BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA PACIFICORP. Direct Testimony of Heidemarie C. Caswell

Transcription

1 Application No. -0- Exhibit No. Witness: Heidemarie C. Caswell BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA PACIFICORP April 0

2 Caswell/i TABLE OF CONTENTS WITNESS QUALIFICATIONS... 0/0 WINTER STORMS... DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPANY S DROUGHT-RELATED FIRE HAZARD MITIGATION EFFORTS... 0 BOLES FIRE... ATTACHED EXHIBITS Exhibit PAC/0 Duration of Customer Outages During January 0 Winter Storms Exhibit PAC/0 Outages Experienced During January 0 Winter Storms

3 Caswell/ 0 0 WITNESS QUALIFICATIONS Q. Please state your name, business address and present position with PacifiCorp (Company). A. My name is Heidemarie (Heide) C. Caswell. My business address is N.E. Multnomah, Suite 00, Portland, Oregon. My present position is Director - Transmission and Distribution Asset Performance, a department within the Engineering Services and Asset Management business unit. Q. Please briefly describe your education and business experience. A. I am a professional engineer, licensed in the State of Washington. I received a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering in from the University of Washington. I have been employed with PacifiCorp since 00, during which time I have been responsible for reliability engineering, reliability reporting and reliability tool and project development. Before that I held positions in Planning and Engineering at Puget Sound Energy and its predecessor company, Washington Natural Gas Company. Q. Please describe your present duties. A. My primary responsibilities include evaluating, investigating, reporting on and developing tools for both the transmission and distribution networks that PacifiCorp owns and operates. I am also responsible for technical support during rulemaking activities that impact the transmission and distribution organizations within the states the Company serves, which include California, Idaho, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. I hold leadership positions within the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) Distribution Reliability Working Group, the North

4 Caswell/ 0 0 American Transmission Owner s Forum and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation s (NERC) Performance Analysis Subcommittee. Q. What is the purpose of your testimony? A. The purpose of my testimony is to describe the effects of following catastrophic events that resulted in costs being recorded in the Company s catastrophic events memorandum account (CEMA):. The December 0 and January 0 series of winter storms (0/0 Winter Storms);. California s drought emergency declared in 0 that led to drought-related fire hazard mitigation requirements; and. The 0 Boles Fire with respect to more recent rebuilding efforts. 0/0 WINTER STORMS Q. What catastrophic events occurred during the 0/0 Winter Storms that resulted in costs being recorded in the Company s CEMA? A. Beginning on December, 0, a series of storms damaged PacifiCorp facilities in Del Norte County, impacting the Company s service in its Crescent City operating district. Most of the costs incurred by PacifiCorp in connection with this weather event resulted from responding to the effects of a severe storm occurring December -, 0. Major storm activity continued in northern California from January, 0, through January, 0, impacting the Company s operations throughout PacifiCorp s northern California service territory and requiring the Company to deploy additional resources to restore service.

5 Caswell/ 0 0 On January, 0, Governor Brown declared two separate states of emergency in a number of California counties as a result of the effects of the 0/0 Winter Storms. The first state of emergency was declared for the December 0 storm cycle that impacted Del Norte County in PacifiCorp s service territory. A second state of emergency was declared for the January 0 winter storms that impacted PacifiCorp s service territory in Siskiyou, Modoc and Shasta counties. See Appendix D to the Application for a copy of Governor Brown s declarations. On January, 0, the Company notified the California Public Utilities Commission (Commission) that PacifiCorp had started recording costs for responding to storm effects from weather experienced during the 0/0 Winter Storms in the Company s CEMA. See Appendix C to the Application for a copy of the notice sent to the Commission. Q. Did these events meet the requirements for activating CEMA? A. Yes. The purpose of the CEMA is to record all costs incurred by the Company associated with catastrophic events. Under Resolution E-, CEMA may be used to record costs of: (a) restoring utility service to its customers; (b) repairing, replacing or restoring damaged utility facilities; and (c) complying with governmental agency orders in connection with events declared disasters by competent state or federal authority. As previously discussed, the Governor of the State of California declared two states of emergency for the 0/0 Winter Storms, and the Company met its requirement to notify the Commission that it would begin recording costs in its CEMA.

6 Caswell/ 0 0 Q. Please describe the 0/0 Winter Storms and their impacts on service to customers. A. During December 0 and January 0, extreme weather descended on the northern California coast. Major storm events occurred throughout the service area the Company operates in; however, widespread customer interruptions were mostly contained to Crescent City (in Del Norte County) in the case of the December -, 0 storm. In other regions of PacifiCorp s service territory (including Siskiyou, Modoc and Shasta counties) widespread outages occurred between January -, 0, January -, 0, and January -, 0. As a result of the December 0 storms, approximately 00 Crescent City customers lost power. As a result of the series of storms in January 0, over 00 individual outages occurred in PacifiCorp s northern California service territory, resulting in, customer interruptions (as certain customers may have experienced multiple interruptions due to the repeated waves of weather damage). Q. Describe PacifiCorp s response to the 0/0 Winter Storms and whether the response was necessary and reasonable. A. The Company s response to the 0/0 Winter Storms was necessary and reasonable. Customers need for electricity is at its peak when these weather events occur which makes prompt and effective restoration of power critical. With the heavy snow, low temperatures, wind and rain conditions that were experienced, the Company had to deploy significant additional resources to promptly restore power and mitigate public health and safety hazards that were created by storm related damage to the Company s electrical system.

7 Caswell/ 0 0 Certain of these actions included remediating potentially hazardous conditions, responding to outages resulting from the extreme weather, clearing vegetation, repairing or replacing damaged facilities and communicating with customers about the progress of our restoration efforts. In furtherance of these efforts, PacifiCorp and contract personnel worked around the clock in extremely hazardous conditions, in many cases hiking through waist-deep snow and using snow cats to reach remote areas. In order to expedite restoration efforts, PacifiCorp mobilized internal crews and equipment from Oregon and California, as well as contract resources and resources available under mutual assistance agreements. Q. While a state of emergency declaration was ordered by Governor Brown, was the local impact experienced within PacifiCorp s California service territory unusual enough to warrant this treatment? A. Yes. Extraordinary efforts were required of the Company to respond to the 0/0 Winter Storms and restore service. For example, in certain areas of Siskiyou County, large amounts of snow accumulated in a short period of time, causing significant damage to the Company s distribution and transmission system and access issues for linemen. According to locally stationed National Weather Service personnel, between percent and percent of the average annual snowfall occurred within one to four days in January 0. The following table illustrates the relative strength of the January 0 storms based on data collected from several locations within Siskiyou County.

8

9 Caswell/ 0 0 Q. Can you explain what impact the 0/0 Winter Storms had upon Company resources? A. The Company plans for and maintains sufficient resources to respond to outages. During the December 0 storm, the damage to the local transmission system, which was responsible for a single outage that impacted a large number of customers, was repaired using existing resources working overtime. During the January 0 storms, over a period of days, the Company experienced an average of outages per day ten times the average outage rate in PacifiCorp s northern California service territory and more than six times the outage rate of a major event. As a result, PacifiCorp was required to deploy additional resources to restore power in its California service territory, as explained in more detail below. The outages experienced during the January 0 storms is illustrated in Exhibit PAC/0 which shows the time periods for which customers were without power, outage counts and accrual of customer minutes interrupted that were occurring within storm waves. As shown on the graphic, early on January, 0, with the onset of heavy snow, a first wave of outages occurred which impacted just under,000 customers. As soon as power was restored to all affected customers on January, 0, outages ramped up again on January, 0. Service was restored by January, 0; however, on January, 0, the final storm cycle occurred resulting in new outages. Service restoration efforts in response to this storm were completed on January, 0. Thereafter, additional work was required to replace facilities damaged by the storms and make permanent repairs.

10 Caswell/ 0 0 Q. What procedures does the Company follow when responding to emergencies, including storms, wildfires and outage events? A. The Company has its Emergency Response Plan (Emergency Plan) on file with the Safety Enforcement Division, as proscribed by Commission General Order. PacifiCorp executes its Emergency Plan when emergencies arise. Each of the Company s regional operating districts in PacifiCorp s northern California service territory respond to emergencies in a manner consistent with the guidelines in the Emergency Plan with respect to assessing damage, detailing necessary repairs and evaluating the extent of customer outages. In following these procedures, the operating districts are able to effectively prioritize work to restore service to customers efficiently in order to meet the Company s service commitment to PacifiCorp s customers. When very severe storms or other emergencies occur that require additional resources or a more coordinated response, the Company follows the Emergency Plan s escalation procedures. The degree of escalation and the internal organizations that are brought into the response to the event depend on the extent of damage and type and level of support needed by local operational staff. Support provided by other internal organizations may include gathering and analyzing data; making decisions that protect life, property and the environment; managing the emergency; disseminating restoration related decisions to affected external agencies, customers, the affected communities and internal Company resources; and facilitating resource deployment decisions, typically through the use of internal personnel, or when needed, through contractor procurement and mutual assistance processes. To the

11 Caswell/ 0 0 extent they receive support from these other internal organizations, local operations teams are freed up to focus their efforts on coordinating the larger response teams required to address the situation on the ground. Q. How did the Company implement its Emergency Plan to assess and respond to the 0/0 Winter Storms? A. The Company implemented the key components of its Emergency Plan by augmenting its local response teams with additional resources. For its response to the December 0 storms in Del Norte County, PacifiCorp utilized all of its Crescent City response personnel on an overtime basis until power was restored to all customers. The equipment damaged during the heavy rain and wind was a local transmission line brought down when wind-borne vegetation struck the conductor. As a result, pole, insulators, crossarms and splices were required to restore power. In responding to the January 0 storms, PacifiCorp augmented its core team of California service territory field employees with additional field employees from outside California, as well as 0 contractor field resources that worked to restore outages during the entire storm event. Twenty-four additional vegetation management resources also supported these efforts by clearing trees and limbs in the area of downed conductor and broken structures. In total these teams replaced poles,,0 feet of conductor, insulators, splices, 0 crossarms, cutouts and transformers. After power was fully restored, resources remained deployed for several weeks to perform work necessary to replace damaged facilities and make permanent repairs.

12 Caswell/0 0 0 Throughout the 0/0 Winter Storms, dispatch and customer service personnel (who provide assistance to local staff) also worked overtime to provide support to crews and customers. DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPANY S DROUGHT-RELATED FIRE HAZARD MITIGATION EFFORTS Q. Please describe the drought-related fire hazard mitigation efforts required by the Commission. A. On January, 0, Governor Brown proclaimed a state of emergency and directed state officials to take all necessary actions to prepare for conditions that could result from the drought. On February, 0, PacifiCorp received a letter from the Commission s Acting Director of the Safety Enforcement Division (SED) stating the following: Due to the increased [chance] of large and devastating fires in California, I hereby direct you and your company to take all practicable measures necessary to reduce the likelihood of fires started by your facilities. This may include, but is not limited to the following actions: Increased inspections in fire threat areas Re-prioritization of corrective action items Modification to protective schemes The letter further stated that during the state of emergency, corrective action associated with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and California s Department of Forestry and Fire (CalFire) vegetation requirements should not be deferred. On March, 0, PacifiCorp notified the Commission s Executive Director that PacifiCorp was activating CEMA for the drought-related fire hazard mitigation measures required by the Commission. In addition, the Company has

13 Caswell/ 0 0 provided annual and quarterly reports to the Commission regarding its droughtrelated fire hazard mitigation measures and in its annual reports has notified the Commission that the Company continues to record these costs in its CEMA. Q. What measures did the Company implement in response to the Commission directive? A. On March, 0, April 0, 0 and April 0, 0, PacifiCorp submitted to the Commission annual reports setting forth the Company s drought-related fire hazard mitigation plans. Consistent with these plans, PacifiCorp implemented a number of mitigation measures including the following items: ) increased patrolling and vegetation management for targeted facilities; ) re-inspection of high risk drought areas and correction of targeted condition types within drought-impacted areas; ) installation of distance-reporting relays on specific transmission lines; ) acceleration of No Test policy implementation, where prior to re-energizing faulted lines, a physical patrol is conducted to ensure no physical damage has occurred to facilities; and ) outfitting field resources with additional fire suppression equipment. As directed by SED, the Company provided quarterly updates of work completed in response to those plans. Copies of the annual plan and quarterly status reports are provided in Appendix C to the Application. Q. Has the Company previously sought recovery for the drought-related fire hazard mitigation costs recorded in its CEMA? A. Yes. On March, 0, the Company filed A.-0-0 to recover costs recorded

14 Caswell/ 0 0 in its CEMA for the drought-related fire hazard mitigation efforts recorded through March 0, 0. The Commission approved the Company s request in D Q. Over what time period were the drought-related fire hazard mitigation costs that are included in this instant Application incurred? A. The costs included in this Application were incurred during the period beginning on March, 0 and ending on March, 0. Q. Was the work performed on the Company s electric facilities extensive? A. Yes. As the Company reported in its quarterly status reports submitted to the SED, since March, 0, PacifiCorp patrolled an extra 0, overhead structures, inspected, structures, corrected outstanding conditions that were identified as possible fire risks and performed additional fire-mitigation vegetation management on transmission and distribution circuits. BOLES FIRE Q. Please describe the Boles Fire. A. On September, 0, the Boles Fire started near the town of Weed, California. Fanned by winds in the area, the fire quickly spread and evacuation efforts began for the areas of Weed, Shastina, and Carrick. Local fire resources were augmented by regional resources to contain the fire as rapidly as possible. Emergency response was supported by regional first response personnel, such as PacifiCorp employees, who interacted with each other to ensure timely support actions were taken. PacifiCorp s local field personnel and management and region dispatch responded to the event at approximately : p.m. PacifiCorp field personnel were put on stand-by and local management coordinated with local fire officials to determine when assessments of

15 Caswell/ 0 0 damage could commence. At :0 p.m. the Pacific Power Emergency Action Center (PPEAC) convened and immediately put all PacifiCorp line personnel, foresters, mechanics and logistics staff on stand-by in Klamath Falls, Medford and Grants Pass, Oregon, ready to be dispatched to the affected area upon determination of safe access to the area to assess the damage and restore service. Crews, equipment and support personnel were dispatched to the area on September and restoration activities commenced in areas that could be accessed. Q. Did the Governor declare a state of emergency as a result of the Boles Fire? A. Yes. On September, 0, Governor Brown declared a state of emergency due to the effects of the King and Boles fires. On October, 0, PacifiCorp notified the Commission that it had activated its CEMA to record costs associated with the Boles Fire. Q. Has the Company previously sought recovery for the Boles Fire-related costs recorded in its CEMA? A. Yes. On March, 0, the Company filed A.-0-0 to recover costs recorded in its CEMA, including costs for the Boles Fire through March 0, 0. The Commission approved the Company s request in D Q. Over what time period were the Boles Fire-related costs that are included in this instant Application incurred? A. The costs included in this application were incurred after March 0, 0. Q. What additional costs were incurred since March 0, 0? A. A large neighborhood (many of which were residences) located in Weed, California was completely destroyed in the fire. Specifically, CalFire s incident report indicates

16 Caswell/ that the fire destroyed single residences and commercial structures and damaged structures. Because it took the community an extended period of time to rebuild the destroyed structures, the installation of the replacement electric facilities was delayed. These efforts continued into 0 and resulted in additional CEMAeligible costs incurred after March 0, 0. Q. Does this conclude your direct testimony? A. Yes.