North Auckland and Northland proposal - history
- Transpower's application (September 2007)
- Modelling material provided by Transpower in support of its proposal
- Opportunity for comments (27 September 2007)
- Commission's comments on draft proposal
- Outstanding issues (September 2007)
- Additional scenario (October 2007)
- Timetable and amendments (updated December 2008)
- Transpower's revised application (May 2008)
- Opportunity for comment (May 2008)
- Notice of Intention (19 December 2008)
- Reasons for Decision (December 2008)
- Opportunity for comment
- Public Conference
- Call for Submissions
- Public Conference presentations
- Public Conference transcript
- Transpower reports
- Comments period
- Final Decision for proposal 1
- Withdrawal of proposal 2
- Report on live line working
On 21 September 2007, Transpower New Zealand Limited submitted to the Electricity Commission a new grid upgrade plan (2007 GUP) under clause 12 of section III of part F of the Electricity Governance Rules 2003.
The 2007 GUP included two proposals relating to investments in North Auckland and Northland.
The first proposal (NAaN proposal 1) had been submitted as a reliability investment and included the installation of a 220kV cross harbour cable connection between Penrose and Albany substations, and the reinforcement of Penrose substation from Pakuranga substation.
The second proposal (NAaN proposal 2) had also been submitted as a reliability investment, and involved Transpower securing rights to preserve the option to install a second cable.
- Attachment list
- A Economic Assessment
- Appendix B - Revised NPV results based on an additional market development scenario of 90% renewable
- B Technical Report
- C Vector Developments for the North Auckland and Northland region
- D Assumptions
- E Assessment of Options
- F Capital Cost Estimates for Alternatives
- G Request for Information cover sheet
- G Request for Information
- H Summary of public workshop held 13 July 2007
- I HEN-OTA 220kv line - Upgrade with High Temperature Low Sag Conductor
- J High Temperature Conductor, 110kV lines
- L Construction Program
- M ROAM Report
- Northern Generation Option - the Commission asked Transpower to further explain its indicative GIT analysis of the Northern generation option (which was not included as an alternative project);
- Capital Costs- Transpower indicated that it would provide additional detail regarding capital costs shortly in a format previously agreed with the Commission;
- The Commission asked Transpower to explain the economic basis for its load shifting assumptions between Penrose and Mt Roskill grid exit points;
- The GIT application relied on significant avoided investment costs in Vector's network. The Commission sought further information regarding the costs that would be avoided by Vector if NAaN proposal 1 was implemented;
- Transpower agreed to provide a revised reliability benefit analysis;
- The Commission asked for further information regarding the property costs relating to the HTC alternative.
- provide written comments on NAaN proposal 1 and NAaN proposal 2; and
- requested that the Commission consider alternatives to NAaN proposal 1, and alternatives to NAaN proposal 2.
- Commission's 2 October 2007 letter
- Transpower's 15 October 2007 letter
- the amount for which approval is sought increased from $515 million to $577 million (in $2013) for proposal 1;
- the amount for which approval is sought for proposal 2 increased from $6.2 million to $12.9 million (in $2009);
- Transpower advised that the technical need date for proposal 1 was 2016 but sought approval for a 2013 commissioning date;
- Transpower's proposal 1 anticipated using the Vector tunnel between Penrose and Hobson substations as opposed to the road route option even though the costs were greater;
- additional works had also been included, notably a new 220/110kV transformer at Penrose which resolved an issue created by the North Island Grid Upgrade project; and
- Transpower provided further analysis of the non-transmission option (generation at Rodney).
- 9 May 2008 letter
- Application for approval
- A - Economic Assessment - Application of the GIT
- B - Technical Report
- C - Vector Developments for the North Auckland and Northland region
- D - Assumptions
- E - Assessment of Options
- F - Capital Cost Estimates for Alternatives
- G - Request for Information
- H - Summary of Public Workshop
- I - Henderson - Otahuhu 220kV line - Upgrade with high temperature low sag conductor
- J - Otahuhu - Mangere - Roskill - Hepburn Rd 110kV circuits - Upgrade with high temperature low sag conductor
- L - Project timing
- provided written comments on Transpower's revised proposals; and
- requested that the Commission consider alternatives to Transpower's revised proposals.
- The interests of end use customers were materially adversely affected by the cost or the service outcome of the reliability investment to which the notice relates; or
- The Grid Investment Test has not been applied properly to the Grid Upgrade Plan
Under rule 13.3.2 and rule 13.3.5 of section III of part F of the Electricity Governance Rules 2003, the Commission gave notice to provide designated transmission customers and parties affected by the revised proposals with an opportunity to:
Comments and/or requests were sought by the Commission by 5.00 pm on Thursday 5 June 2008. The Commission received eight submissions.
On 19 December 2008, the Commission published a notice of its intention to decline Transpower's NAaN proposal 1.
The document below presents the Commission's analysis of NAaN proposal 1 and explains the reasons supporting the Commission's intention to decline the proposal.
The Commission was assisted in its decision making by analysis of the information provided by Transpower undertaken by its staff and a number of key advisors.
Under rule 15.2 of section III of part F of the Electricity Governance Rules 2003, a designated transmission customer, an authorised representative of parties substantially affected by the Grid Upgrade Plan, or Transpower, may, within 10 working days of the date of publication of the notice of intention (that is, by 5pm on 8 January 2009), request that the Commission hold a public conference if they consider that:
The purpose of a public conference is to provide a final opportunity for comment on the reliability investment to which the notice relates.
On 19 December 2008, the Electricity Commission published a notice of intention to decline Transpower's NAaN proposal 1.
On 23 December 2008, the Commission received requests for a public conference from Transpower and Vector Ltd under rule 15.2 of section III of part F of the Electricity Governance Rules 2003 and agreed to hold a public conference. The purpose of the public conference was to provide a final opportunity for comment on the proposed investment.
The Commission invited parties to register their interest in attending the NAaN proposal conference.
The conference was held on Monday, 2 March 2009 at:
Digsilent Power Systems Analysis Cases (Note: To open this file you require the Digsilent software package and the file needs to be saved by the user)
Under rule 13.3.2 and rule 13.3.5 of section III of part F of the Electricity Governance Rules 2003, the Commission gave notice that it was providing designated transmission customers and parties affected by the proposals with an opportunity to:
Comments and/or requests were sought by the Commission by midday on Friday 9 November 2007. The Commission received 10 submissions.
In preparing submissions, designated transmission customers and affected parties noted that the Commission raised with Transpower a number of issues relating to NAaN proposal 1 prior to receiving the 2007 GUP. These were summarised and further details provided in the Commission's letter of 31 August 2007.
On 2 October 2007, the Commission wrote to Transpower seeking additional information on the issues listed above. On 15 October 2007, Transpower wrote to the Commission providing further information.
In light of the recently finalised NZES and other developments in the Government's climate change policies, the Commission wrote to Transpower on 12 October 2007 to ask Transpower to provide revised NPV results for the NAaN proposals based on the addition of a “90% renewables by 2025” scenario. The Commission considered this new scenario as well as the four other scenarios.
On 26 October 2007, Transpower provided the results of the analysis.
On 20 December 2007, the Commission wrote to Transpower proposing a revised timetable for NAaN Proposals 1 and 2.
On 13 February 2007, Transpower wrote to the Commission advising that it was unable to agree a timetable as it was still discussing the timing of grid reinforcements into Penrose and through to Albany with Vector.
Transpower suggested that the agreement on the timetable be deferred until Transpower had completed the work.
On 9 May 2008, Transpower submitted revised versions of the NAaN proposals to the Commission. On 14 May 2008, the Commission and Transpower agreed to a timetable for consideration and approval of the proposals (“May 2008 timetable”).
The May 2008 timetable lapsed as the Commission's review of the revised versions of the NAaN proposals required further discussion between the Commission and Transpower.
Accordingly, on 1 December 2008, the Commission and Transpower agreed to an amended timetable (“December 2008 timetable”).
On 9 May 2008, Transpower submitted revised versions of the NAaN proposals (revised Proposals) to the Commission. Transpower was seeking approval for $577 million for proposal 1 and $12.9 million for proposal 2.
The main changes to the original proposals were:
Rendezvous Hotel Auckland
Corner of Vincent Street and Mayoral Drive
- Auckland City Council presented on behalf of Cr Aaron Bhatnagar
- Mighty River Power
- North Shore City Council
- Steve Goldthorpe Energy Analyst Ltd
- Oakley Greenwood
- Powerlink Queensland
To assist submitters in preparing their submissions, the Commission held a technical briefing on 13 February 2009 in Auckland.
A summary of the relevant questions asked of the Commission and associated answers is below.
In order to make the public conference process as transparent and efficient as possible, the Commission invited interested parties (whether intending to be present at the conference or not) to provide a written submission in order to assist the Commission in making its final decision.
As part of its preparation for the public conference, the Commission invited submissions on the Commission's decision to decline NAaN proposal 1. The Commission sought written submissions by 5pm on Friday 20 February 2009. The Commission received 18 submissions.
The following presentations were made at the 2nd of March 2009 public conference regarding the Commission's notice of intention to decline the NAaN Investment Proposal.
Transpower made the following reports available at the public conference:
The Commission received 9 comments/submissions.
On 19 December 2008, the Commission issued a notice of intention to decline Transpower's NAaN proposal 1 in accordance with rule 15.1 of the Electricity Governance Rules 2003.
At the request of a number of affected parties, a public conference was held in Auckland on 2 March 2009. The purpose of the public conference was to provide the affected parties with a final opportunity to comment on NAaN proposal 1.
Following the Commission's consideration of additional material made available at the public conference, the Commission decided to approve NAaN proposal 1. The Commission published its final reasons for decision document below.
The Commission was assisted in its decision making by analysis of the information provided by Transpower undertaken by its staff.
On 20 April 2009, Transpower wrote to the Commission withdrawing the North Auckland and Northland proposal 2. Transpower advised that the technical issues related to a second cable in the Vector tunnel along with diversity risks needed further investigation. A copy of the letter is below:
Following the NAaN public conference, held in Auckland on 2 March 2009, questions were raised regarding the reconductoring of live transmission lines, particularly where lines had significant under build as occurs on the Henderson-Otahuhu line. As a result the Commission engaged KT Power to assess and report on the opportunities for live line working in New Zealand.
NAaN-Alternatives-for-EC.zip | zip | 1.2 MB | Last Changed: 07/09/2010 3:31pm
Note: you will need the Digsilent software packate to open this file after it has been saved.
This page is related to: Transmission.