies are driving a dramatic increase in clean energy projects entering the Interconnection Queue, where they will be studied for feasibility and grid reliability impacts. The process requires the expertise of many of the NYISO’s most skilled engineers and analysts.
“It’s something I take great pride in: the talent in the team and experts we have,” says Smith. “But we also have a lot of challenges ahead of us.”
The Interconnection Queue has experienced change. A few years ago, it was typical to see between one and two hundred resources applying. Today, the Interconnection Queue contains nearly 500 proposals. Factors driving this historic growth include New York’s requirement of a zero-emissions grid by 2040, new incentives to build new solar, wind, and storage resources, and public policy needs that incentivize new transmission investment.
In this podcast, Smith discusses the three successive studies that examine the impact of each new resource, as well as their collective impact and the potential need for system upgrades. The process involves continuous collaboration between the developers, local utilities, and the NYISO. Some project proposals are more fully realized than others. Sometimes a resource will elect to drop out of the process, requiring a new round of studies, adding to the time it takes for all remaining resources to get to the end.
The NYISO has several initiatives underway to make the process more efficient and user-friendly for applicants. “The technology continues to change,” Smith said. “We’re working hard here in New York to keep things moving along.”
Additional Resources & Information
- Whitepaper: The NYISO Interconnection Process
- Press Release: NYISO Completes Interconnection Study Process to Connect New Resources to the Electric Grid
- Explainer: How New Electric Resources Connect to the Grid
Learn More
- Follow us on Twitter @NewYorkISO and LinkedIn @NYISO
- Read our blogs and watch our videos
- Check out our 2040 grid page
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Welcome to the Power Trends podcast, produced by the
New York Independent SystemOperator, where we discuss
energy planning, public policy,and other issues affecting New
York's power grid.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
The hello and welcome to the Power Trends
podcast. I'm Kevin Lanahan,your host Vice President of
External Affairs and CorporateCommunications at the New York
Independent System Operator.
And once again, we are hostingZach Smith, vice President
system and resource planning totalk about a very important
subject on this episode, theinterconnection and classier
(00:41):
study process. Before we divein, I think it's important to
note that your team is regardedas when we talk about the
authoritative source of the NewYork eye . So you folks are
really at the heart of that.
And what we're gonna discusstoday has so many connections
and implications toauthoritative source
reliability, how the grid isrunning transition today, we're
(01:04):
all finding ourselves in, so weappreciate , uh, you being with
us. Yeah,
Speaker 3 (01:08):
Thank you for that, Kevin. It's something I take
great pride in , uh, the teamthat we have and the experts
that we have , uh, in so manyareas of this industry. It's
incredibly complex and we needall the right expertise and I'm
really proud to say that wehave it, but we have a lot of
challenges ahead of us.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
Yeah, so those are the themes of the discussion
today. Let's dive right in. Iffolks are not familiar with the
interconnection class yearprocess, this is the process by
which generation transmissionmajor load projects of certain
size are studied , analyzedfrom a reliability perspective
for the impact on the bulkelectric system. Let's start
with the basics. When folks askyou what the interconnection
(01:47):
process is, how do you describeit from a high level? What are
we talking about?
Speaker 3 (01:52):
Yeah, absolutely.
The interconnection processconsists of many pieces, and
really the objective is aboutthe reliability of the grid,
being able to integrate newresources into the grid as
we're transitioning to arenewable future, to a storage,
and all the different resourcesthat we need to meet the
state's policies, we need tomake sure that we do that in a
reliable way. That means thatas we connect these new
(02:15):
resources, they don't doanything to degrade the
performance of the system sothat we can keep the lights on,
keep the quality of service forall customers in New York
without anything happening toany of their service and to any
of the equipment that's alreadyconnected to the grid. That's
really the core objective ofthe interconnection process.
The interconnection processitself is structured in
(02:35):
multiple phases. It consists ofup to three studies, a
feasibility study, an impactstudy, and a facility study.
And you mentioned the classyear . The class year is that
final step, the facility studywhere we group projects
together to understand what isthe cumulative impact, what's
the joint impact that thoseprojects have with each other
on the grid, to make sure thatas those projects come online,
(02:59):
we can still maintain thereliability of the system. It
has gotten so much more complexbecause of the volume of
projects. We have so many moreprojects now that we're
evaluating all at once. And youalso mentioned the technology.
The technology has changed,continues to change. And with
that change in technology, wehave to have an understanding
as to what the impact could be.
(03:20):
Many of these new resources, beit wind, solar storage, many of
them, if not all of them, areinverter based . From a
technology standpoint, itbasically just means you have
power electronics, you havethese technologies that may
interact with each other andmay interact with the grid
sometimes in a negative way.
We've actually seen this inother systems. There have been
(03:40):
recent events in Texas , uh,that have caused significant
loss of these resources, andit's because of the
interactions of inverter basedresources. We have to be very
mindful of that. We have to bemindful of that as we're
looking at their sole impact onthe system and then their joint
impact on the system. Andthat's really the purpose of
the class here.
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Yeah , it's good in one sense that the C L C P A
has created incentives forprojects to come to us and say,
we wanna connect to the system.
Please perform thesereliability studies. So the C L
C P A is working in that senseat the same time. You mentioned
the volume. Talk about how thatvolume has changed in the last
three years. I think I sawsomething from your group that
the number of projects havetripled. How many projects do
(04:22):
we have in the interconnectionqueue hole ? All altogether
right now, active
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Projects, we're at about 500. We're approaching
500 active projects right now.
It's, it's a tremendous volumeand it has doubled, tripled
over time. I've been here fornearly 20 years now, a few
years, short of 20 years. Andwhen I first started, yeah, we
were at maybe a dozenactive projects. And so now
we're approaching 500. It'sincredible. And it is driven by
(04:47):
C L C P A, by state policies,incentivizing the integration
of these resources, which isgreat. And our process needs to
make sure that it's done in areliable way. We've touched on
that on some of the otherpodcasts. You know, thinking
about what is the interactionof these resources with the
grid as a whole, and what otherresources do we need? We've
talked before aboutdispatchable emission free
(05:09):
resources, or he might hear ussay, DERs , you know, that is
acknowledging that you have allof these wind and solar and
storage, but that may not beall the grid needs. The
interconnection process is apart of that overall assessment
to consider. Can we integrateall of these while still
keeping the lights on?
Speaker 2 (05:28):
So, number of projects has tripled in roughly
three years, talking about 500projects in the interconnection
queue. All of these projectshave to be studied and analyzed
in one to one degree oranother. What are some of the
steps that your staff has to gothrough to make sure that they
have all these questionsanswered about how these
projects, these machines ,these assets , are going to
(05:48):
react and perform once theyconnect to the system?
Speaker 3 (05:51):
Yeah. A key aspect of it, let me acknowledge who
else is involved. So it's notjust my staff, of course, we
have many consulting firms thatare helping us out from a
workforce standpoint, but it'svery important, the interaction
that we have with thedevelopers themselves, the
support that they provide andthe utilities, the utilities
who own the grid and thefacilities for which these,
these projects are connectingto. And really what we need to
(06:15):
consider through the classierand through the interconnection
process. First of all, how doyou actually interconnect?
Literally, how do you plug in anew wind farm or solar farm
into the grid? There's a designassociated with that, and
that's a key step in theprocess. Then once you figure
out how you're going to plug itin, how does that interact with
other projects around it? Youmay have multiple wind solar
(06:38):
storage facilities all in thesame vicinity, and even in that
local area, they may haveinteractions with each other.
And then you have to look atthe broader grid, the , the New
York grid as a whole. What typeof impact might you have? For
example, the projects mayinterconnect in such a place
where it may limit our abilityto move power across the grid.
We call it transfer capability.
(06:59):
What's our ability to movepower from one part of the grid
to the next? We need tomaintain that for the sake of
the reliability of the system.
And there are cases where,depending on the
interconnection design,depending on the type of
resource, there is thepotential for that to be
degraded, and we need tomaintain that. And, and thus
the interconnection process,really the objective in the
end, if you cannot maintainreliability with the projects
(07:22):
interconnecting, identify whatupgrades are needed to in fact
maintain reliability. So theanswer in the end is always, we
will get these integrated. It'sa matter of how, it's a matter
of what upgrades do you need.
And then identifying who'sresponsible for those upgrades
and allocating costs for them.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
Okay. So there was a , a , a lot of important points
there. Let's take the last onefirst. We're not in a position
of saying yes and no. That'snot our role. Our role is to
say how that's correct , to doso safely and reliably. And
that's, you know , that's theend result that we're, we're
trying to work towards.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
That's exactly right.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
So one thing that makes that complex, and you
were just talking about it thatI wanna explore a little bit
more is, you know, where andhow to connect to the grid. I
think some people who may notbe so familiar would think, oh
, that's just an easy goal toaccomplish. Mm-hmm.
, you create aproject and you plug in
somewhere, it doesn't matterwhere, but the , the grid is
almost like a living, breathingorganism on its own. And you
(08:16):
change things here, it can haveimplications elsewhere. You may
not have considered oranticipated.
Speaker 3 (08:20):
That's absolutely true. And it's not only true
for New York. New York is partof an interconnected machine
across the entire eastern halfof the United States. So, you
know, we are all one bigmachine connected with New
England and Pennsylvania, andall the way really to the
Midwest through , through theMidwest, and through our
studies, through our analysis,we need to work with our
(08:42):
neighbors as well in NewEngland to the south, the
organization's, p j M, also ourCanadian neighbors. We need to
work closely with all of themto understand, is there
anything that's happening inour system, in our, in the New
York grid that couldpotentially impact their
system? And we have anobligation to that as well. And
they do the same for us. They,they look at interconnections
in their system and they giveus a call and say, Hey, you
(09:04):
know, is this a concern foryou?
Speaker 2 (09:05):
So that , that again, highlights the
complexity and the criticalityon , on the reliability front.
The other thing that youmentioned a moment ago that we
should explore and highlight iswe're one entity. If you
disagree with this analogy,then tell me. But , um, we're
in , in some ways we're, we'relike an orchestra conductor and
we've got various differentother parties that have to be
involved in this. The localutility, local governments and
(09:26):
communities, et cetera. So, youknow, that adds to, you know ,
that's a difficult task tomanage all of that's,
Speaker 3 (09:34):
It's complicated.
It's, you have , uh, not onlythe engineering side that's
complicated. You have theadministrative side and the
coordination side. So we have aproject management team that's
focusing in on coordinating theutilities, the developers, any
neighboring systems, everyonewho needs to be involved in the
process, making sure that theyare well coordinated, aware of
(09:54):
what needs to get done, keepingtrack of timelines. We're
working on improving all ofthat. And then your shop,
Kevin, let me give them someacknowledgement. We're setting
up, we're , we'resetting up a call center, you
know, to help us out onfielding any questions. And,
you know, we , we want to beresponsive to the concerns of
developers, responsive to theconcerns of policymakers and
(10:18):
everyone who, you know, isbacking the achievement of the
C L C P A and making sure thatwe're a key part of that. And,
you know, doing everything thatwe can to support that
achievement.
Speaker 2 (10:28):
Yeah. And , and I want to get to those, to that
part of the discussion as well.
Before we do , um, now let'stalk about the actual work.
'cause that's where a lot ofthe hours are directed. So
we've got three majorsuccessive studies, and then
there's a lot of informationthat has to be transferred back
and forth between the parties.
(10:48):
It's complex information, andthen the type of information
that gets transferred back andforth, all of this to serve
the, you know, the integrity ofthe process. So let's walk
through the types of questions,information, tasks that, that
your team has to accomplish inorder to get to that end goal.
Speaker 3 (11:09):
Yeah, the process starts with interconnection
request from the developer. Andthat's really key to the whole
process, not just from anadministrative standpoint. For
us to properly evaluate anygiven project, we have to
understand the nature of thatproject. So of course, starts
with, is this wind, is thissolar, is this storage
something else? But then weneed to understand all the
(11:30):
technical details around that.
And that all comes from thedeveloper.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
So , okay, so they're putting a project
proposal in front of you, youget that, you start to dig in,
understand it. We
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Dig into the, you know, the machinery specs , uh,
what their preliminary thoughtsare in terms of the
interconnection. We haveiterations with the developer
talking about thatdocumentation they've provided
us on the front end . When thatgets to the right place, then
we bring in the utilities andwe start talking about, okay,
well what's the initialthoughts on how to interconnect
(12:00):
this? And then the, the , theutility will weigh in depending
on what their design criteriais, depending on what's needed
in that system. For example,New York City has more
stringent requirements thansay, other places in upstate
New York.
Speaker 2 (12:13):
And the utility , uh, from a distribution system
point of view, knows theirinfrastructure. So that's why
they have have to , um, take alook at the impacts there and
give you and your folks theresults of their work. That's
Speaker 3 (12:27):
Exactly right. I mean, the New York i s o , we
are not facility owners on theelectric grid. The utilities
all own these facilities thatare being interconnected to,
and therefore they are theexperts when it comes to this
design. So we work hand in handwith them very closely. Their
role is incredibly important aswe work together with all of
these parties. So on the frontend, that interconnection
(12:47):
request, we work all together.
We have a , what's called ascoping meeting to scope out,
okay, what's this project looklike? What's important to
evaluate? You know, using ourengineering judgment, using our
expertise, we determine thisaspect might be a concern. That
aspect might be a concern.
Let's dig into it further. Andthen that's really the purpose
of that sequence of studies Idescribed. Feasibility study,
(13:10):
impact study, ultimatelyleading to a class year
facility study.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
Okay. So let's talk about , uh, 'cause this subject
comes up, project design,sometimes you're getting
project designs and some aremore fully realized, should we
say, than others. And sometimeswhen we get those projects that
aren't necessarily as fullyrealized, that's where a lot of
back and forth has to be had.
Speaker 3 (13:33):
That's very true. We , we offer the feasibility
study as an option , uh, wherea developer can utilize that to
explore different possibilitiesdepending on how, you know, how
developed their project is.
Some developers come in with afully baked idea, fully
designed, at least in theirmind, and then that can maybe
go through the process a littlebit faster. Others aren't so
(13:54):
sure. And so they come in withd with different options. The
process as it stands today, itprovides for either one of
those tracks.
Speaker 2 (14:01):
So fair to say, not as fully realized. That can add
hours.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
It certainly can.
Yeah. And, and that leads tothe overall timeframe of the
entire interconnection process.
So, you know, there, theretends to be focused on how long
the class year takes or howlong an impact study takes. And
each one of those timeframesare incredibly important. What
in my mind, what's reallyimportant is the time from an
interconnection request to thetime when that developer's
(14:25):
signing the interconnectionagreement. You know, if
expediency is important topeople, that's really what we
need to be focusing on. We needto focus on that in terms of
how we think about our processin the future. And we ask that
everyone involved, thedevelopers, the utilities, and
any of our stakeholders that weall be thinking about that
together. How can we conduct aprocess in the most expedient
(14:47):
way while still achieving thesame objectives?
Speaker 2 (14:50):
So there's three things to, to consider and
balance out here as we moveforward. And we take a look at
efficiencies. One is, well,we're talking about it now,
right? Time, time tocompletion. But then making
sure that if we can achievethose efficiencies and time to
completion a little faster,reliability is not in any way
sacrifice.
Speaker 3 (15:08):
That is paramount.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
And then you're talking about, I use the word
flexibility. There'sflexibility built into our
process. And while that mighthelp the developer and maybe,
you know, provide certainbenefits, we have to balance
that amount of flexibility outbecause it's gonna be hard to
achieve both a quickertimeframe, more efficiencies
and flexibility. If you've gotsome thoughts there.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
That's absolutely right. Over the years, we've
modified the interconnectionprocess a number of times, and
oftentimes it's been in thedirection of greater
flexibility. So as a result, wehave an optional feasibility
study. Now we have an impactstudy that culminates in
non-binding findings. So reallyit leaves everything to the
class here as a consequence. Wehave seen recently, in the most
(15:56):
recently completed class here ,we had 50 plus projects that
started it. Only about half ofthose ended up finishing the
whole study, accepting theircost allocation and posting
security. And part of that,this isn't the sole driver, but
part of that is the flexibilitythat came before that, that,
you know, allowing for projectsto proceed on through the
(16:17):
interconnection process withoutbeing sure about some of the
complications. We even had thecircumstance of physical
infeasibility as part of the,the class year, where we
actually found in that latestage of the interconnection
process that a project may notbe able to actually physically
interconnect to the grid.
That's something that I'veflagged as a useful example of
something we need to thinkabout for our interconnection
(16:39):
process going forward. A lot oftime was spent in the class
year trying to address thatissue, trying to address a
number of other issues that aresort of similar. Could those
have been addressed earlier?
Could we structure our processin a different way than it's
structured today, such that wecan nail those down early on in
the process? So then when weget to the class year, we're,
(17:00):
you know, looking at projectsthat are a little more firm, a
little more thoroughlydesigned.
Speaker 2 (17:04):
So now you're taking those groups of projects, as we
pointed out in the beginning,much more diverse these days in
terms of technology. You'rerunning modeling, you're seeing
how they interact with oneanother, different parts of the
grid and different parts of thestate where there's different ,
uh, load centers and demandcharacteristics, et cetera .
And finding out where some ofthose reliability issues might
(17:24):
pop up, and then sharing thoseresults with the groups of
projects. Right. And so thentake it from there. What else
is part of that? That's right .
We all need to focus on,
Speaker 3 (17:34):
It all culminates in the class year report. And ,
uh, you know , without boringour audience with all the
technical details, you know,it's, it's looking at fault,
current capabilities on thesystem. In other words, you
know , we all have a breakerbox in our house. Well , the
grid has some really bigversions of that, and
we need to make sure that thebreakers can handle the load or
(17:56):
the generators that we'reconnecting to the mm-hmm .
to the system. Sothat's a key aspect of the
evaluation. You need to look atwhether the wires across the
system, the transmission linescan handle the movement of
power that's going tointerconnect to them. And what
problems might that cause? Youneed to worry about how the
machinery interacts with eachother and how that could, cause
(18:17):
we call it instability of thegrid. That's the worst case
where it actually could lead tothe generators tripping
offline. Mm-hmm ., it could lead to ultimately
blackouts. So those are thekind of things we need to look
at. And it's looked atcumulatively among all of the
projects. Ultimately in theclass year report that we
publish. Once we publish it,that identifies upgrades on the
(18:40):
system, if they're needed,attributes, those upgrades to
the projects that cause theneed for the upgrade. So
through our analysis, wedetermine this subset of
projects are driving the needfor this upgrade. The upgrade
could be putting in a newbreaker, reconductoring a
transmission line, building anew transmission line,
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Expanding a substation,
Speaker 3 (19:00):
Expanding a substation. There's all kinds
of things like that that couldbe a quote unquote upgrade. The
cost estimates are establishedfor those upgrades. We
determine the costresponsibility on a project by
project basis based on whodrove the need. Mm-hmm .
. And then eachdeveloper is faced with that
decision at the end of theclass year process, do they
(19:21):
accept or reject their costallocation? And we go through
iterations until everyoneaccepts. And if you reject,
well then, you know, you mighthear the shorthand of us
saying, you've dropped out ofthe class here . So if you
reject your cost allocation,you can then move on to another
class year , depending on thecircumstances.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
That doesn't mean you're gone forever,
Speaker 3 (19:40):
Doesn't mean you're gone forever. Right. Uh, every
developer has differentoptions. It just kind of
depends on the circumstances,but all of this is about the
developer understanding whattheir cost responsibility is
gonna be. Does that seemreasonable to them? Is the
timing right for them to acceptthose costs? If it is, they
accept and then they can moveon and sign an interconnection
(20:01):
agreement.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
Okay. So we're looking at these projects
through this, this processindividually to make sure that
they can do what they purportto do together and reveal the
impacts on the system and theimpacts these machines and
these projects are gonna haveon one another. Once they all
connect, finding out based onwhat those impacts are, what
the upgrades are to the systemto keep it reliable and safe on
(20:24):
behalf of consumers, and thengiving them an estimate. It's
more than an estimate. It's it, this is a , this is a figure,
and it's not ,
Speaker 3 (20:32):
It's , it's a binding figure that they are
non-negotiable, that they areagreeing to, and , and let me
emphasize, it takes a lot ofengineering work to come up
with what we believe is theleast cost upgrade. So it's
Speaker 2 (20:42):
Not just I was gonna highlight
Speaker 3 (20:43):
That. Yeah , yeah , yeah. It's not just about
finding something that mightwork. It's about going through
some real scrutiny through ourengineering team, including our
consultants, including theutilities, including the
developers, and understanding,well, what is the right
solution here at the least costso that we're not burdening the
developers , uh, you know, withundue costs . So
Speaker 2 (21:02):
This is, this is a really important point. So
working really hard to findthat least cost solution. We're
not slapping somethingtogether. So trying to make it
as affordable in one sense forthe developers that they will
move forward. That's right. Butat the same time, making sure
that those costs are not borneby consumers. That's another
inherent benefit to the systemand the way we run it. That's
Speaker 3 (21:22):
Exactly right. When you've heard me describe cost
allocation, you'll notice youdidn't hear me say cost
allocation to rate payers,right ? It's, it's what we're
doing here is understandingwhat impact does a given
generator or a collection ofgenerators have on the grid,
identifying that, coming upwith a cost estimate for that,
and allocating that to thegenerators. Okay.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
So, huge responsibility. Your team, like
I said, we just got through oneof these class year processes.
Let's talk a little bit aboutwhat was in that particular
class year, some initialtakeaways after completing it
that you and your team arefocused on. And then let's,
let's talk about after thatwe'll dig into some more
improvements. You talked aboutthe 2019 improvements I wanna
(22:00):
get to, to some of the morecurrent ones. Sure.
Speaker 3 (22:02):
So the current class here that wrapped up, it's, it
started with 57 projects. Weended with 20 some, I believe
26 projects included. Wind,solar storage, some exciting
projects in there, offshorewind was included. We have the
Champlain Hudson Power Expressproject coming down from
Canada. That's been a corefocal point within the state
(22:24):
policy to meet renewable andemission free goals.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
Big class here from this perspective,
Speaker 3 (22:29):
Very big class from any perspective. Yeah . Uh , it
was a big class here from avolume perspective, just the
number of projects that we hadto deal with. But a big class
here from any numberstandpoint, the amount of power
that we're gonna be adding tothe system as a result of this
class here , it's an excess of,I believe, 7,000 plus megawatts
coming onto the grid. So ,
Speaker 2 (22:46):
Majority of which is emissions free . And ,
Speaker 3 (22:48):
And almost all of it. Yeah. Uh, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
Share any observations coming through
this one as , 'cause we'rewasting no time started a new
one, almost, you know,immediately began the steps to,
to start the process foranother one.
Speaker 3 (23:00):
We're mindful of lessons learned no matter what
process we're working on. Yeah. So lessons learned with this
class here is being focused onsome of the issues that can
possibly delay the process.
What can we do better goinginto the next one? So being
mindful of physical andfeasibility, being mindful of ,
uh, interactions that mighthappen between the projects,
(23:20):
prioritizing our work, ourconsultants work, the utilities
work such that we identifythose as early as possible in
the class year process. Sothat's not left us a surprise
at the end and thus delayingthe process. So that's very
much what we're focused on,seeing how this past class year
played out and doing everythingthat we can within our tariff,
(23:41):
within our procedures to makethis next class year even
better. But that really gets tosome of the reforms that we're
thinking about as well.
Speaker 2 (23:48):
Yeah. So let's, let's dig into that. I mean ,
we're running focus groups nowto interface with the
developers , um, understandwhat their ideas are to create
efficiencies, but we're alsospeaking back to them and
saying, we need your help aswell. That's the nature of the
focus groups. I think thatwe've had over 150 companies,
individuals, entities,attending those . So it's been
(24:08):
a robust discussion, like yousaid, a lot of lessons learned.
But let's talk about your team.
Some of the staffing changesthat are being made there.
Investments that are being madethere to address some of the
feedback we're getting.
Speaker 3 (24:18):
Yeah, we've had great engagement from the
stakeholders, great feedback.
And we always value that. Partof that feedback throughout the
past year or so has been, youknow, what support do they need
, uh, from us to betteradminister the process, to
better understand the process.
And so we've added resourceswithin my team. We've added
resources within your team,Kevin, to address project
(24:40):
management and to betteradminister the process overall.
Also to focus on some of thetools that we provide, right .
To stakeholders and developers.
You'll hear us talk about aportal, really. It's a website
that has specific informationabout any given project. A
developer or any party involvedin the process can log in ,
check out the status of theirproject, check out where their
(25:01):
study stands, who's waiting onwhat we're working on
developing all of that.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
So we're focused on people, we're focused on
processes, and we're focused ontechnology.
Speaker 3 (25:11):
That's right. And there's the broader picture
that we'll start talking withstakeholders about here very
soon. Very recently, we had astakeholder meeting talking
about the broader process as awhole. So the interconnection
process I've described, it'sall driven by our federal
tariffs, federal law that sayswe shall conduct an
interconnection process in thisway. We have the ability
(25:31):
through our stakeholder processto propose modifications to
that tariff, to that law. Andthis year, 2023, we intend to
pursue improvements to thatprocess. We have our own
thoughts as to how things couldmove faster, how things could
move more efficiently so thatwe're not leaving so much work
to the class here . You know ,if we spread out the butter,
(25:53):
you know, across theinterconnection process
throughout the timeframe, wethink it can get through a
little bit faster than , uh,than what we've seen in the
past. The problem is, is weneed to modify the federal
tariffs. We need to modifyfederal law in order to do
that. So for us to do that, weneed to bring a proposal to our
stakeholders. We need to talkto all of them, get their
(26:14):
feedback, get their thoughts,suggestions, get them on board
with whatever proposal weultimately go with. And once
they're on board , then we fileit with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission and hopethat they approve it. There's a
lot of push across the nation,not just here in New York,
right. To change theinterconnection process to
improve it. We've seen it insome of our neighbors and our
(26:35):
counterparts with them workingtowards improving their
interconnection process. Wewant to do the same here, but
we wanna do it for New Yorkers
Speaker 2 (26:42):
In other regions of the country. Other RTOs have
put a , a halt, a pause, shouldwe say, on their process,
because there's been too many,you
Speaker 3 (26:50):
Know, I talked to my counterparts from across the
country. We're all wrestlingwith the same problem. Mm-hmm .
, uh, everyonehas different flavors of the
problem, but it is all the sameproblem. The tremendous volume
of new interconnectionrequests, nearly all of it
being renewable or emissionfree . And how do you get it
integrated into the gridreliably, and how do you handle
the volume on a timely basis?
(27:11):
And yeah, some of our , uh,counterparts across the
country, they have taken somepretty drastic steps. We're
working darn hard here at inNew York to keep things moving
along. But I will say Irecognize some people's
frustrations at times, andwe're working really hard to
address
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Those. Yeah. And I, I just have to put out there, I
mean , we know that your folksworked overtime deep into
multiple nights, holidays. Theydid , um, to close this class
year down. They did. And , uh,it has been an incredible
display of dedication for sure.
What we haven't talked about isincreased load, big load
projects. There's one that beenin the headlines. The Micron
(27:49):
chip fab project announced in ,uh, central New York near
Syracuse. It's been a focus ofthe , of , uh, president Biden,
governor Hoal , Chuck Schumer.
And that is an enormous projectthat's also going to have
implications. And there's othersimilar projects, maybe not in
that magnitude that we alsohave to study and take a look
at for impacts. Thoughts there.
(28:10):
'cause that's also something toconsider. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (28:12):
We've seen a real increase in, you know, what we
used to call industrial load.
You could still call it that,but it's a whole new
technologies , a new version ofindustrial load as you
mentioned. We have the , theMicron project that's coming
forward, very large facility.
It'll be a very large demand,you know , singularly located
in a specific part of the grid.
(28:34):
And that part of the grid wasnot originally designed for
that. And so the question isgonna be, can that grid handle
that demand in such a singularlocation? We have a process
very similar to our generatorinterconnection process , uh,
to evaluate, we call themloads, large loads on the
system like that micronproject. As you mentioned,
Kevin, there are other projectsas well for data centers, cloud
(28:58):
computing, anything regardingcomputing can lead to large
cooling load can lead to, inother words, electrical load,
real draws of power on the gridon the system.
Speaker 2 (29:10):
Maybe not as , uh, well known in the headlines as
micron, but , uh, impactsnonetheless.
Speaker 3 (29:15):
That's right. And it is across New York, and
especially upstate New York. Soas these new data centers and
chip fabs plug in to the gridacross upstate New York, it's
going to very quickly use upany surplus power we have in
upstate New York. And it alsowill put stress on the
transmission grid to move powerfrom one place to where these,
(29:37):
these loads areinterconnecting. As I
mentioned, we have aninterconnection process,
process to address that. It'ssimilar but different from the
generator interconnectionprocess. But you mentioned the
micron. I , we've seen that inthe headlines. I anticipate
that they'll probably, thatthey will have to go through
our interconnection process,and when they do, it's the same
consideration, reliability ofthe grid, but us being here for
(30:00):
support to get them throughthat process to figure out how
to get it done. We're not hereto say no. We're here to say,
here's how you have to do it inorder to maintain the
reliability of the grid. Butit's going to be a whole new
challenge for us going forward.
Very clearly. There's a numberof these facilities across New
York state, right, right.
Speaker 2 (30:15):
Like you said, in support of the project and ,
uh, making sure that they cancite there safely again,
reliably, and , uh, bring thosejobs to Central New York. So
That's right. Yeah. Well , uh,again, thanks for your
participation in the fourth oneof these podcasts. This was a ,
a , a really importantdiscussion. Uh , might have you
back to talk about it again atsome point in the future.
(30:36):
Congratulations to you and yourteam on this latest class year
. Thank you for the dedication.
We appreciate it very much.
Thank
Speaker 3 (30:41):
You very much, Kevin. Happy to be back anytime
.
Speaker 1 (30:46):
Thank you for joining us. As a reminder, the
New York Independent Systemoperator, nys O for Short, is
responsible for reliablymanaging New York's power grid
and energy markets, andproviding independent data to
policymakers and the public.
For more independent info,please visit the ni o blog at
www.nyiso.com/blog.
Welcome to the Power Trends podcast, produced by the
New York Independent SystemOperator, where we discuss
energy planning, public policy,and other issues affecting New
York's power grid.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
The hello and welcome to the Power Trends
podcast. I'm Kevin Lanahan,your host Vice President of
External Affairs and CorporateCommunications at the New York
Independent System Operator.
And once again, we are hostingZach Smith, vice President
system and resource planning totalk about a very important
subject on this episode, theinterconnection and classier
(00:41):
study process. Before we divein, I think it's important to
note that your team is regardedas when we talk about the
authoritative source of the NewYork eye . So you folks are
really at the heart of that.
And what we're gonna discusstoday has so many connections
and implications toauthoritative source
reliability, how the grid isrunning transition today, we're
(01:04):
all finding ourselves in, so weappreciate , uh, you being with
us. Yeah,
Speaker 3 (01:08):
Thank you for that, Kevin. It's something I take
great pride in , uh, the teamthat we have and the experts
that we have , uh, in so manyareas of this industry. It's
incredibly complex and we needall the right expertise and I'm
really proud to say that wehave it, but we have a lot of
challenges ahead of us.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
Yeah, so those are the themes of the discussion
today. Let's dive right in. Iffolks are not familiar with the
interconnection class yearprocess, this is the process by
which generation transmissionmajor load projects of certain
size are studied , analyzedfrom a reliability perspective
for the impact on the bulkelectric system. Let's start
with the basics. When folks askyou what the interconnection
(01:47):
process is, how do you describeit from a high level? What are
we talking about?
Speaker 3 (01:52):
Yeah, absolutely.
The interconnection processconsists of many pieces, and
really the objective is aboutthe reliability of the grid,
being able to integrate newresources into the grid as
we're transitioning to arenewable future, to a storage,
and all the different resourcesthat we need to meet the
state's policies, we need tomake sure that we do that in a
reliable way. That means thatas we connect these new
(02:15):
resources, they don't doanything to degrade the
performance of the system sothat we can keep the lights on,
keep the quality of service forall customers in New York
without anything happening toany of their service and to any
of the equipment that's alreadyconnected to the grid. That's
really the core objective ofthe interconnection process.
The interconnection processitself is structured in
(02:35):
multiple phases. It consists ofup to three studies, a
feasibility study, an impactstudy, and a facility study.
And you mentioned the classyear . The class year is that
final step, the facility studywhere we group projects
together to understand what isthe cumulative impact, what's
the joint impact that thoseprojects have with each other
on the grid, to make sure thatas those projects come online,
(02:59):
we can still maintain thereliability of the system. It
has gotten so much more complexbecause of the volume of
projects. We have so many moreprojects now that we're
evaluating all at once. And youalso mentioned the technology.
The technology has changed,continues to change. And with
that change in technology, wehave to have an understanding
as to what the impact could be.
(03:20):
Many of these new resources, beit wind, solar storage, many of
them, if not all of them, areinverter based . From a
technology standpoint, itbasically just means you have
power electronics, you havethese technologies that may
interact with each other andmay interact with the grid
sometimes in a negative way.
We've actually seen this inother systems. There have been
(03:40):
recent events in Texas , uh,that have caused significant
loss of these resources, andit's because of the
interactions of inverter basedresources. We have to be very
mindful of that. We have to bemindful of that as we're
looking at their sole impact onthe system and then their joint
impact on the system. Andthat's really the purpose of
the class here.
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Yeah , it's good in one sense that the C L C P A
has created incentives forprojects to come to us and say,
we wanna connect to the system.
Please perform thesereliability studies. So the C L
C P A is working in that senseat the same time. You mentioned
the volume. Talk about how thatvolume has changed in the last
three years. I think I sawsomething from your group that
the number of projects havetripled. How many projects do
(04:22):
we have in the interconnectionqueue hole ? All altogether
right now, active
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Projects, we're at about 500. We're approaching
500 active projects right now.
It's, it's a tremendous volumeand it has doubled, tripled
over time. I've been here fornearly 20 years now, a few
years, short of 20 years. Andwhen I first started, yeah, we
were at maybe a dozen
we're approaching 500. It'sincredible. And it is driven by
(04:47):
C L C P A, by state policies,incentivizing the integration
of these resources, which isgreat. And our process needs to
make sure that it's done in areliable way. We've touched on
that on some of the otherpodcasts. You know, thinking
about what is the interactionof these resources with the
grid as a whole, and what otherresources do we need? We've
talked before aboutdispatchable emission free
(05:09):
resources, or he might hear ussay, DERs , you know, that is
acknowledging that you have allof these wind and solar and
storage, but that may not beall the grid needs. The
interconnection process is apart of that overall assessment
to consider. Can we integrateall of these while still
keeping the lights on?
Speaker 2 (05:28):
So, number of projects has tripled in roughly
three years, talking about 500projects in the interconnection
queue. All of these projectshave to be studied and analyzed
in one to one degree oranother. What are some of the
steps that your staff has to gothrough to make sure that they
have all these questionsanswered about how these
projects, these machines ,these assets , are going to
(05:48):
react and perform once theyconnect to the system?
Speaker 3 (05:51):
Yeah. A key aspect of it, let me acknowledge who
else is involved. So it's notjust my staff, of course, we
have many consulting firms thatare helping us out from a
workforce standpoint, but it'svery important, the interaction
that we have with thedevelopers themselves, the
support that they provide andthe utilities, the utilities
who own the grid and thefacilities for which these,
these projects are connectingto. And really what we need to
(06:15):
consider through the classierand through the interconnection
process. First of all, how doyou actually interconnect?
Literally, how do you plug in anew wind farm or solar farm
into the grid? There's a designassociated with that, and
that's a key step in theprocess. Then once you figure
out how you're going to plug itin, how does that interact with
other projects around it? Youmay have multiple wind solar
(06:38):
storage facilities all in thesame vicinity, and even in that
local area, they may haveinteractions with each other.
And then you have to look atthe broader grid, the , the New
York grid as a whole. What typeof impact might you have? For
example, the projects mayinterconnect in such a place
where it may limit our abilityto move power across the grid.
We call it transfer capability.
(06:59):
What's our ability to movepower from one part of the grid
to the next? We need tomaintain that for the sake of
the reliability of the system.
And there are cases where,depending on the
interconnection design,depending on the type of
resource, there is thepotential for that to be
degraded, and we need tomaintain that. And, and thus
the interconnection process,really the objective in the
end, if you cannot maintainreliability with the projects
(07:22):
interconnecting, identify whatupgrades are needed to in fact
maintain reliability. So theanswer in the end is always, we
will get these integrated. It'sa matter of how, it's a matter
of what upgrades do you need.
And then identifying who'sresponsible for those upgrades
and allocating costs for them.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
Okay. So there was a , a , a lot of important points
there. Let's take the last onefirst. We're not in a position
of saying yes and no. That'snot our role. Our role is to
say how that's correct , to doso safely and reliably. And
that's, you know , that's theend result that we're, we're
trying to work towards.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
That's exactly right.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
So one thing that makes that complex, and you
were just talking about it thatI wanna explore a little bit
more is, you know, where andhow to connect to the grid. I
think some people who may notbe so familiar would think, oh
, that's just an easy goal toaccomplish. Mm-hmm.
somewhere, it doesn't matterwhere, but the , the grid is
almost like a living, breathingorganism on its own. And you
(08:16):
change things here, it can haveimplications elsewhere. You may
not have considered oranticipated.
Speaker 3 (08:20):
That's absolutely true. And it's not only true
for New York. New York is partof an interconnected machine
across the entire eastern halfof the United States. So, you
know, we are all one bigmachine connected with New
England and Pennsylvania, andall the way really to the
Midwest through , through theMidwest, and through our
studies, through our analysis,we need to work with our
(08:42):
neighbors as well in NewEngland to the south, the
organization's, p j M, also ourCanadian neighbors. We need to
work closely with all of themto understand, is there
anything that's happening inour system, in our, in the New
York grid that couldpotentially impact their
system? And we have anobligation to that as well. And
they do the same for us. They,they look at interconnections
in their system and they giveus a call and say, Hey, you
(09:04):
know, is this a concern foryou?
Speaker 2 (09:05):
So that , that again, highlights the
complexity and the criticalityon , on the reliability front.
The other thing that youmentioned a moment ago that we
should explore and highlight iswe're one entity. If you
disagree with this analogy,then tell me. But , um, we're
in , in some ways we're, we'relike an orchestra conductor and
we've got various differentother parties that have to be
involved in this. The localutility, local governments and
(09:26):
communities, et cetera. So, youknow, that adds to, you know ,
that's a difficult task tomanage all of that's,
Speaker 3 (09:34):
It's complicated.
It's, you have , uh, not onlythe engineering side that's
complicated. You have theadministrative side and the
coordination side. So we have aproject management team that's
focusing in on coordinating theutilities, the developers, any
neighboring systems, everyonewho needs to be involved in the
process, making sure that theyare well coordinated, aware of
(09:54):
what needs to get done, keepingtrack of timelines. We're
working on improving all ofthat. And then your shop,
Kevin, let me give them someacknowledgement. We're setting
up, we're
know, to help us out onfielding any questions. And,
you know, we , we want to beresponsive to the concerns of
developers, responsive to theconcerns of policymakers and
(10:18):
everyone who, you know, isbacking the achievement of the
C L C P A and making sure thatwe're a key part of that. And,
you know, doing everything thatwe can to support that
achievement.
Speaker 2 (10:28):
Yeah. And , and I want to get to those, to that
part of the discussion as well.
Before we do , um, now let'stalk about the actual work.
'cause that's where a lot ofthe hours are directed. So
we've got three majorsuccessive studies, and then
there's a lot of informationthat has to be transferred back
and forth between the parties.
(10:48):
It's complex information, andthen the type of information
that gets transferred back andforth, all of this to serve
the, you know, the integrity ofthe process. So let's walk
through the types of questions,information, tasks that, that
your team has to accomplish inorder to get to that end goal.
Speaker 3 (11:09):
Yeah, the process starts with interconnection
request from the developer. Andthat's really key to the whole
process, not just from anadministrative standpoint. For
us to properly evaluate anygiven project, we have to
understand the nature of thatproject. So of course, starts
with, is this wind, is thissolar, is this storage
something else? But then weneed to understand all the
(11:30):
technical details around that.
And that all comes from thedeveloper.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
So , okay, so they're putting a project
proposal in front of you, youget that, you start to dig in,
understand it. We
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Dig into the, you know, the machinery specs , uh,
what their preliminary thoughtsare in terms of the
interconnection. We haveiterations with the developer
talking about thatdocumentation they've provided
us on the front end . When thatgets to the right place, then
we bring in the utilities andwe start talking about, okay,
well what's the initialthoughts on how to interconnect
(12:00):
this? And then the, the , theutility will weigh in depending
on what their design criteriais, depending on what's needed
in that system. For example,New York City has more
stringent requirements thansay, other places in upstate
New York.
Speaker 2 (12:13):
And the utility , uh, from a distribution system
point of view, knows theirinfrastructure. So that's why
they have have to , um, take alook at the impacts there and
give you and your folks theresults of their work. That's
Speaker 3 (12:27):
Exactly right. I mean, the New York i s o , we
are not facility owners on theelectric grid. The utilities
all own these facilities thatare being interconnected to,
and therefore they are theexperts when it comes to this
design. So we work hand in handwith them very closely. Their
role is incredibly important aswe work together with all of
these parties. So on the frontend, that interconnection
(12:47):
request, we work all together.
We have a , what's called ascoping meeting to scope out,
okay, what's this project looklike? What's important to
evaluate? You know, using ourengineering judgment, using our
expertise, we determine thisaspect might be a concern. That
aspect might be a concern.
Let's dig into it further. Andthen that's really the purpose
of that sequence of studies Idescribed. Feasibility study,
(13:10):
impact study, ultimatelyleading to a class year
facility study.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
Okay. So let's talk about , uh, 'cause this subject
comes up, project design,sometimes you're getting
project designs and some aremore fully realized, should we
say, than others. And sometimeswhen we get those projects that
aren't necessarily as fullyrealized, that's where a lot of
back and forth has to be had.
Speaker 3 (13:33):
That's very true. We , we offer the feasibility
study as an option , uh, wherea developer can utilize that to
explore different possibilitiesdepending on how, you know, how
developed their project is.
Some developers come in with afully baked idea, fully
designed, at least in theirmind, and then that can maybe
go through the process a littlebit faster. Others aren't so
(13:54):
sure. And so they come in withd with different options. The
process as it stands today, itprovides for either one of
those tracks.
Speaker 2 (14:01):
So fair to say, not as fully realized. That can add
hours.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
It certainly can.
Yeah. And, and that leads tothe overall timeframe of the
entire interconnection process.
So, you know, there, theretends to be focused on how long
the class year takes or howlong an impact study takes. And
each one of those timeframesare incredibly important. What
in my mind, what's reallyimportant is the time from an
interconnection request to thetime when that developer's
(14:25):
signing the interconnectionagreement. You know, if
expediency is important topeople, that's really what we
need to be focusing on. We needto focus on that in terms of
how we think about our processin the future. And we ask that
everyone involved, thedevelopers, the utilities, and
any of our stakeholders that weall be thinking about that
together. How can we conduct aprocess in the most expedient
(14:47):
way while still achieving thesame objectives?
Speaker 2 (14:50):
So there's three things to, to consider and
balance out here as we moveforward. And we take a look at
efficiencies. One is, well,we're talking about it now,
right? Time, time tocompletion. But then making
sure that if we can achievethose efficiencies and time to
completion a little faster,reliability is not in any way
sacrifice.
Speaker 3 (15:08):
That is paramount.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
And then you're talking about, I use the word
flexibility. There'sflexibility built into our
process. And while that mighthelp the developer and maybe,
you know, provide certainbenefits, we have to balance
that amount of flexibility outbecause it's gonna be hard to
achieve both a quickertimeframe, more efficiencies
and flexibility. If you've gotsome thoughts there.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
That's absolutely right. Over the years, we've
modified the interconnectionprocess a number of times, and
oftentimes it's been in thedirection of greater
flexibility. So as a result, wehave an optional feasibility
study. Now we have an impactstudy that culminates in
non-binding findings. So reallyit leaves everything to the
class here as a consequence. Wehave seen recently, in the most
(15:56):
recently completed class here ,we had 50 plus projects that
started it. Only about half ofthose ended up finishing the
whole study, accepting theircost allocation and posting
security. And part of that,this isn't the sole driver, but
part of that is the flexibilitythat came before that, that,
you know, allowing for projectsto proceed on through the
(16:17):
interconnection process withoutbeing sure about some of the
complications. We even had thecircumstance of physical
infeasibility as part of the,the class year, where we
actually found in that latestage of the interconnection
process that a project may notbe able to actually physically
interconnect to the grid.
That's something that I'veflagged as a useful example of
something we need to thinkabout for our interconnection
(16:39):
process going forward. A lot oftime was spent in the class
year trying to address thatissue, trying to address a
number of other issues that aresort of similar. Could those
have been addressed earlier?
Could we structure our processin a different way than it's
structured today, such that wecan nail those down early on in
the process? So then when weget to the class year, we're,
(17:00):
you know, looking at projectsthat are a little more firm, a
little more thoroughlydesigned.
Speaker 2 (17:04):
So now you're taking those groups of projects, as we
pointed out in the beginning,much more diverse these days in
terms of technology. You'rerunning modeling, you're seeing
how they interact with oneanother, different parts of the
grid and different parts of thestate where there's different ,
uh, load centers and demandcharacteristics, et cetera .
And finding out where some ofthose reliability issues might
(17:24):
pop up, and then sharing thoseresults with the groups of
projects. Right. And so thentake it from there. What else
is part of that? That's right .
We all need to focus on,
Speaker 3 (17:34):
It all culminates in the class year report. And ,
uh, you know , without boringour audience with all the
technical details, you know,it's, it's looking at fault,
current capabilities on thesystem. In other words, you
know , we all have a breakerbox in our house. Well , the
grid has some really bigversions of that
we need to make sure that thebreakers can handle the load or
(17:56):
the generators that we'reconnecting to the mm-hmm .
evaluation. You need to look atwhether the wires across the
system, the transmission linescan handle the movement of
power that's going tointerconnect to them. And what
problems might that cause? Youneed to worry about how the
machinery interacts with eachother and how that could, cause
(18:17):
we call it instability of thegrid. That's the worst case
where it actually could lead tothe generators tripping
offline. Mm-hmm .
blackouts. So those are thekind of things we need to look
at. And it's looked atcumulatively among all of the
projects. Ultimately in theclass year report that we
publish. Once we publish it,that identifies upgrades on the
(18:40):
system, if they're needed,attributes, those upgrades to
the projects that cause theneed for the upgrade. So
through our analysis, wedetermine this subset of
projects are driving the needfor this upgrade. The upgrade
could be putting in a newbreaker, reconductoring a
transmission line, building anew transmission line,
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Expanding a substation,
Speaker 3 (19:00):
Expanding a substation. There's all kinds
of things like that that couldbe a quote unquote upgrade. The
cost estimates are establishedfor those upgrades. We
determine the costresponsibility on a project by
project basis based on whodrove the need. Mm-hmm .
decision at the end of theclass year process, do they
(19:21):
accept or reject their costallocation? And we go through
iterations until everyoneaccepts. And if you reject,
well then, you know, you mighthear the shorthand of us
saying, you've dropped out ofthe class here . So if you
reject your cost allocation,you can then move on to another
class year , depending on thecircumstances.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
That doesn't mean you're gone forever,
Speaker 3 (19:40):
Doesn't mean you're gone forever. Right. Uh, every
developer has differentoptions. It just kind of
depends on the circumstances,but all of this is about the
developer understanding whattheir cost responsibility is
gonna be. Does that seemreasonable to them? Is the
timing right for them to acceptthose costs? If it is, they
accept and then they can moveon and sign an interconnection
(20:01):
agreement.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
Okay. So we're looking at these projects
through this, this processindividually to make sure that
they can do what they purportto do together and reveal the
impacts on the system and theimpacts these machines and
these projects are gonna haveon one another. Once they all
connect, finding out based onwhat those impacts are, what
the upgrades are to the systemto keep it reliable and safe on
(20:24):
behalf of consumers, and thengiving them an estimate. It's
more than an estimate. It's it, this is a , this is a figure,
and it's not ,
Speaker 3 (20:32):
It's , it's a binding figure that they are
non-negotiable, that they areagreeing to, and , and let me
emphasize, it takes a lot ofengineering work to come up
with what we believe is theleast cost upgrade. So it's
Speaker 2 (20:42):
Not just I was gonna highlight
Speaker 3 (20:43):
That. Yeah , yeah , yeah. It's not just about
finding something that mightwork. It's about going through
some real scrutiny through ourengineering team, including our
consultants, including theutilities, including the
developers, and understanding,well, what is the right
solution here at the least costso that we're not burdening the
developers , uh, you know, withundue costs . So
Speaker 2 (21:02):
This is, this is a really important point. So
working really hard to findthat least cost solution. We're
not slapping somethingtogether. So trying to make it
as affordable in one sense forthe developers that they will
move forward. That's right. Butat the same time, making sure
that those costs are not borneby consumers. That's another
inherent benefit to the systemand the way we run it. That's
Speaker 3 (21:22):
Exactly right. When you've heard me describe cost
allocation, you'll notice youdidn't hear me say cost
allocation to rate payers,right ? It's, it's what we're
doing here is understandingwhat impact does a given
generator or a collection ofgenerators have on the grid,
identifying that, coming upwith a cost estimate for that,
and allocating that to thegenerators. Okay.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
So, huge responsibility. Your team, like
I said, we just got through oneof these class year processes.
Let's talk a little bit aboutwhat was in that particular
class year, some initialtakeaways after completing it
that you and your team arefocused on. And then let's,
let's talk about after thatwe'll dig into some more
improvements. You talked aboutthe 2019 improvements I wanna
(22:00):
get to, to some of the morecurrent ones. Sure.
Speaker 3 (22:02):
So the current class here that wrapped up, it's, it
started with 57 projects. Weended with 20 some, I believe
26 projects included. Wind,solar storage, some exciting
projects in there, offshorewind was included. We have the
Champlain Hudson Power Expressproject coming down from
Canada. That's been a corefocal point within the state
(22:24):
policy to meet renewable andemission free goals.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
Big class here from this perspective,
Speaker 3 (22:29):
Very big class from any perspective. Yeah . Uh , it
was a big class here from avolume perspective, just the
number of projects that we hadto deal with. But a big class
here from any numberstandpoint, the amount of power
that we're gonna be adding tothe system as a result of this
class here , it's an excess of,I believe, 7,000 plus megawatts
coming onto the grid. So ,
Speaker 2 (22:46):
Majority of which is emissions free . And ,
Speaker 3 (22:48):
And almost all of it. Yeah. Uh, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
Share any observations coming through
this one as , 'cause we'rewasting no time started a new
one, almost, you know,immediately began the steps to,
to start the process foranother one.
Speaker 3 (23:00):
We're mindful of lessons learned no matter what
process we're working on. Yeah. So lessons learned with this
class here is being focused onsome of the issues that can
possibly delay the process.
What can we do better goinginto the next one? So being
mindful of physical andfeasibility, being mindful of ,
uh, interactions that mighthappen between the projects,
(23:20):
prioritizing our work, ourconsultants work, the utilities
work such that we identifythose as early as possible in
the class year process. Sothat's not left us a surprise
at the end and thus delayingthe process. So that's very
much what we're focused on,seeing how this past class year
played out and doing everythingthat we can within our tariff,
(23:41):
within our procedures to makethis next class year even
better. But that really gets tosome of the reforms that we're
thinking about as well.
Speaker 2 (23:48):
Yeah. So let's, let's dig into that. I mean ,
we're running focus groups nowto interface with the
developers , um, understandwhat their ideas are to create
efficiencies, but we're alsospeaking back to them and
saying, we need your help aswell. That's the nature of the
focus groups. I think thatwe've had over 150 companies,
individuals, entities,attending those . So it's been
(24:08):
a robust discussion, like yousaid, a lot of lessons learned.
But let's talk about your team.
Some of the staffing changesthat are being made there.
Investments that are being madethere to address some of the
feedback we're getting.
Speaker 3 (24:18):
Yeah, we've had great engagement from the
stakeholders, great feedback.
And we always value that. Partof that feedback throughout the
past year or so has been, youknow, what support do they need
, uh, from us to betteradminister the process, to
better understand the process.
And so we've added resourceswithin my team. We've added
resources within your team,Kevin, to address project
(24:40):
management and to betteradminister the process overall.
Also to focus on some of thetools that we provide, right .
To stakeholders and developers.
You'll hear us talk about aportal, really. It's a website
that has specific informationabout any given project. A
developer or any party involvedin the process can log in ,
check out the status of theirproject, check out where their
(25:01):
study stands, who's waiting onwhat we're working on
developing all of that.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
So we're focused on people, we're focused on
processes, and we're focused ontechnology.
Speaker 3 (25:11):
That's right. And there's the broader picture
that we'll start talking withstakeholders about here very
soon. Very recently, we had astakeholder meeting talking
about the broader process as awhole. So the interconnection
process I've described, it'sall driven by our federal
tariffs, federal law that sayswe shall conduct an
interconnection process in thisway. We have the ability
(25:31):
through our stakeholder processto propose modifications to
that tariff, to that law. Andthis year, 2023, we intend to
pursue improvements to thatprocess. We have our own
thoughts as to how things couldmove faster, how things could
move more efficiently so thatwe're not leaving so much work
to the class here . You know ,if we spread out the butter,
(25:53):
you know, across theinterconnection process
throughout the timeframe, wethink it can get through a
little bit faster than , uh,than what we've seen in the
past. The problem is, is weneed to modify the federal
tariffs. We need to modifyfederal law in order to do
that. So for us to do that, weneed to bring a proposal to our
stakeholders. We need to talkto all of them, get their
(26:14):
feedback, get their thoughts,suggestions, get them on board
with whatever proposal weultimately go with. And once
they're on board , then we fileit with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission and hopethat they approve it. There's a
lot of push across the nation,not just here in New York,
right. To change theinterconnection process to
improve it. We've seen it insome of our neighbors and our
(26:35):
counterparts with them workingtowards improving their
interconnection process. Wewant to do the same here, but
we wanna do it for New Yorkers
Speaker 2 (26:42):
In other regions of the country. Other RTOs have
put a , a halt, a pause, shouldwe say, on their process,
because there's been too many,you
Speaker 3 (26:50):
Know, I talked to my counterparts from across the
country. We're all wrestlingwith the same problem. Mm-hmm .
problem, but it is all the sameproblem. The tremendous volume
of new interconnectionrequests, nearly all of it
being renewable or emissionfree . And how do you get it
integrated into the gridreliably, and how do you handle
the volume on a timely basis?
(27:11):
And yeah, some of our , uh,counterparts across the
country, they have taken somepretty drastic steps. We're
working darn hard here at inNew York to keep things moving
along. But I will say Irecognize some people's
frustrations at times, andwe're working really hard to
address
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Those. Yeah. And I, I just have to put out there, I
mean , we know that your folksworked overtime deep into
multiple nights, holidays. Theydid , um, to close this class
year down. They did. And , uh,it has been an incredible
display of dedication for sure.
What we haven't talked about isincreased load, big load
projects. There's one that beenin the headlines. The Micron
(27:49):
chip fab project announced in ,uh, central New York near
Syracuse. It's been a focus ofthe , of , uh, president Biden,
governor Hoal , Chuck Schumer.
And that is an enormous projectthat's also going to have
implications. And there's othersimilar projects, maybe not in
that magnitude that we alsohave to study and take a look
at for impacts. Thoughts there.
(28:10):
'cause that's also something toconsider. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (28:12):
We've seen a real increase in, you know, what we
used to call industrial load.
You could still call it that,but it's a whole new
technologies , a new version ofindustrial load as you
mentioned. We have the , theMicron project that's coming
forward, very large facility.
It'll be a very large demand,you know , singularly located
in a specific part of the grid.
(28:34):
And that part of the grid wasnot originally designed for
that. And so the question isgonna be, can that grid handle
that demand in such a singularlocation? We have a process
very similar to our generatorinterconnection process , uh,
to evaluate, we call themloads, large loads on the
system like that micronproject. As you mentioned,
Kevin, there are other projectsas well for data centers, cloud
(28:58):
computing, anything regardingcomputing can lead to large
cooling load can lead to, inother words, electrical load,
real draws of power on the gridon the system.
Speaker 2 (29:10):
Maybe not as , uh, well known in the headlines as
micron, but , uh, impactsnonetheless.
Speaker 3 (29:15):
That's right. And it is across New York, and
especially upstate New York. Soas these new data centers and
chip fabs plug in to the gridacross upstate New York, it's
going to very quickly use upany surplus power we have in
upstate New York. And it alsowill put stress on the
transmission grid to move powerfrom one place to where these,
(29:37):
these loads areinterconnecting. As I
mentioned, we have aninterconnection process,
process to address that. It'ssimilar but different from the
generator interconnectionprocess. But you mentioned the
micron. I , we've seen that inthe headlines. I anticipate
that they'll probably, thatthey will have to go through
our interconnection process,and when they do, it's the same
consideration, reliability ofthe grid, but us being here for
(30:00):
support to get them throughthat process to figure out how
to get it done. We're not hereto say no. We're here to say,
here's how you have to do it inorder to maintain the
reliability of the grid. Butit's going to be a whole new
challenge for us going forward.
Very clearly. There's a numberof these facilities across New
York state, right, right.
Speaker 2 (30:15):
Like you said, in support of the project and ,
uh, making sure that they cancite there safely again,
reliably, and , uh, bring thosejobs to Central New York. So
That's right. Yeah. Well , uh,again, thanks for your
participation in the fourth oneof these podcasts. This was a ,
a , a really importantdiscussion. Uh , might have you
back to talk about it again atsome point in the future.
(30:36):
Congratulations to you and yourteam on this latest class year
. Thank you for the dedication.
We appreciate it very much.
Thank
Speaker 3 (30:41):
You very much, Kevin. Happy to be back anytime
.
Speaker 1 (30:46):
Thank you for joining us. As a reminder, the
New York Independent Systemoperator, nys O for Short, is
responsible for reliablymanaging New York's power grid
and energy markets, andproviding independent data to
policymakers and the public.
For more independent info,please visit the ni o blog at
www.nyiso.com/blog.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.