delta to wye working group update: looking at transformer ... · delta to wye working group update:...

Delta to Wye Working Group Update: Looking at transformer configurations and customer services

Utility Advisory Council

December 8, 2016

Working Group Update

2

At the UAC meeting on May 19, 2016, it was determined that a Working Group should be formed. ESA has retained Fernand Fontaine formerly of ABB and Clarence Batterink currently with Honeywell. Request for volunteers for the LDC side was delivered November 23rd to our “Main Utility” contacts. Requests to join the group are requested by December 15, 2016.


3

DETAILS The group is expected to create documentation which outlines for all LDCs hazards with solidly grounded, 3-wire wye transformer from a delta conversion and any other configurations with potential issues. It is expected that the group will meet 3 times. First meeting is expected in the new year during the week of February 6-10.

Utility Owned Generation and Energy Storage Working Group Update


December 8, 2016


2

At the UAC meeting on October 6, 2016, it was determined that a Working Group should be formed. Request for volunteers for the LDC side was delivered October 20th to our “Main Utility” contacts. Requests to join the group are requested by November 23, 2016.


3

DETAILS The group is expected to address the application of Regulation 22/04 and the Ontario Electrical Safety Code as they relate to the installation of Generation and Energy Storage resources by LDCs. It is expected that the group will meet 1-3 times. First meeting is expected in the new year mid-January.


4

Generator and Energy Storage Working GroupName CompanyPaul Kuner Enersource HydroKevin Whitehead Whitby HydroDavid Lawler Collus PowerStreamBob Braletic PowerStreamJohn Hecimovic Toronto HydroChristopher Hale Halton Hills HydroRichard Bassindale Horizon UtilitiesVicky Khamar Hydro One BramptonShane McNally Hydro OttawaTed Olechna ESASunny Patel London HydroJigar Patel Hydro OneJason Hrycyshyn ESA Jason Lay ESA

Normand Breton ESAMartin Post ESAPatrick Falzon ESA

ESA’s plan for Updating the Regulation 22/04 Referenced Standards and Codes


December 8, 2016

Regulation 22/04 Update

2

The provincial government undertook an initiative to update standards that are referenced in regulation in order to keep up to date with the current standards and regulatory environment. The following standards and codes where identified as being referenced in Regulation 22/04:

1. CSA Standard C22.3 No.1 2. CSA Standard C22.3 No.7 3. NESC C2

Regulation 22/04 Update

3

ESA is currently working with the Ministry on this initiative. If changes to update the standards referenced in regulation to the current version were to occur, the Ministry would consult stakeholders on this change (date TBD). ESA and the Ministry would also consider implementation considerations of when any changes would come into effect.

Presented by Greg Sheil, P.Eng. Manager of Standards and Generation

November 2016

• 27.6kV circuits are positioned above 4.16kV underbuild

• Inadvertent contact with overbuild

• Voltage surge may damage utility and customer equipment

• Prolonged outage and costly repairs

• Damage claims from affected customers

Distribution class surge arresters are designed to provide protection against temporary high voltage events, such as a lightning strike or switching surge

Sustained overvoltages may cause the arrester to fail. The normal failure mode of an arrester is a permanent short to ground which causes the ground lead isolator to disconnect the shorted surge arrester from the system

Once the surge arrester is disconnected, the distribution asset it was installed to protect is at risk from any subsequent overvoltage conditions

Multiple sustained overvoltages can be expected annually

Low probability event with high impact

Convert underbuild distribution lines to the same voltage as overbuild

Convert overhead distribution to underground distribution

Use insulated spacer cable on lower circuit

Low probability event therefore do nothing and assume all risk/liability

The following solution was derived from the ArresterWorks paper: The Underbuilt Line Arrester - A Novel and Cost Effective Means of Protecting Underbuilt Circuits from Contact with the Higher Voltage Line by Jonathan Woodworth, which also references an IEEE paper: OverVoltage Protectors – A Novel Concept for Dealing with Overbuilt Distribution Circuits by Daniel J. Ward.

A station class surge arrester or “overvoltage” arrester which is designed for multiple operations – without a ground lead isolator

The station class surge arrester has a higher energy dissipation capability designed to maintain contact to ground in overvoltage conditions

Ideally, the arrester will act as a sacrificial piece and protect the distribution equipment from damage caused by the resultant overvoltage

Installed at strategic locations, central to the underbuild feeder’s length, identified based on the highest risk and proximity to overbuilt lines

Station Class Polymer-Housed Arresters, as per ANSI/IEEE Standard C62.11-2012

– IEEE Standard for Metal-Oxide Surge Arresters for AC Power Circuits

Suitable for single and three phase applications

Suitable for use on 4 wire multi-grounded distribution system

Arrester Characteristics

Distribution Class

Station Class

Arrester Material Polymer Polymer

MCOV 2.55kV 2.55kV

Duty Cycle 3kV 3kV

Pressure Relief Capability 20kA 63kA

Maximum Energy Discharge (kJ/kV MCOV)

1.8 4.9

Isolator Yes No

• 4.16kV underbuild is framed on steel cross-arms

• Three-phase station class surge arresters installed on a cluster-mount bracket

• Animal guards were installed for improved reliability

• 207 arresters were installed at 71 locations

On July 8, 2016:

• A 27.6kV tap failed due to a lightning strike and fell onto lower 4.16kV circuit causing an outage in a residential area

• Line crews found the nearest overvoltage arresters on the line had operated (1.5km away)

• Arresters operated as intended

• Zero damage claims reported

• Tested in our shop and it was still intact and conductive

Thank you.

For further information, contact Sunny Patel at

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]�

Charity M. Lynn Applications Engineer Arresters

Hubbell Power Systems, Inc. 1850 Richland Ave. East

Aiken, SC 29801

August 28, 2014 Subject: Fault protection

To: Whom It May Concern at London Hydro

As an introduction, the Ohio Brass Company is one of the operating companies of Hubbell Power Systems,

Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Hubbell, Inc. headquartered in Orange, CT. Hubbell Power Systems is a

manufacturer of a wide variety of products for transmission and distribution needs of the electric utility

industry. Ohio Brass manufactures insulators and arresters for all system voltages and applications, and cable

accessories for underground systems.

The short circuit type test demonstrates that an arrester failure doe not result in a violent shattering of the arrester housing. Per IEC 60099-4 Ed. 3 Section 8.10.4.1, the fault duration during the short circuit testing is dependent upon the current test level requirements in table 7.

HPS successfully completed the short circuit test per the IEC standard on the EVP arrester. The results can be found in the design test report number EU1593-H-00 on pages 48 to 50. These tests demonstrate the capability of the EVP arrester design to withstand fault currents up to a maximum claimable 63 kA during the rated short circuit test (highest current). The report also shows the EVP passed the required intermediate and low short circuit current test levels.

In addition to the data in the test report, this letter certifies that the electrically failed (shorted) 3 kV rated EVP arrester, base part number EVP000300, can withstand one to two recloses with system fault levels of 17kA for three-phase and 12kA for single-phase while remaining structural intact and conducting current to ground. Thank you for the opportunity. If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate in contacting me.

Regards,

Charity M. Lynn

Applications Engineer Arresters Business Unit Hubbell Power Systems

Dennis W. Lenk, P.E. Principal Engineer Arrester Business Unit Hubbell Power Systems – Wadsworth, OH

ArresterFacts 010 The Lightning Surge and Arresters

Copyright ArresterWorks 2008 Jonathan J. Woodworth Page1

ArresterFacts 022

The Underbuilt

Line Arrester

A Novel and Cost Effective Means of

Protecting Underbuilt Circuits from Contact

with the Higher Voltage Line

Rev 1 May 11, 2010

by Jonathan Woodworth Consulting Engineer

ArresterWorks

May 11, 2009

REV 2 6-23-10

ArresterFacts 022 The Underbuilt Line Arrester


The Underbuilt Line Arrester A Cost Effective Means of Protecting Underbuilt Circuits

Contents

Introduction Installation Considerations Relevant Definitions Future Work The Problem List of Other ArresterFacts Historical Solutions A New Concept Speed of Overload

Introduction The underbuilt line arrester is a simple solution to a problem that has plagued overbuilt distribution circuits for decades –namely, protection from sustained overvoltage events. With the exception of the term underbuilt line, these are the opening words of a recently published IEEE paper by Dan Ward an IEEE Fellow employed at Dominion Virginia Power. I agree with Dan and his new concept, that this is a simple and effective means of mitigating a serious safety and equipment problem that has up until now been unsolved. This ArresterFacts summarizes and adds to the IEEE paper titled “OverVoltage Protectors – A Novel Concept for Dealing with Overbuilt Distribution Circuits”

Definitions Underbuilt Line Arrester Any arrester that clamps the power frequency voltage rapidly to ground during a sustained overvoltage event and holds it there until reset (or removed). Overbuilt Construction This is a type of power system construction where two separate circuits are supported by the same pole. The upper circuit can be 50 to 500% higher in voltage than the circuit built below.

Underbuilt Circuit The lower voltage circuit (generally a distribuiotn circuit) constructed beneath a distribution or transmission circuit.

Figure 1 Overbuilt Circuit Configuration with Underbuilt Line Arrester and Transmission Line Arresters

Underbuilt

Line Arresters

Transmission

Line Arresters



The Problem When two overhead circuits of different voltages exist on the same poles, the possibility exists that contact between the two circuits will occur. When this happens, damage and failures occur to utility equipment on the lower voltage circuit and to customers’ end use equipment served from the lower voltage circuit. When contact is made, the voltage on the lower voltage rises until its arresters overload and set off their disconnectors if so equipped. The standard distribution arrester may explode if it is a porcelain type or if it is a more contemporary polymer housed arrester it may just become a short until its disconnector operates. In either case, it most likely has protected the circuit during the initial contact, however if the higher voltage circuit has a reclose operation, the voltage on the lower voltage circuit immediately increases to levels that do damage on the lower voltage circuit since the distribution arresters are effectively out of the circuit. Historical Solutions The most common solution is no solution at all. The risk is accepted and if an event occurs, the utility pays for the damages. A less common but effective solution is to relocate the circuits and in some cases move the distribution circuit underground. Moving the circuit underground for one or two spans is quite often seen where a transmission line crosses a distribution line, however when the run concurrently on the same poles for miles, this solution is very costly. If the difference in the two system voltages is not significant, sometimes the lower voltage circuit is converted to the higher voltage. In some countries, this author has seen where a ground grid is installed between the

two systems and in the case of a line drop of the high voltage circuit, it is intercepted by a grounded grid. In all these historical solutions, the effort is considerable and the cost even more so. That is why the most common solution is to allow the insurance policy pay. As the cost of these events increases and the constant growing demand for more safety in power delivery the no solution option is rapidly becoming unacceptable.

A New Concept What Dan Ward has put forth as a simple solution seems so obvious, that one has to wonder why it was not consider much before this. Since arresters are capable of clamping power frequency overvoltages, he believed if the arrester was specified correctly it could be used as the protector in these high voltage contact events, so that is exactly what he did.

Figure 2 Close-up of Underbuilt Line Arresters

Co

urt

esy

of

Do

min

ion

Vir

gin

ia P

ow

er



For this special arrester the following is required.

1. Must be rated so that it will clamp a sustained power frequency overvoltage to levels below the withstand of electronic equipment attached to the lower voltage system.

2. Must remain on the circuit after the initial event and through any re-energizations of the high voltage line.

3. Since it cannot be equipped with a disconnector, it must be of very high reliability and not likely fail in the presence of lightning.

4. When overloaded, it must result in a near short circuit.

When applying this type of arrester on the lower voltage circuit of an overbuild system the lower voltage circuit is effectively immune to a line drop from above. The arrester is most likely sacrificed during the event, but this is an insignificant cost as compared to the cost of damaged equipment for miles along the lower voltage circuit. The arrester that meets the above criteria for this application is simply a high energy station class polymer housed arrester. The reason a standard polymer housed station class arrester was chosen is because it meets all the listed specifications. 1. Their MCOV can be

specified to be equal or lower than the distribution arresters on the lower voltage circuit and can clamp power frequency at levels that do not

result in damage to equipment on the lower voltage circuit.

2. This arrester design is very robust and will not disintegrate or explode during a high fault current event.

3. High energy rated station class arresters are equipped with very large diameter disks that are very resistant to lightning thus making them more reliable than a distribution arrester. This is more necessary when the arresters are not effectively shielded as they are in this example.

4. When overloaded, this type of arrester becomes nearly a short circuit and is not equipped with a ground lead disconnector.

Speed of Overload Not by design, but more by luck, the overload (or TOV capability) speed of most arresters is quite fast compared to the withstand time of equipment connected to service voltage. This is shown in figure 3. Because arresters are designed to clamp lightning and switching surges, they are generally not capable of riding through very

Figure 3 Overload Speed of Arresters and Withstand of Equipment



high power frequency overloads. Their rapid conversion to a short circuit is an advantage in this application. Installation and Selection Considerations

Location – The arresters only need to be installed on the lower voltage system. Since this issue is a power frequency (50-60 Hz) issue, the location of the underbuilt line arrester is not critical. Almost anywhere on the circuit will work. Of course closer to the source of the fault will be better, but not critical. One arrester must be installed on each phase. One arrester at each end of the overbuilt line is recommended only for redundancy sake and it is further recommended that one set per mile be installed.

Grounding: It is recommended that the arresters have a good ground (10-30 ohms). This will help insure quick overload and the lowest clamping voltage possible.

Wildlife Protective Devices: Since these arresters are not equipped with ground lead disconnectors, it is imperative that they do not experience a failure due to animals. If they are failed due to an animal, the resulting outage will be much longer than desired. If at all possible, use as large a wildlife guard as possible to insure that wildlife cannot compromise the circuit at this critical arrester.

Fault Current Withstand: When selecting the arrester, make sure the fault current withstand of the arrester is higher than the available fault current of the higher voltage line as well as the lower voltage line.

Faulted Circuit Indicators: Installing these devices on the line or grounded side of the arrester may be helpful in locating a faulted unit. They can be seen in figure 2 just above the arresters. Future Work

This application is new and untested with time. It appears to be an excellent and simple solution to this age old issue. Anyone with experience and comments on this issue are encouraged to email me at [email protected] and share your experiences.

mailto:[email protected]

ArresterFacts 016 Selecting Arrester MCOV and Uc


____________________________________________________________________________________ Other ArresterFacts Available

Arrester Lead Length Field Testing Arresters Infrared Thermometer Guide for Selecting an Arrester Field Test Method VI Characteristics The Externally Gapped Arrester (EGLA) The Disconnector Understanding Mechanical Tests of Arresters What is a Lightning Arrester? The Switching Surge and Arresters The Lightning Surge and Arresters Understanding the Arrester Energy Handling Issue Understanding Discharge Voltage

What is a Riser Pole Arrester? Selecting Arrester MCOV and Uc

ArresterFacts Usage ArresterFacts are Copyrighted documents intended for the

education of arrester users and stakeholders. If you choose to

copy any part of this document for teaching purposes you have

my permission, however please give ArresterWorks proper

credit.

Thank you for using www.ArresterWorks.com as a source of

information on high voltage surge arresters.

Jonathan Woodworth Principal Consultant ArresterWorks

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterWorks_ArresterFacts-001_ArresterLeadLength.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterWorks_ArresterFacts-002_Field_Testing_Arresters.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterWorks_ArresterFacts-002a_Infrared_Thermometer_As_An_Arrester_Tester.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/Arrester%20Facts%20002c%20-%20Guide%20for%20Selecting%20an%20Arrester%20Field%20Test%20Method.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/Typical%20VI%20Characteristic.xls

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/Arrester%20Facts%20004a%20-%20Externally%20Gapped%20Arrester.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/Arrester%20Facts%20005%20-%20Arrester%20Disconnector.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterFacts%20007%20-%20Understanding%20New%20IEC%20Mechanical%20Test%20Requirements%20of%20Arresters.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterFacts%20009%20What%20is%20an%20Arrester%20R3.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterFacts%20010%20-%20The%20Switching%20Surge%20and%20Arresters.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterFacts%20011%20-%20The%20Lightning%20Surge%20and%20Arresters.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterFacts%20012%20-%20Understanding%20The%20Arrester%20Energy%20Handling%20Issue.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterFacts%20012%20-%20Understanding%20The%20Arrester%20Energy%20Handling%20Issue.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterFacts%20013%20-%20Understanding%20Arrester%20Discharge%20Voltage.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterFacts%20015%20-%20What%20is%20a%20Riser%20Pole%20Arrester.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterFacts%20016%20Selecting%20Arrester%20MCOV-Uc.pdf

http://www.arresterworks.com/

Dec 8 2016

UAC Member Survey 2016

UAC Member Survey 2016

38% Response Rate

• Results summarized to ESA Board’s Regulatory Affairs & Governance Committee

UAC MEMBER SURVEY RESULTS • DEC 8 2016 2

Accomplishments – 2016

Major Accomplishments • Education re: powerline safety

• Development OEB Scorecard Safety Metric

• Involvement in the consultation process around changes to 22/04 re: mandatory reporting of serious electrical incidents


Looking Forward

UAC’s Focus for 2017 • Update the guidelines for reporting of serious incidents

• Communication of serious and/or fatal incidents. Find a way to communicate these almost immediately

• Education material for public awareness measure for the OEB Score Card


Challenges and Opportunities

• More robust and timely pre read materials and minutes

• More involvement of council at earlier stages of projects/initiatives – seems like ESA has already made decisions

• ESA should highlight and summarize UAC accomplishments annually

• Members need to be more vocal and share their views

• ESA needs to make UAC aware of how council feedback is taken back and used within ESA


Q1 To what degree do you agree/disagreewith the following:

Answered: 9 Skipped: 0

I understandESA's strate...

I understandwhat ESA's...

I understandwhat my role...

The Council isan effective...

1 / 22

Utility Advisory Council Member Survey 2016 SurveyMonkey

0.00%0

66.67%6

33.33%3

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

0.00%0

77.78%7

22.22%2

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

33.33%3

55.56%5

11.11%1

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

33.33%3

55.56%5

11.11%1

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

33.33%3

66.67%6

0.00%0

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

# Additional Comments: Date

1 Sometimes I feel the level of engagement of the council is done too late in the process. Other times I feel ESAalready has their mind made up.

11/29/2016 3:58 PM

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

The Council'spractices...

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

I understand ESA's strategy and business plan

I understand what ESA's priorities are

I understand what my role and responsibility is as a Council member

The Council is an effective forum for ESA and stakeholders to engage

The Council's practices reflect its Term of Reference

2 / 22


Q2 In the last twelve months, has theCouncil's contribution to the followingincreased, decreased, or remained the

same?Answered: 9 Skipped: 0

3 / 22


Increased Remained the Same Decreased

Assisting ESAto deliver o...

Providinginsight to E...

Identifyingemerging issues

Providingadvice to ES...



0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

4 / 22


22.22%2

77.78%7

0.00%0

9

22.22%2

77.78%7

0.00%0

9

44.44%4

55.56%5

0.00%0

9

33.33%3

66.67%6

0.00%0

9

22.22%2

66.67%6

11.11%1

9

22.22%2

77.78%7

0.00%0

9


1 issuance and approval of minutes don't appear to be in accordance with the Terms of Reference 12/6/2016 5:16 PM

Increased Remained the Same Decreased Total

Assisting ESA to deliver on its goals

Providing insight to ESA on stakeholder perspectives

Identifying emerging issues

Providing advice to ESA on technical items

Providing advice to ESA on policy terms/items

Providing advice to ESA on operational items

5 / 22


Q3 What would you consider to be theCouncil's major accomplishments over the

past year?Answered: 3 Skipped: 6

# Responses Date

1 -Development of safety measure for OEB scorecard in a relatively short time-frame. -communication of potentialpowerline safety hazards to target audiences e.g. ladders to DIYers and roofers, and to dump-truck operatorsoperating beneath powerlines.

12/6/2016 5:16 PM

2 Input into the OEB score card. Working group for the serious reporting of incidents (meter failures). 11/29/2016 3:58 PM

3 Although I'm not in agreeance with it, the reporting for meters was the proper channel for this to discussed andcommunicated through.

10/17/2016 10:41 AM

6 / 22


14.29% 1

85.71% 6

Q4 Is there anything the Council did notaccomplish over the last year?


Total 7

Yes

No

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Answer Choices Responses

Yes

No

7 / 22


Q5 If yes, what?Answered: 1 Skipped: 8

# Responses Date

1 Update the guideline for reporting serious electrical incidents 10/27/2016 3:57 PM

8 / 22


Q6 What should the Council's priorities bein the year ahead?


# Responses Date

1 finding a way to be allowed to communicate almost immediately (and definitely sooner than currently permitted),serious and/or fatal powerline contacts and incidents in an attempt to not have history repeat itself during the time ittakes to ESA or another authority (MOL) to investigate;

12/6/2016 5:16 PM

2 Education material for the Public Awareness around the OEB score card. 11/29/2016 3:58 PM

3 I feel that the council should continue to be an avenue for information to be shared and feedback to be recieved. Thereis a thought that the LDCs can influence the decisions of ESA through this council, which is a misconception.

10/17/2016 10:41 AM

9 / 22


Q7 To what degree do you agree/disagreewith the following?


The Council isengaged at t...

As a Councilmember, I am...

I haveconfidence i...

I understandhow Council...

10 / 22


11.11%1

55.56%5

22.22%2

11.11%1

0.00%0

9

11.11%1

88.89%8

0.00%0

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

0.00%0

100.00%8

0.00%0

0.00%0

0.00%0

8

11.11%1

55.56%5

0.00%0

33.33%3

0.00%0

9

0.00%0

66.67%6

0.00%0

22.22%2

11.11%1

9

11.11%1

33.33%3

55.56%5

0.00%0

0.00%0

9



The Council isaware of the...

The Council iseffective in...

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

StronglyAgree

Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree

Total

The Council is engaged at the appropriate stage in ESA's strategic planningprocess

As a Council member, I am clear about the work of the council vs. the work ofESA staff

I have confidence in the information I receive from ESA at Council meetings

I understand how Council feedback is communicated within ESA

The Council is aware of the impact of its advice on ESA

The Council is effective in carrying out its mandate

11 / 22


1 - 12/6/2016 5:16 PM

2 Never really sure if ESA see value in the council. 11/29/2016 3:58 PM

12 / 22


Q8 How could the Council be moreeffective?


# Responses Date

1 -engagement of wider LDC audience to listen in on meetings; -highlighting and summarizing UAC accomplishments vsgoals annually

12/6/2016 5:16 PM

2 Getting minutes out faster. Try and engage the group in more free form dialogue. Realize this is difficult when you'retrying to follow an agenda.

11/29/2016 3:58 PM

3 More members being vocal during meetings and sharing their views 10/27/2016 3:57 PM

4 Based on the comments made by council members, I don't think the objective is as clear as it could be. 10/17/2016 10:41 AM

13 / 22




Councilmembership h...

The Councilmembership h...

Theappropriate...

The Council'smembership...

14 / 22


22.22%2

55.56%5

22.22%2

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

11.11%1

77.78%7

11.11%1

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

11.11%1

88.89%8

0.00%0

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

11.11%1

66.67%6

22.22%2

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

11.11%1

88.89%8

0.00%0

0.00%0

0.00%0

9


There are no responses.


The Council isable to make...

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

StronglyAgree


Total

Council membership has the correct mix of skills and competencies to fulfill itsmandate

The Council membership has the correct mix of expertise to bring balancedperspective to issues

The appropriate stakeholder groups are present at the table

The Council's membership terms and obligations, and recruitment processes areclear

The Council is able to make collective judgments about important matters

15 / 22


0.00% 0

100.00% 7

Q10 Do you think another stakeholdergroup(s) should be represented as a

member on the Council?Answered: 7 Skipped: 2

Total 7

Yes

No

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Answer Choices Responses

Yes

No

16 / 22


Q11 If yes, which one?Answered: 1 Skipped: 8

# Responses Date

1 perhaps the Canadian Electrical Association (CEA) 12/6/2016 5:16 PM

17 / 22




Pre-meetingmaterials ar...

Pre-meetingmaterials...

The Council isprovided wit...

All Councilmembers have...

18 / 22


The Councilprovides...

Councilmembers come...

The meetingsare chaired...

The rightissues are o...

19 / 22


33.33%3

44.44%4

22.22%2

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

33.33%3

44.44%4

22.22%2

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

44.44%4

55.56%5

0.00%0

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

33.33%3

66.67%6

0.00%0

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

22.22%2

77.78%7

0.00%0

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

11.11%1

55.56%5

22.22%2

11.11%1

0.00%0

9

44.44%4

44.44%4

11.11%1

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

11.11%1

66.67%6

22.22%2

0.00%0

0.00%0

9


Councilmeetings all...

The Councilmembers are...

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

StronglyAgree


Total

Pre-meeting materials are provided in a timely manner

Pre-meeting materials clearly identify the significant topics for the Council'sconsideration

The Council is provided with the appropriate ESA personnel to examine the issuesunder discussion

All Council members have an equal voice during discussions

The Council provides relevant feedback to ESA during discussions

Council members come prepared to the meetings

The meetings are chaired effectively

The right issues are on the agenda

20 / 22


22.22%2

66.67%6

11.11%1

0.00%0

0.00%0

9

22.22%2

55.56%5

22.22%2

0.00%0

0.00%0

9


There are no responses.

Council meetings allow for constructive discussion and critical questioning

The Council members are able to raise issues that are of interest to them or theirconstituents

21 / 22


Q13 Do you have any additional commentsfor ESA regarding the Council?


# Responses Date

1 Nothing at this time 12/1/2016 11:46 AM

2 None at this time. 10/17/2016 10:41 AM

22 / 22


Patrick Falzon, Powerline Safety Specialist Electrical Safety Authority December 8, 2016

Utility Advisory Council Bonding of Roadway Lighting Systems & Communications Systems

Bonding of Roadway Lighting Systems & Communications Systems

OESC Rule 30-1300 Roadway lighting systems (1) Roadway lighting systems shall be installed in accordance with Rule 2-024(3) and Rules 30-1000 to

30-1036, except that Rule 30-1006(1) need not apply.

(2) In-line fuseholders shall be acceptable to satisfy the requirements of Rules 30-1002 and 30-1008 for

single luminaires fed from overhead distribution systems where a dedicated roadway lighting bus is not

available.

(3) Grounding and bonding of roadway lighting luminaires shall be as required by the authority

having jurisdiction over the infrastructure installed on the public right-of-way.

(4) Notwithstanding Subrule (1), for high- and low-voltage line installations on public right-of-

ways, for the purpose of roadway lighting systems or traffic control systems, CSA C22.3 No. 1,

Overhead systems, or the Ontario Provincial Standards shall be permitted.


CSA 22.3 No.1 Overhead Systems

Clause 4.2.9.2 states current-carrying metal parts of a luminaire (except lamp leads) shall be adequately

insulated from non-current-carrying metal parts.

Furthermore, Clause 5.10.1.2 states luminaires and associated brackets shall be effectively grounded

unless they are located more than 1 m above the communication plant. Supply cables and wires

associated with the luminaire shall be insulated and protected by a covering that provides suitable

mechanical protection, unless they are located more than 1 m above the communication plant.


less than 1.0m greater than 1.0m


30-1030 Grounding and bonding of non-current-carrying metal parts (1) All non-current-carrying metal parts within 2.5 m of ground or at locations where unauthorized

persons may stand shall be bonded to ground by a separate bonding conductor sized in accordance

with Table 16A or 16B, as applicable.

(2) Except for isolated metal parts, such as crossarm braces, bolts, insulator pins, and the like, non-

current-carrying metal parts of electrical equipment at the pole top shall be bonded together and, if within

reach of any grounded metal, shall be grounded.

(3) The size of the grounding or bonding conductor shall be as specified in Rule 10-814.

Pertains to luminaires installed on non-distributor owned poles


• If the roadway lighting system and communications are installed within 1.0m of each other, the installer will be responsible to determine if the supply authority will permit bonding of the luminaires and their supporting brackets to the communication system and verify if the communication and the system neutral are bonded together.

• 3rd party attacher agreement • As per OESC Rule 30-1300(3), when roadway luminaires and communication

systems are installed on poles owned by the supply authority, grounding and bonding shall be as required by the supply authority.

• Reference OESC Bulletin 30-14-0

Direction

Regulation 22/04 Bulletin: Energized Temporary Distribution Work


December 8, 2016

Energized Temporary Distribution Work

• Last UAC, ESA suggested drafting a bulletin on this topic and bringing it to this council for advice.

• ESA drafted a bulletin to address Regulation 22/04 requirements for incomplete or temporary installations that will be energized and are recurring.

• Incomplete or temporary installations may be due to equipment availability issues, customer requirements, mid-construction issues.

October 6, 2016 2


October 6, 2016 3


ESA DIRECTION In order to maintain compliance with Regulation 22/04 LDCs shall comply with all sections

of Regulation 22/04, for temporary installations that are common occurrences where the

equipment is to be energized. This bulletin highlights Sections 6, 7, 8 specifically.

ESA RECOMMENDS

1. LDCs create standards and practices for temporary installations that are not common

occurrences or follow applicable clauses in OESC section 66 or section 76 and

2. Review the definition of “No undue hazard” or “site left in safe condition” (as per the LDC

Construction Verification Program) with staff involved in the installation of temporary

services and staff who inspect the installation.

UPDATE • NOVEMBER 2015 4

Distributor Bulletin Energized Temporary Distribution Work

Electrical Distribution Safety

Month XX, 20YY 1 of 2 Bulletin DB-XX/YY

Provincial Office 155A Matheson Blvd. West, Suite 200, Mississauga, Ontario L5R 3L5 Fax 905-507-4572

Website: www.esaeds.info E-Mail: [email protected]

DISTRIBUTION COMPANY AWARENESS This bulletin replaces Bulletins DSB-02-08. It is recommended the copies be destroyed and replaced with this bulletin. This bulletin contains direction on how an LDC may demonstrate compliance with Regulation 22/04, with respect to energizing temporary distribution work. ESA DIRECTION In order to maintain compliance with Regulation 22/04 LDCs shall comply with all sections of Regulation 22/04, for temporary installations that are common occurrences where the equipment is to be energized. This bulletin highlights Sections 6, 7, 8 specifically.

• Section 6 - The equipment shall be approved for use on the distribution system. • Section 7 – The electrical installation shall have approved plans, standard design drawings or standard

design specifications. • Section 8 – The electrical installation shall be inspected and approved.

EXAMPLES The pictures below demonstrate energized installations which may be common, temporary construction methods for an LDC.

Top Row of Pictures: Shows copper bars used in half-power situations. Bottom Row of Pictures

: Shows adequate mechanical protect of cables run above grade.

http://www.esaeds.info/�


Distributor Bulletin Energized Temporary Distribution Work

Electrical Distribution Safety

Month XX, 20YY 2 of 2 Bulletin DB-XX/YY

Provincial Office 155A Matheson Blvd. West, Suite 200, Mississauga, Ontario L5R 3L5 Fax 905-507-4572

Website: www.esaeds.info E-Mail: [email protected]

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Crews installing temporary services as an alternative to restoring power to a customer due to an underground “burn off” shall install the service in a safe manner and not expose members of the public to a hazard. Common hazards ESA has found are:

• Service cables laid on the ground unprotected, unidentified and unbarriered • Unbarriered overhead service cable without adequate clearance. • Service cables entering side of meter base with no box connector exposing live terminals to the public • Homeowner unaware of temporary service on residential property • Members of the public exposed to accessible bare neutral conductor

ESA RECOMMENDS • LDCs create standards and practices for temporary installations that are not

• Review the definition of “No undue hazard” or “site left in safe condition” (as per the LDC Construction Verification Program) with staff involved in the installation of temporary services and staff who inspect the installation.

common occurrences or follow applicable clauses in OESC section 66 or section 76 and

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Information requests and follow-up may be directed to ESA at [email protected]. For questions on this bulletin please be prepared to quote Bulletin “DB-xx/yy”.

http://www.esaeds.info/�


Patrick Falzon, Powerline Safety Specialist Electrical Safety Authority December 8, 2016

Utility Advisory Council Buildings and Powerlines

Buildings and Powerlines

3.1.19.1. Clearance to Buildings

(1) A building shall not be located beneath existing above ground electrical conductors.

(2) The horizontal clearance measured from the maximum conductor swing to the building, including balconies, fire

escapes, flat roofs or other accessible projections beyond the face of the building, shall,

(a) be not less than 1 m, for electrical conductors carrying voltages 750 V or less, except where necessary to connect to the electrical wiring

of the building,

(b) be not less than 3 m, for electrical conductors carrying voltages greater than 750 V but not exceeding 46 kV,

(c) be not less than 3.7 m, for electrical conductors carrying voltages greater than 46 kV but not exceeding 69 kV, or

(d) conform to the requirements of CAN/CSA-C22.3 No.1, “Overhead Systems”, for electrical conductors carrying voltages greater than 69

kV.

(3) Where the swing of an above ground electrical conductor not owned or operated by an electrical supply authority is not

known, a swing of not less than 1.8 m shall be used.

OBC Article 3.1.19 Above Ground Electrical Conductors


•Are LDC’s still having issues with new buildings or building additions installed under or encroaching overhead powerlines?

•Has LDC’s had discussions with their local Building Department to discuss issues?

Looking for feedback

2016 Auditor Debrief

1

The information in this presentation was prepared as discussion points for the auditor meeting. In some cases more information may be required to understand the issue fully as discussed during the meeting. For more information please contact [email protected] or [email protected]



2016 Compliance Assessment Overview and Auditor Debrief


December 8, 2016

Compliance Assessment Overview

3

• 52 LDCs - Full Compliance (2014-42 LDCs)

• 22 LDCs - Needs Improvement only

• 15 LDCs with only one Needs Improvement and 7 LDCs with more than two Needs Improvements

• 3 LDCs had 1 Non-compliance

• 2 LDCs had more than 1 Non-compliance


4

12 14

24 27 26

34 37

44

52

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

2.00

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Audit - Compliant

DDI - Avg. # of Findings per DDI


Section 4/5 – Safety Standards • Maintenance records inconsistently completed / no prioritization of findings • Missed scheduled inspections of distribution equipment

5


Section 6 – Approval of Equipment • Unapproved equipment used • Procedure for review and approval for use of equipment returned from field not followed

6


Section 7 – Approval of Designs • No Certificate of Deviation Approval, accepted a verbal confirmation from a P. Eng regarding a deviation from an approved plan. • Certificates of approval not completed for relay settings (DIB-13-12 Distribution System Control Component Setting.) • Approved Standards not referenced on plans, layouts

7


Section 8 – Approval of Construction • Records of Inspection and Certificates not completed at time of energization • Maintenance work and emergency work Records of Inspection are not being correctly completed in accordance with the C.V.P. • Partial Certificates not regularly provided for lines and equipment energized in stages. • Records of Inspection for secondary service inspections had incomplete checklists on the form. • Records of Inspection for third party attachments are not being completed in a timely fashion • Records of Inspection completed incorrectly by checking off multiple boxes on the Record of Inspection form 8


Question How should auditors respond when LDC’s attempt to over-manage an audit? Answer • Discuss with the client. • Notify ESA. • Document. • If needed, tell them you cannot complete audit. Document.

9


Question LDC-1 was taken over by LDC-2. LDC-2 operated under its own license during a 4-month period and therefore needed to be audit for that period of time. The takeover had already been completed at time of the audit but no LDC-1 records were made available for auditing. How should an auditor respond?

10


Answer When an LDC is acquired by another LDC it is important to ensure that Regulation 22/04 is still complied with by the new, larger entity Focus is on ensuring acquired distribution assets are incorporated into maintenance schedules/processes, acquired standards or inventory/equipment is approved for use, and personnel are trained in processes, standards, etc. Some sampling of previous LDC records may be useful to identify incomplete work, but should not be the focus. continued

11


Section 4/5 – acquired assets in the field are covered by maintenance processes; Section 6 – any inventory (in stores or on trucks) is reviewed and either confirmed that it is already on the approved equipment list, formally approved or disposed of; Section 7 – appropriate training for absorbed personnel in standards & standards approval process is provided to design personnel & unapproved standards/plans are disposed of; Section 8 – relevant staff to be trained in the CVP and approved standards. The CVP should be reviewed and updated if necessary to incorporate any new staff positions. If any of these can’t be verified, document in the audit report

12


Question OEB Appendix C specifies that “vegetation” must be patrolled at least every 3 years in urban areas and 6 years in rural areas. Appendix C, Note 10 defines “vegetation” as “encroachment on distribution lines”. How should auditors respond when they notice overgrown distribution lines? Answer Ask for records (when completed and when scheduled); try to assess the potential for hazards (tree climbing is a primary concern).

13


Question How should an auditor respond when partial certificates of inspection are not provided for lines and equipment energized in stages? Should this be shown as a noncompliance or a need for improvement? Answer Failure to follow the approved CVP can be either a N/C or N/I. It is a judgment call by the Auditor as to the recurrence and severity of the audit finding.

14


Question When an LDC has contracted with a manufacturer for refurbishment of transformers, can the refurbished transformers be considered as ‘new’? If so, under what conditions? Answer No, refurbished equipment can not be treated as ‘new’. Refer to bulletin DB 05/14

15


Distributor Bulletin 05-14 Major Equipment Refurbishment

ESA recommends that LDCs review current refurbishment agreements /process /practices and ensure they are in compliance with Regulation 22/04. Some of the lessons learned from reviewing the LDCs practice are highlighted below.

1. “Distributor Developed Specifications” shall detail Requirements and not Expectations.

2. “Distributor Developed Specifications” shall detail what tests are to be performed.

3. Declaring that equipment is “tested to” a test is insufficient in a specification. The equipment is to meet or exceed a defined outcome.

4. Declarations of compliance shall be made to the Regulation and not the Guidelines.

5. Reference shall be made to identify all the equipment (e.g. by serial number) which is undergoing the LDC’s approval process.

16


Question Some LDCs would like to keep the equipment from the field for spare parts. I believe a competent person should approve and catalogue the parts to be used with a statement "no undue hazard". Answer The equipment used must be approved to meet the Regulation. The distributor may approve used or pre-regulation equipment under Good Utility Practice. Sections 2.7.2, 2.7.5 and 2.7.6 of the Technical Guideline provide additional information on how to satisfy the Regulation for major and non-major equipment approval under Good Utility Practice. 17


Question. Some LDCs' showed all the standards in a box on plans or attach with the plans. I found one LDC had a note, "All the work is in accordance with the latest edition of LDC's Stds. & Construction Manual. The plans were approved by a consultant and displayed professional engineer seal. I believe this is acceptable Answer. If the standards are referenced and the P.Eng is signing off on the entire package that is acceptable. It can be seen as a “Plan” approved by that P.Eng at that point.

18


Focus of 2016 Audits: Continue as previous years: Auditors are requested to focus on the LDC’s maintenance results (compliance with the Ontario Energy Board’s Distribution System Code – App. C). In particular chambers (also known as vaults), and similar underground infrastructure is highlighted. Process for energizing projects in stages should include the use of partial certificates & staff should be trained on the process Contractors not listed on CVP as qualified/competent signing off

19

delta to wye working group update: looking at transformer ... · delta to wye working group update:...

Documents