{"text_format":"1","workbook":"xlsx","n_sheets":50,"sheets":["Template","Logo","Non-ICM","Index","150255","150262","150263","151181","151275","151277","151278","151281","151290","151296","151299","151300","151303","151304","151307","151308","151314","151315","151318","151336","151360","151362","151363","151364","151366","151374","151385","151408","151424","151428","151430","151433","151457","151458","151462","151465","151516","151556","151855","151879","151904","151911","152281","152383","152385","152388"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":2,"macros":1,"external_links":0,"defined_names":95,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900"}

{"sheet":"Template","index":0,"n_rows":10,"n_cols":3,"rows_kept":10,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"OEB Multi-Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code"]
[null,"Project Name"]
["Pdescription","Project Description"]
["autofit","Major Category"]
[null,"Scenario"]
[null,"Project Overview"]

{"sheet":"Logo","index":1,"n_rows":0,"n_cols":0,"rows_kept":0,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[]}

{"sheet":"Non-ICM","index":2,"n_rows":49,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":49,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
[]
["C55#","Project Name",2023,2024]
[150255,"Cable Replacement Project - (B23) - Cundles Rd and Janine St, Barrie",0,1165911.0189680001]
[150262,"Cable Replacement Project - (M33) - 16th Avenue and Village Parkway, Markham",0,556788.73544399999]
[150263,"Cable Replacement Project - East - Left Behind Cable",2125720.9246175997,3009116.7901440002]
[151181,"Cable Replacement Project - Left Behind Cable, Brampton",227982.8241228,230683.61523600001]
[151275,"Cable Injection Project - (SCH) - QEW - Highway 406 - Martindale Road",630616.19469060004,813305.88730400009]
[151277,"Cable Injection Project - (SCH) -  Barbican Trail",332564.45515040006,0]
[151278,"Cable Injection Project - (SCH) -  Bunting",278152.2870218,0]
[151281,"Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (SCH) - Lake - Linwell - Geneva - Scott",43580.501420400571,0]
[151290,"Cable Replacement Project - (I3) - Bovaird - Dixie - Queen -  Hwy 410, Brampton",2362994.2032786999,2398862.6113140001]
[151296,"Cable Injection Project - (SCH) - Welland - Bunting - Carlton - Cushman",263148.90012290003,0]
[151299,"Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (HAM) - Millen - Barton - Fruitland",3283871.6538711996,2220483.1022270001]
[151300,"Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Millen - Barton - Fruitland",767763.83650000009,3093.2774279999794]
[151303,"Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (HAM) - Stone Church - Garth - Lincoln M. Alexander",2015503.7125799998,0]
[151304,"Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Stone Church - Garth - Lincoln M. Alexander",596629.78562430001,0]
[151307,"Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Upper Sherman - Stone Church - Nebo - Rymal",0,635615.74121200014]
[151308,"Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Hollybush - Parkside - Dundas - Spring Creek",0,128884.475963]
[151314,"Cable Injection  Project - (G2) -Wanless - Kennedy - Bovaird - Main, Brampton",0,500609.31767999998]
[151315,"Cable Injection Project - (G5) - Steeles - Kennedy - Hwy 407 - Main, Brampton",0,975702.39520399994]
[151318,"Cable Injection Project - (I3) -Bovaird - Dixie - Queen -  Hwy 410, Brampton",881595.09542200016,733272.47487899999]
[151336,"Cable Replacement Project - (BA22) - Sunnidale and Anne, Barrie",1575461.7311579997,2037411.2647639997]
[151360,"Cable Injection Project - (M31) - 14th - Old Kennedy - Steeles - Warden, Markham",1369926.9551147998,1431488.310576]
[151362,"Cable Injection Project - (M39) - 16th - Warden - Hwy 7 - Woodbine, Markham",1209939.4494412001,2081566.866408]
[151363,"Cable Injection Project - (M25) - 14th - McCowan - Steeles - Old Kennedy, Markham",1323881.7625002998,1357722.515498]
[151364,"Cable Injection Project - (V23) - Hwy 7 - Keele - Langstaff - Jane, Vaughan",1174782.3290909999,0]
[151366,"Cable Injection Project - (M19) - Markham - Steeles - McCowan - 14th, Markham",2075753.7836423998,0]
[151374,"Cable and Transformer Replacement - (893) - 176 - 224 Janefield Ave Subdivision, Guelph",471147.78322369995,0]
[151385,"Cable and Transformer Replacement - (892) - 74 - 176 Janefield Ave Subdivision, Guelph",0,432669.35693200002]
[151408,"Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (AREA24) - Burnhamthorpe & Miss. Road, Mississauga",1604334.1081999999,0]
[151424,"Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (AREA21) - Miss. Valley & Bloor, Mississauga",402055.99999999994,2429925.3250800003]
[151428,"Cable Injection - (AREA30) - Eglinton Ave W & Miss Rd, Mississauga",598535.79817680002,0]
[151430,"Cable Injection- (AREA 38) - Bristol & Creditview, Mississauga",0,830180.09202300012]
[151433,"Cable Injection - (AREA46) - Glen Erin & Aquitane, Mississauga",1002184.8883999999,0]
[151457,"Cable Injection Project - (V25) -  Major Mackenzie - Keele - Rutherford - Jane, Vaughan",571046.05052100006,0]
[151458,"Cable Injection Project - (V31) - Langstaff - Weston - Rutherford - Jane, Vaughan",1068316.4828267999,0]
[151462,"Cable Injection Project - (G1) - Hwy 410 - Kennedy - Wanless - Main, Brampton",0,497787.10682400002]
[151465,"Cable Replacement - Mississauga Left Behind Cable",21122.286810399994,605382.07034999994]
[151516,"Cable Replacement Project - (AREA46)- Millcreek Dr & Erin Mills Pkway, Mississauga",1542621.5276199998,0]
[151556,"Cable and Transformer Replacement - (HAM) - Hollybush - Parkside - Dundas - Spring Creek",0,3213431.5696080001]
[151855,"Cable Replacement and Switchgear Removal -  (AREA19) - Fieldgate and Ponytrail Dr, Mississauga",1558623.0583202001,0]
[151879,"Cable and Transformer Replacement - (HAM) - Upper Sherman - Stone Church - Nebo - Rymal",0,2234925.5362959998]
[151904,"Cable Replacement Project  - (AREA54) - Copenhagen Rd, Mississauga",0,2219760.1315190005]
[151911,"Cable Replacement Project - (A05) - Golf Links, Aurora",1954352.0001199997,1959523.9924000001]
[152281,"Cable Replacement Project - (M31) - Denison and Birchmount, Markham",1750811.6512042,0]
[152383,"Cable Injection - (AREA 39) - Erin Mills Pkway & Thomas St, Mississauga",0,917017.59524199995]
[152385,"Cable Injection Project - (R23) - Bathurst - Weldrick - Yonge - Carville, Richmond Hill",0,1636475.5417630004]
[152388,"Cable Injection Project - (V17) - Langstaff - Railway - Rutherford - Dufferin, Vaughan",0,1728352.7836150001]
["Total",null,{"$f":"SUM(C3:C48)","v":35085022.020793498},{"$f":"SUM(D3:D48)","v":38985949.501901001}]

{"sheet":"Index","index":3,"n_rows":47,"n_cols":2,"rows_kept":47,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["Name","Code"]
["Cable Replacement Project - (B23) - Cundles Rd and Janine St, Barrie","150255"]
["Cable Replacement Project - (M33) - 16th Avenue and Village Parkway, Markham","150262"]
["Cable Replacement Project - East - Left Behind Cable","150263"]
["Cable Replacement Project - Left Behind Cable, Brampton","151181"]
["Cable Injection Project - (SCH) - QEW - Highway 406 - Martindale Road","151275"]
["Cable Injection Project - (SCH) -  Barbican Trail","151277"]
["Cable Injection Project - (SCH) -  Bunting","151278"]
["Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (SCH) - Lake - Linwell - Geneva - Scott","151281"]
["Cable Replacement Project - (I3) - Bovaird - Dixie - Queen -  Hwy 410, Brampton","151290"]
["Cable Injection Project - (SCH) - Welland - Bunting - Carlton - Cushman","151296"]
["Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (HAM) - Millen - Barton - Fruitland","151299"]
["Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Millen - Barton - Fruitland","151300"]
["Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (HAM) - Stone Church - Garth - Lincoln M. Alexander","151303"]
["Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Stone Church - Garth - Lincoln M. Alexander","151304"]
["Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Upper Sherman - Stone Church - Nebo - Rymal","151307"]
["Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Hollybush - Parkside - Dundas - Spring Creek","151308"]
["Cable Injection  Project - (G2) -Wanless - Kennedy - Bovaird - Main, Brampton","151314"]
["Cable Injection Project - (G5) - Steeles - Kennedy - Hwy 407 - Main, Brampton","151315"]
["Cable Injection Project - (I3) -Bovaird - Dixie - Queen -  Hwy 410, Brampton","151318"]
["Cable Replacement Project - (BA22) - Sunnidale and Anne, Barrie","151336"]
["Cable Injection Project - (M31) - 14th - Old Kennedy - Steeles - Warden, Markham","151360"]
["Cable Injection Project - (M39) - 16th - Warden - Hwy 7 - Woodbine, Markham","151362"]
["Cable Injection Project - (M25) - 14th - McCowan - Steeles - Old Kennedy, Markham","151363"]
["Cable Injection Project - (V23) - Hwy 7 - Keele - Langstaff - Jane, Vaughan","151364"]
["Cable Injection Project - (M19) - Markham - Steeles - McCowan - 14th, Markham","151366"]
["Cable and Transformer Replacement - (893) - 176 - 224 Janefield Ave Subdivision, Guelph","151374"]
["Cable and Transformer Replacement - (892) - 74 - 176 Janefield Ave Subdivision, Guelph","151385"]
["Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (AREA24) - Burnhamthorpe & Miss. Road, Mississauga","151408"]
["Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (AREA21) - Miss. Valley & Bloor, Mississauga","151424"]
["Cable Injection - (AREA30) - Eglinton Ave W & Miss Rd, Mississauga","151428"]
["Cable Injection- (AREA 38) - Bristol & Creditview, Mississauga","151430"]
["Cable Injection - (AREA46) - Glen Erin & Aquitane, Mississauga","151433"]
["Cable Injection Project - (V25) -  Major Mackenzie - Keele - Rutherford - Jane, Vaughan","151457"]
["Cable Injection Project - (V31) - Langstaff - Weston - Rutherford - Jane, Vaughan","151458"]
["Cable Injection Project - (G1) - Hwy 410 - Kennedy - Wanless - Main, Brampton","151462"]
["Cable Replacement - Mississauga Left Behind Cable","151465"]
["Cable Replacement Project - (AREA46)- Millcreek Dr & Erin Mills Pkway, Mississauga","151516"]
["Cable and Transformer Replacement - (HAM) - Hollybush - Parkside - Dundas - Spring Creek","151556"]
["Cable Replacement and Switchgear Removal -  (AREA19) - Fieldgate and Ponytrail Dr, Mississauga","151855"]
["Cable and Transformer Replacement - (HAM) - Upper Sherman - Stone Church - Nebo - Rymal","151879"]
["Cable Replacement Project  - (AREA54) - Copenhagen Rd, Mississauga","151904"]
["Cable Replacement Project - (A05) - Golf Links, Aurora","151911"]
["Cable Replacement Project - (M31) - Denison and Birchmount, Markham","152281"]
["Cable Injection - (AREA 39) - Erin Mills Pkwy & Thomas St, Mississauga","152383"]
["Cable Injection Project - (R23) - Bathurst - Weldrick - Yonge - Carville, Richmond Hill","152385"]
["Cable Injection Project - (V17) - Langstaff - Keele - Rutherford - Dufferin, Vaughan","152388"]

{"sheet":"150255","index":4,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",150255]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement Project - (B23) - Cundles Rd and Janine St, Barrie"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 1,389 m (2024) of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the East (Barrie) B23 grid – Cundles Rd and Janine St area. \n\nDue to the age of the cable in the project scope area , we can predict that we will start to experience outages in the future starting with 1 outage in 2023, up to 3 outages in 2027. It is expected that completion of this project will avoid 3 failures per year as of 2027 and 233523 potential CMI.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable replacements easier to implement.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Cost of Investment"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Project is re-estimated and re-submitted."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","825 Patterson Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",1389]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","Yes"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Bowman, Todd (Todd.Bowman)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the next 2 years to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further. Deteriorated cables fail at greater rates, and Alectra Utilities forecast that if the investment is not made, that the rate of cable failures per year will increase to 0.3 in 2021 and 2 failures per year starting 2025."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","325 Customers (Mixed) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGiven that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are at end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nReplacing only the segments that failed negates the issue that the other segments were affected by cable faults which further degrades the cables' insulation and therefore, will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has  multi-year Master Service Agreement with external contractors. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable replacement projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","Due to the age of the cable in the project scope area , we can predict that we will start to experience outages in the future starting with 1 outage in 2023, up to 3 outages in 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","The cable in this area is 48 years old (installed in 1974), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report ''Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board'' results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",277]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 0 failures in this project area since 2017.\n\nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will happen starting with 1 failure in 2023, escalating to 2 failures by 2025, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n\nAssuming the failure impact is similar to other areas in the region:\nImpact of 1 failure: 277 customers affected, 77,841 CMI, and average outage duration is 104 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. This project will help avoid 3 failures per year as of 2027 and 233523 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable installed according to new Standards. Which call for the cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category","Cable Remediation"]
[null,null,"Location Description","(Barrie) - Cundles Rd and Janine St"]

{"sheet":"150262","index":5,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",150262]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement Project - (M33) - 16th Avenue and Village Parkway, Markham"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the (M33) - 16th Avenue and Village Parkway area in Markham to maintain system reliability and customer service. Cable in this area is 45 years old, whereas the typical useful life of non-tree retardant XLPE cable is 30 years. In the project scope area, there were 4 cable/splice failure(s) since 2015.\n\nIf not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027. Based on the condition of the assets cable replacement is recommended and is the alternative that provides the greatest value to customers.\n\nThe total cable quantity for replacement is approximately 3,781m. It is proposed to complete 925m in 2024 and 2856m in 2025. This investment will help avoid a total of 3 potential cable failure and 60453 potential CMI."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Cost of Investment"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Project is re-estimated and re-submitted."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",3781]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","Yes"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tenorlas, Reynaldo (Reynaldo.Tenorlas)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","Alectra Utilities’ service area has a population of underground cables totaling approximately 21 million linear meters of cable.  Alectra Utilities’ planned Underground Asset Renewal investments are driven by an increasing decline in reliability on the distribution system.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  Alectra Utilities plans to gradually but significantly increase its spending to rejuvenate or replace Cross-Linked Polyethylene (XLPE) cable and related accessories that are either in poor or very poor condition.  This investment will replace failing direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit.  It is expected that completion of this project will avoid customer outage frequency and duration. This aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets. \n \nCable manufacturers introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems of having impurities due to the nature of the manufacturing processes. Utilities installed these cables directly in the ground. These led to breakdown of insulation over time and are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period. \n \nWhen failed, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. In addition, it does not solve the underlying issue, since the older direct-buried cable remains installed and likelihood of failing again increases over time. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service. Failing cables are significantly and increasingly impacting the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. In the project scope area, there were 4 cable/splice failure(s) since 2015.\n \nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must not only halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. Without the proposed expenditures, cables will continue to degrade, and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults. Future failures are predicted at an escalating rate as cables deteriorate."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1996 Customer (Mixed - Customer/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","Alectra Utilities ensure all policies and practices don’t unnecessarily create barriers to economic development which are primarily focused within our communities."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure, and respond to outages under reactive capital. This would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction. In the project scope area, there were 4 cable/splice failure(s) since 2015. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Replace only the cable segments that experienced cable faults. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected. For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n \nAlternative #2 is not recommended because replacing only the segments that failed will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories.  \n \nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria. While this is a lower cost solution it will not negate the impact of outages and therefore not drive the greatest amount of benefit for customers. \n \nTherefore, the recommended Alternative is Alternative #1. It will decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the (M33) - 16th Avenue and Village Parkway area in Markham, thereby maintaining system reliability and customer service is a key theme for customers during customer engagement. Cable in this area is 45 years old, whereas the typical useful life of non-tree retardant XLPE cable is 30 years. In the project scope area, there were 4 cable/splice failure(s) since 2015.\n\nIf not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n\nThe total cable quantity for replacement is approximately 3,781m. It is proposed to complete 925m in 2024 and 2856m in 2025. This investment will help avoid a total of 3 potential cable failure and 60453 potential CMI.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by rehabilitating all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has  multi-year Master Service Agreement with external contractors. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable replacement projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In the project scope area, there were 4 cable/splice failure(s) since 2015.. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is 45 years old (installed in 1977), which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",307]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 4 failures in this project scope area since 2015.\n\n7 year average of failures is 4 failures / 7 years = 0.6 failure(s) per year \n\n Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failures in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 132 customers affected, 20,151 CMI, and average outage duration is 167 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 3 potential cable failure and 60453 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable installed according to new Standards. Which call for the cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category","Cable Remediation"]
[null,null,"Location Description","(M33) - 16th Avenue and Village Parkway (Markham)"]

{"sheet":"150263","index":6,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",150263]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement Project - East - Left Behind Cable"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing approximately 30,000m (4500m in 2022, 5000m in 2023, 5000m in 2024, 5000m in 2025, 5000m in 2026, 5000m in 2027) of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the East region in various areas and over multiple years.\n\n\"\"Left-behind\"\" cable segments are those segments that were intended for cable injection but turn-out to be not injectable for various reasons (e.g. too many splices, corrosion). If not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 9 failures and 700569 potential CMI.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable failures easier to avoid.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","10 Alectra"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",1]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tenorlas, Reynaldo (Reynaldo.Tenorlas)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","Yes"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",453742]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the next 2 years to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further. Deteriorated cables fail at greater rates, and Alectra Utilities forecast that if the investment is not made, that the rate of cable failures per year will increase to 0.3 in 2021 and 2 failures per year starting 2025."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","307 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGiven that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. \n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are at end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers. \n  \nIf not rehabilitated these cables will get older and will fail more often to a level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nReplacing only the segments that failed negates the issue that the other segments were affected by cable faults which further degrades the cables' insulation and therefore, will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories. \n\nThese cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria, having already undergone attempts at cable injection and been deemed unable to have successful cable injection performed.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has  multi-year Master Service Agreement with external contractors. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra East has budgeted and completed the same level of cable replacement work load in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018. Therefore the proposed annual budget for 2019 onward is a continuation of the cable replacement program at the same level."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In Alectra East, there were an average of 162 Cable and Splice failures per year since 2017. If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this project exceeds the Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",1842]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable (applicable to the selected cable remediation candidates):\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 30000 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 30000 /1000 = 7.5 failure(s)\n\nIn Alectra East, there were an average of 162 Cable and Splice failures per year since 2017. \nAnnually on average there were 162 Cable and Splice failures affecting 44,874 customers and 12,610,242 CMI \n\nImpact of 1 failure: 277 customers affected and 77,841CMI\nImpact of 7.5 failures: 277 x 7.5 = 2078 customers affected and 77,841 x 7.5 = 583807.5 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid 9 failures and 700569 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable installed according to new Standards. Which call for the cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category","1a / Lines Replacement Program/Projects"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category","Sustainment Capital (1)"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category","Cable Remediation"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Various locations in Alectra East (legacy PowerStream)"]

{"sheet":"151181","index":7,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151181]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement Project - Left Behind Cable, Brampton"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing “Left-Behind” underground Cross-Linked Polyethylene (XLPE) cables in the Central North region.  \"Left-behind\" cable segments are those segments that were intended for cable injection but turn-out to be not injectable for various reasons (e.g. too many splices, corrosion).\n\nAlectra Utilities’ planned Underground Asset Renewal investments are driven by an increasing decline in reliability on the distribution system.  Cable and cable accessories are the highest cause of failure. In 2020 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life and in poor condition.  This investment will replace the direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit.  If this project is not implemented, Central North would experience 3 failures per year, due to \"Left Behind\" cables, by 2027. It is expected that each year this project is executed, 1 failure, impacting 495 customers for 69 minutes, will be avoided.\n\nInstalling the new cables in conduit will make future cable replacements easier to implement."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","805 Sandalwood Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",1000]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Agostini, Robert (Robert.Agostini)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","Yes"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",632073]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the year following the completion of cable injection project where the \"Left Behind\" cables were identified, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 1 cable failure per year starting in 2022 and 3 failures per year starting 2027."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1639 Residential and 44 Commercial customers / 22034 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","Alectra Utilities ensure all policies and practices don’t unnecessarily create barriers to economic development which are primarily focused within our communities."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure, and respond to outages under reactive capital. This would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Replace only the cable segments that experienced cable faults. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are at end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers. \n\nReplacing only the segments that failed negates the issue that the other segments were affected by cable faults which further degrades the cables' insulation and therefore, will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has  multi-year Master Service Agreement with external contractors. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra Brampton has budgeted and completed the same level of cable replacement work load in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018. Therefore the proposed annual budget for 2019 onward is a continuation of the cable replacement program at the same level."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In Alectra Central North, there were 41, 62, 38, 40, and 49 primary cable failures from 2017 to 2021 (5-year average is 46 failures per year). If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this project exceeds Alectra Utilities' Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",1683]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 13500 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 13500 /1000 = 3.4 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central North Control Room data, there were 41, 62, 38, 40, and 49 Cable failures in 2017 to 2021, respectively (5-year average is 46 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 46 Cable failures affecting 22753.4 customers and 1562758 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 22753.4/46 = 495 customers affected and 1562758/46 = 33973 CMI.\nImpact of 3.4 failures: 495 x 3.4 = 1683 customers affected and 33973 x 3.4 = 115508 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 3.4 potential cable failures and 115508 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable installed according to new Standards. Which call for the cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Various locations in Alectra Brampton\t\t\n"]

{"sheet":"151275","index":8,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151275]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (SCH) - QEW - Highway 406 - Martindale Road"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is to perform remediation of underground cable in the northwest area of St.Catharines near the QEW and Martindale Rd.  This project covers the area that meets the criteria for cable injection candidates for a total of 26,342m.  It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 2205 customers.\n\nThis area has seen 7 failures as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 26.6 failures/100km. The failures with 5 failures in the last 3 years.  This investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  \n"]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","830 St. Catharines Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",26342]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the short term, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the short term, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","2205 customers and 13,475 kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area exceed the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","This project is forecasted to be $100/m, based on similar cable injection projects previously completed. There is an assumption that the unit cost increases with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 7 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 26.6 failures/100km. Five failures occurring in the last 3 years.  If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 26 to 34 years old (installed in 1993 and 1985 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",2208]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 26,342m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 26,342 /1000 = 6.59 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 6.59 failures: 598 x 6.59 = 3,941 customers affected and 52,945 x 6.59 = 348,908 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in phases over a period of three years, the estimated quantity is 9,351m in Year 1, 9,671m in Year 2, and 7,320m in Year 3. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 215 totalling 13,475 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 9,351 /1000 = 2.34 failures\nImpact of 2.34 failure: 598 x 2.34 = 1,399 customers affected and 52,945 x 2.34 = 123,891 CMI\nPeak KVA = 13,475 / 26,342 x 9,351 = 4,783 KVA\nThe benefit from this year onward is based on 2.34 failures\n\nYear 2\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (9,351+9,671) /1000 = 4.76 failures\nImpact of 4.76 failure: 598 x 4.76 = 2,846 customers affected and 52,945 x 4.76 = 252,018 CMI\nPeak KVA = 13,475 / 26,342 x (9,351+9,671) = 9,731\nThe benefit from this year onward is based on 4.76 failures\n\nYear 3\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (9,351+9,671+7,320) /1000 = 6.59 failures\nImpact of 6.59 failures: 598 x 6.59 = 3,941 customers affected and 52,945 x 6.59 = 348,908 CMI\nPeak KVA = 13,475 / 26,342 x (9,351+9,671+7,320) = 13,475\nThe benefit from this year onward onwards is based on 6.59 failures"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 6.59 potential cable failures and 348,908 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","QEW - Highway 406 - Martindale Road (St. Catharines)"]

{"sheet":"151277","index":9,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151277]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (SCH) -  Barbican Trail"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is to perform remediation of underground cable in the south area of St.Catharines  along Barbican Trail.  This project covers the area that meets the criteria for cable injection candidates for a total of 4,203m.  It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 352 customers.\n\nThe cable is between 33-35 years of age, without injection the insulation on these cables could degrade to a point where replacement is required, which is 6 times the cost of injection. It is prudent to inject these cables to prevent future outages\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  \n"]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","830 St. Catharines Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",4203]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",1]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the short term, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the short term, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","352 customers and 900kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area exceed the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","This project is forecasted to be $100/m, based on similar cable injection projects previously completed. There is an assumption that the unit cost increases with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 0 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 0 failures/100km."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 33 to 35 years old (installed in 1986 and 1984 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"\"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\"\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",352]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 4203m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 4203 /1000 = 1.05 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 1.05 failures: 598 x 1.05 = 628 customers affected and 52,945 x 1.05 = 55,592 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in phases over 1 year the estimated quantity is 4203m . In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 18 totalling 900 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 4203 /1000 = 1.05 failures\nImpact of 1.05 failures: 598 x 1.05 = 628 customers affected and 52,945 x 1.05 = 55,592 CMI\nPeak Load = 900 KVA\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 1.05 failures"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 1.05 potential cable failures and 55,592 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Barbican Trail (St. Catharines)"]

{"sheet":"151278","index":10,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151278]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (SCH) -  Bunting"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is to perform remediation of underground cable in the east end  of St.Catharines near Bunting Rd.  This project covers the area that meets the criteria for cable injection candidates for a total of 3,592m.  It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 302 customers.\n\nThe cable is 28 years old and nearing it's typical useful life. The project area is situated in a location where bordering locations have begun to experience failures. Injection is warrented to avoid any future failures that may occur\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  \n"]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","830 St. Catharines Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",3592]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",1]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the short term, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the short term, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","302 customers and 650 kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area exceed the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","This project is forecasted to be $100/m, based on similar cable injection projects previously completed. There is an assumption that the unit cost increases with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 0 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 0 failures/100km. "]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is 28 years old (installed in 1991), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"\"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\"\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",302]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 3592m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 3592 /1000 = 0.9 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 0.9 failures: 598 x 0.9 = 538 customers affected and 52,945 x 0.9 = 47,651 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in one year, the estimated quantity is 3592m in Year 1. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 13 totalling 650 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 3592 /1000 = 0.9 failures\nImpact of 0.9 failures: 598 x 0.9 = 538 customers affected and 52,945 x 0.9 = 47,651 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 0.9 failures\nPeak KVA = 650 KVA"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 0.90 potential cable failures and 47,651 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Caw Retiree Village (St. Catharines)"]

{"sheet":"151281","index":11,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151281]
[null,"Project Name","Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (SCH) - Lake - Linwell - Geneva - Scott"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is to perform remediation of underground cable in the North area of St.Catharines bounded by Lake, Linwell, Geneva and Scott St.  This project covers the area that meets the criteria for cable replacement candidates for a total of 3,176m.  It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 267 customers. Along with the cable remediation, 17 transformers will also be replaced as part of the project.\n\nThis area has seen 6 failures as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 189 failures/100km.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable replacements easier to implement.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","No applicable."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","No applicable."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","830 St. Catharines Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","No applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",3176]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the near term to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","267 customers and 2675 kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The oldest cables are at end-of-life and are failing. Since cables are the main component of the underground electrical distribution system, when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected. For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages - system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. These projects are a result of continuous assessments, prioritizing, and remediating the worst cable segments by a combination of cable injection and cable replacement. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria. Segments that do meet the criteria for cable injection are covered under a separate project. \n\nTherefore, planned cable replacement within the area is selected as the preferred alternative. While it is a costly alternative, the added benefit of installing new conduit which will help with future cable issues as well as avoiding future outages on other cable segments that have been subjected to previous high stress fault conditions. The benefits to the customer include reducing the likelihood of unplanned disruptions and new underground equipment which should provide reliable, continuous service for many more years.  Furthermore, the replacement of several transformers that are at risk of failing allows for an opportunistic renewal of assets while work crews are already in the area performing cable replacement, minimizing the outage impacts for customers who would otherwise eventually experience an unplanned outage once the transformer fails. This aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable replacement projects in 2015, 2016, and 2017 were $328/m on average. This project is forecasted to be $312/m. The difference is based on the assumption that the unit cost is to be $300/m in the base year of 2019 (less complicated than projects already completed in prior years) and increased with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 6 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 189 failures/100km. If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 36 to 46 years old (installed in 1983 and 1973 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",265]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 3176m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 3176 /1000 = 0.79 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 0.79 failures: 598 x 0.79 = 472 customers affected and 52,945 x 0.79 = 41,827 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in one year, the estimated quantity is 3176m in Year 1. \nIn addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 34 totalling 2,675 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 3176 /1000 = 0.79 failures\nImpact of 0.79 failures: 598 x 0.79 = 472 customers affected and 52,945 x 0.79 = 41,827 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 0.79 failures\nPeak KVA = 2,675 KVA"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 0.79 potential cable failures and 41,827 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition, it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Lake - Linwell - Geneva - Scott (St. Catharines)"]

{"sheet":"151290","index":12,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151290]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement Project - (I3) - Bovaird - Dixie - Queen -  Hwy 410, Brampton"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 7,227 m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the Central North (Brampton) I3 grid – Bovaird – Dixie – Queen – Hwy 410 area (the project will be paced to replace 1067.5 m in 2021, 1067.5 m in 2022, 2000 m in 2023, 2000 m in 2024 and 1092 m in 2025). \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 1.8 failures per year impacting 891 customers for 69 minutes based on Regional reliability data.  \n\nInstalling the new cables in conduit will make future cable remediation easier to implement."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","805 Sandalwood Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units"]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Agostini, Robert (Robert.Agostini)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",639114]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This investment is driven by numerous cable failures in the area prior to 2019 and this location continues to have cable failure in 2021 which impacts reliability on the distribution system in the area.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the next 2 years to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further. Deteriorated cables fail at greater rates, and Alectra Utilities forecast that if the investment is not made, that the rate of cable failures per year will increase to 0.3 in 2021 and 1.8 failures per year starting 2026."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","887 Residential and 4 Commercial customers / 1795 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are at end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers. \n\nReplacing only the segments that failed negates the issue that the other segments were affected by cable faults which further degrades the cables' insulation and therefore, will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has  multi-year Master Service Agreement with external contractors. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid having some of the issues, where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable replacement projects over the past 3 years in the Brampton area were $550/m. This project is forecasted to be $550/m."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there were 3 cable and splice failures since 2018. If not rehabilitated, this cable  will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","The cable in this area is 46 years old (installed in 1975), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report ''Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board'' results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",891]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 7227 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 7227 /1000 = 1.8 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central North Control Room data, there were 41, 62, 38, 40, and 49 Cable failures in 2017 to 2021, respectively (5-year average is 46 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 46 Cable failures affecting 22753 customers and 1562780 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 22753/46 = 495 customers affected and 1562780/46 = 33973 CMI.\nImpact of 1.8 failures: 495 x 1.8 = 891 customers affected and 33973 x 1.8 = 61151 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 1.8 potential cable failures and 61151 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable is installed according to new Standards which require installation in conduit.  The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable.  In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"," (I3) - Bovaird - Dixie - Queen -  Hwy 410, Brampton\n"]

{"sheet":"151296","index":13,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151296]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (SCH) - Welland - Bunting - Carlton - Cushman"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is to perform remediation of underground cable in the East area of St.Catharines bounded by Welland, Bunting, Carlton and Cushman.  This project covers the area that meets the criteria for cable injection candidates for a total of 3,406m, while a separate project covers the cable replacement portion (C55 project #151295).  It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 285 customers.\n\nThis area has seen 1 recent failure as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 29.3 failures/100km. Cables are between 26 to 45 years old. This investment would target the cables suitable for injection that are the most vulnerable first.  This investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  \n"]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Deferred due to M-Factor decision results."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Adjustments required due to rate case results"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Deferred due to M-Factor decision results."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","830 St. Catharines Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",3406]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",634199]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the short term, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the short term, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","285 customers and 4700kVA."]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area exceed the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","This project is forecasted to be $100/m, based on similar cable injection projects previously completed. There is an assumption that the unit cost increases with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There is 1 failure in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 29.3 failures/100km. If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 26 to 45 years old (installed in 1993 and 1974 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"\"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\"\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",285]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 3406m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 3406 /1000 = 0.85 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 0.85 failures: 598 x 0.85 = 508 customers affected and 52,945 x 0.85 = 45,003 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in one year, the estimated quantity is 3406m in Year 1. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 52 totalling 4700 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 3406 /1000 = 0.85 failures\nImpact of 0.85 failures: 598 x 0.85 = 508 customers affected and 52,945 x 0.85 = 45,003 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 0.85 failures\nPeak KVA = 4700 KVA"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 0.85 potential cable failures and 45,003 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Welland - Bunting - Carlton - Cushman (St. Catharines)"]

{"sheet":"151299","index":14,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151299]
[null,"Project Name","Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (HAM) - Millen - Barton - Fruitland"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 12,708m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the Alectra West (Hamilton) area bounded by Barton St, Millen Rd and Fruitland Rd. (while project #151300 covers the cable injection portion). It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 1065 customers. \n\nThis area has seen 10 failures as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 78.7 failures/100km.  Along with the cable remediation, 91 transformers will also be replaced as part of the project.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable replacements easier to implement.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","820 Nebo Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",12708]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",643846]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the near term to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1065 customers and 6800 kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The oldest cables are at end-of-life and are failing. Since cables are the main component of the underground electrical distribution system, when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected. For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages - system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. These projects are a result of continuous assessments, prioritizing, and remediating the worst cable segments by a combination of cable injection and cable replacement. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria. Segments that do meet the criteria for cable injection are covered under a separate project. \n\nTherefore, planned cable replacement within the area is selected as the preferred alternative. While it is a costly alternative, the added benefit of installing new conduit which will help with future cable issues as well as avoiding future outages on other cable segments that have been subjected to previous high stress fault conditions. The benefits to the customer include reducing the likelihood of unplanned disruptions and new underground equipment which should provide reliable, continuous service for many more years.  Furthermore, the replacement of several transformers that are at risk of failing allows for an opportunistic renewal of assets while work crews are already in the area performing cable replacement, minimizing the outage impacts for customers who would otherwise eventually experience an unplanned outage once the transformer fails. This aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable replacement projects in 2015, 2016, and 2017 were $328/m on average. This project is forecasted to be $312/m, $318/m and $325/m in 2021, 2022, and 2023 respectively. The difference is based on the assumption that the unit cost is to be $300/m in the base year of 2019 (less complicated than projects already completed in prior years) and increased with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 10 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 78.7 failures/100km.  If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 26 to 69 years old (installed in 1993 and 1950 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",1065]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 12708m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 12708 /1000 = 3.18 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 3.18 failures: 598 x 3.18 = 1902 customers affected and 52,945 x 3.18 = 168,365 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in phases over a period of three years, the estimated quantity is 4419m in Year 1, 4145m in Year 2, and 4144m in Year 3. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 91 totalling 6880 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 4419 /1000 = 1.1 failures\nImpact of 1.1 failure: 598 x 1.1 = 658 customers affected and 52,945 x 1.1 = 58,240 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 1.1 failures\nPeak KVA = 2,393 KVA\n\nYear 2\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (4419+4145) /1000 = 2.14 failures\nImpact of 2.14 failure: 598 x 2.14 = 1280 customers affected and 52,945 x 2.14 = 113,302 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 2.14 failures\nPeak KVA = 4,637 KVA\n\nYear 3\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (4419+4145+4144) /1000 = 3.18 failures\nImpact of 3.18 failures: 598 x 3.18 = 1902 customers affected and 52,945 x 3.18 = 168,365 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 3.18 failures\nPeak KVA = 6,880 KVA"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 3.18 potential cable failures and 168,365 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition, it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Millen - Barton - Fruitland (Hamilton)"]

{"sheet":"151300","index":15,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151300]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Millen - Barton - Fruitland"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is to perform remediation of underground cable in the Stoney Creek area bounded by Barton St, Millen Rd and Fruitland Rd.  This project covers the area that meets the criteria for cable injection candidates for a total of 23,477m, while a separate project covers the cable replacement portion (C55 project #151299).  It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 1963 customers.\n\nThis area has seen 1 recent failures as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 4.3 failures/100km.  This investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  \n"]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Timing"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","De-funding in 2020 and deferring work until 2023. Funds being re-allocated to work in Central South and to West Voltage conversion project for Central MS (150352). De-funding amount was originally $910,300 in 2020, after re-estimate in early 2020, total amount being deferred into 2023 is $1,069,352."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Significant unforeseen external factors (e.g. pandemic, natural disaster)"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","West cable injection projects for 2020 were not going to be able to be completed due to challenges related to coronavirus. Money is being re-allocated from 2020 to 2023 and project will continue as planned in 2021. Funding for 2022 has been re-assigned to 2024."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","820 Nebo Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",23447]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status","Approved"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",3]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",634190]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the short term, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the short term, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1963 customers and 6,900 kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area exceed the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","This project is forecasted to be $100/m, based on similar cable injection projects previously completed. There is an assumption that the unit cost increases with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There is 1 failure in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 4.3 failures/100km. If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 26 to 69 years old (installed in 1993 and 1950 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",1963]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 23447m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 23447 /1000 = 5.86 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 5.86 failures: 598 x 5.86 = 3504 customers affected and 52,945 x 5.86 = 310,258 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in phases over a period of three years, the estimated quantity is 2644m in Year 1, 11724m in Year 2, and 9080m in Year 3. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 259 totalling 19,575 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 2644 /1000 = 0.66 failures\nImpact of 0.66 failure: 598 x 0.66 = 395 customers affected and 52,945 x 0.66 = 34,944 CMI\nPeak KVA = 1432 KVA\nThe benefit for 2020 is based on 0.66 failures\n\nYear 2\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (2644+11724) /1000 = 3.59 failures\nImpact of 3.59 failure: 598 x 3.59 = 2147 customers affected and 52,945 x 3.59 = 190,073 CMI\nPeak KVA = 7779 KVA\nThe benefit for 2021 is based on 3.59 failures\n\nYear 3\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (2644+11724+9080) /1000 = 5.86 failures\nImpact of 5.86 failures: 598 x 5.86 = 3504 customers affected and 52,945 x 5.86 = 310,258 CMI\nPeak KVA = 12695 KVA\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 5.86 failures"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 5.86 potential cable failures and 310,258 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Millen - Barton - Fruitland – Ridge (Hamilton)"]

{"sheet":"151303","index":16,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151303]
[null,"Project Name","Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (HAM) - Stone Church - Garth - Lincoln M. Alexander"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 20,304m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the Alectra West (Hamilton) area bounded by Stone Church, Garth and the Lincoln Alexander Parkway. (while project #151304 covers the cable injection portion).  It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 1705 customers. Along with the cable remediation, 124 submersible transformers will also be replaced as part of the project.\n\nThis area has seen 5 failures as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 24.6 failures/100km. Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable replacements easier to implement.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","820 Nebo Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",20343]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",639116]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by a failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the near term to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1705 customers and 9,500 kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The oldest cables are at end-of-life and are failing. Since cables are the main component of the underground electrical distribution system, when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected. For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages - system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. These projects are a result of continuous assessments, prioritizing, and remediating the worst cable segments by a combination of cable injection and cable replacement. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria. Segments that do meet the criteria for cable injection are covered under a separate project. \n\nTherefore, planned cable replacement within the area is selected as the preferred alternative. While it is a costly alternative, the added benefit of installing new conduit which will help with future cable issues as well as avoiding future outages on other cable segments that have been subjected to previous high stress fault conditions. The benefits to the customer include reducing the likelihood of unplanned disruptions and new underground equipment which should provide reliable, continuous service for many more years.  Furthermore, the replacement of several transformers that are at risk of failing allows for an opportunistic renewal of assets while work crews are already in the area performing cable replacement, minimizing the outage impacts for customers who would otherwise eventually experience an unplanned outage once the transformer fails. This aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable replacement projects in 2015, 2016, and 2017 were $328/m on average. This project is forecasted to be $318/m, $325/m and $331/m in 2022, 2023, and 2024 respectively. The difference is based on the assumption that the unit cost is to be $300/m in the base year of 2019 (less complicated than projects already completed in prior years) and increased with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 5 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 24.6 failures/100km.  If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 26 to 69 years old (installed in 1993 and 1950 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",1705]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 20343m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 20343 /1000 = 5.09 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 5.09 failures: 598 x 5.09 = 3044 customers affected and 52,945 x 5.09 = 269,490 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in phases over a period of three years, the estimated quantity is 7627m in Year 1, 9868m in Year 2, and 2848m in Year 3. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 188 totalling 12,854 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 7627 /1000 = 1.91 failures\nImpact of 1.91 failure: 598 x 1.91 = 1142 customers affected and 52,945 x 1.91 = 101,125 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 1.91 failures\nPeak KVA = 3,543 KVA\n\nYear 2\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (7627+9868) /1000 = 4.37 failures\nImpact of 4.37 failure: 598 x 4.37 = 2613 customers affected and 52,945 x 4.37 = 231,370 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 4.37 failures\nPeak KVA = 8,128 KVA\n\nYear 3\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (7627+9868+2848) /1000 = 5.09 failures\nImpact of 5.09 failures: 598 x 5.09 = 3044 customers affected and 52,945 x 5.09 = 269,490 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 5.09 failures\nPeak KVA = 9,451 KVA"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 5.09 potential cable failures and 269,490 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition, it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Stone Church - Garth - Lincoln M. Alexander (Hamilton)"]

{"sheet":"151304","index":17,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151304]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Stone Church - Garth - Lincoln M. Alexander"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is to perform remediation of underground cable in the south Mountain area of Hamilton  bounded by Garth, Stonechurch and the Lincoln Alexander Pkwy.  This project covers the area that meets the criteria for cable injection candidates for a total of 7,325m, while a separate project covers the cable replacement portion (C55 project #151303).  It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 613 customers.\n\nThis area has seen 2 recent failures as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 27.3 failures/100km. This investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  \n"]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Timing"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Project being defunded in 2020 due to project execution issues for West Cable Injection projects. Original 2020 budget was $568,768. Budget was revised by Design, and the project start date has been shifted to 2025 to match 3.1 Optimization timing. New 2025 budget number is $668,146 ('current year $' in C55). Money has been re-allocated to other projects, per July 17th 2020 email."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Significant unforeseen external factors (e.g. pandemic, natural disaster)"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Delayed due to coronavirus."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","820 Nebo Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",7325]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status","Approved"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",3]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",634193]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the short term, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the short term, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","613 customers and 2200 kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area exceed the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","This project is forecasted to be $100/m, based on similar cable injection projects previously completed. There is an assumption that the unit cost increases with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 2 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 27.3 failures/100km. If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 26 to 69 years old (installed in 1993 and 1950 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"\"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\"\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",613]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 7325m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 7325 /1000 = 1.83 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 1.83 failures: 598 x 1.83 = 1094 customers affected and 52,945 x 1.83 = 96,889 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in one year, the estimated quantity is 7,325m in Year 1. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 188 totalling 12,854 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 7325 /1000 = 1.83 failures\nImpact of 1.83 failures: 598 x 1.83 = 1094 customers affected and 52,945 x 1.83 = 96,889 CMI\nPeak KVA = 12,854 KVA\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 1.83 failures"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 1.83 potential cable failures and 96,889 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"," Stone Church - Garth - Lincoln M. Alexander (Hamilton)"]

{"sheet":"151307","index":18,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151307]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Upper Sherman - Stone Church - Nebo - Rymal"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is to perform remediation of underground cable in the south Mountain area of Hamilton bounded by Upper Sherman, Stonechurch, Nebo and Rymal Rds.  This project covers the area that meets the criteria for cable injection candidates for a total of 21,244m, while a separate project covers the cable replacement portion (C55 project #151879).  It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 1779 customers.\n\nCables are between 27 to 69 years old. This investment would target the cables suitable for injection that are the most vulnerable first.   This investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  \n"]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","820 Nebo Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",21244]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the short term, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the short term, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1779 customers and 6,500 kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area exceed the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","This project is forecasted to be $100/m, based on similar cable injection projects previously completed. There is an assumption that the unit cost increases with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 0 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 0 failures/100km.   If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 27 to 69 years old (installed in 1992 and 1950 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"\"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\"\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",1779]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 21244m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 21244 /1000 = 5.31 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 5.31 failures: 598 x 5.31 = 3175 customers affected and 52,945 x 5.31 = 281,138 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in phases over a period of three years, the estimated quantity is 7650m in Year 1, 8898m in Year 2, and 4696m in Year 3. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 227 totalling 25,974 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 7650 /1000 = 1.91 failures\nImpact of 1.91 failure: 598 x 1.91 = 1142 customers affected and 52,945 x 1.91 = 101,125 CMI\nPeak KVA = 25,974 / 21,244 * 7650 = 9,353 KVA\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 1.91 failures\n\nYear 2\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (7650+8898) /1000 = 4.14 failures\nImpact of 4.14 failure: 598 x 4.14 = 2476 customers affected and 52,945 x 4.14 = 219,192 CMI\nPeak KVA = 25,974 / 21,244 x (7650+8898) = 20,232 KVA\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 4.14 failures\n\nYear 3\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (7650+8898+4696) /1000 = 5.31 failures\nImpact of 5.31 failures: 598 x 5.31 = 3175 customers affected and 52,945 x 5.31 = 281,138 CMI\nPeak KVA = 25,974 / 21,244 x (7650+8898+4696) = 25,974 KVA\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 5.31 failures"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 5.31 potential cable failures and 281,138 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Upper Sherman - Stone Church - Nebo - Rymal (Hamilton)"]

{"sheet":"151308","index":19,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151308]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (HAM) - Hollybush - Parkside - Dundas - Spring Creek"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is to perform remediation of underground cable in the Waterdown area of Hamilton  between Dundas St and Parkside Dr.  This project covers the area that meets the criteria for cable injection candidates for a total of 1,372m, while a separate project covers the cable replacement portion (C55 project #151556).   It is served by the 2D13X which was on the Worst Performing Feeders list. It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 114 customers.\n\nThis area has seen 1 recent failure as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 72.9 failures/100km. Cables in this area are between 26 and 72 years old. This investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  \n"]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","820 Nebo Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Units",1372]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the short term, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the short term, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","114 customers and 500kVA."]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area exceed the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","This project is forecasted to be $100/m, based on similar cable injection projects previously completed. There is an assumption that the unit cost increases with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There is 1 failure in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 72.9 failures/100km.   If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 26 to 72 years old (installed in 1993 and 1947 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"\"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\"\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",114]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","Area is served by 2D13X, which is on the Worst Performing Feeder list.\nFor 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 1372m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 1372 /1000 = 0.34 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 0.34 failures: 598 x 0.34 = 203 customers affected and 52,945 x 0.34 = 18,001 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in one year, the estimated quantity is 1372m in Year 1. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 10 totaling 500 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 1372 /1000 = 0.34 failures\nImpact of 0.34 failures: 598 x 0.34 = 203 customers affected and 52,945 x 0.34 = 18,001 CMI\nPeak KVA = 500 KVA\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 0.34 failures"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 0.34 potential cable failures and 18,001 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"," Hollybush - Parkside - Dundas - Spring Creek (Hamilton)"]

{"sheet":"151314","index":20,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151314]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection  Project - (G2) -Wanless - Kennedy - Bovaird - Main, Brampton"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the Wanless - Kennedy - Bovaird - Main area (Grid G2) to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nThis area has experienced 1 cable failure since 2017 impacting 40 customers for 107 minutes, less than once a year. There were 2 failures prior to 2016. On one sub-event in 2017, the outage lasted more than 3 hours. Alectra considers this below the standard the customers should expect. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in fair condition.  This investment will inject 38994 m of direct-buried XLPE cables. It is proposed to replace 13000 m in 2024, and 25994 m in 2025 based on work that can be executed within these years.\n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 3 failures per year impacting 120 customers for 107 minutes.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets. "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","805 Sandalwood Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",38944]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Agostini, Robert (Robert.Agostini)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",639126]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by the cable failure risks impacting the reliability of the distribution system in this area.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable remediation within the next 2 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 1 cable failures per year in 2025 and will increase to 3 failures per year starting 2026."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","114 Residential and 6 Commercial customers / 2991 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","Alectra Utilities ensure all policies and practices don’t unnecessarily create barriers to economic development which are primarily focused within our communities."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure, and respond to outages under emergency condition."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Inject all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 1 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are over 31 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #2 is not recommended because on average, cable replacement is 5 times more expensive than cable injection, and cables at this location are feasible for cable injection.\n\nCables in this area have failures and therefore cable remediation is required.  Since the cables are eligible for cable injection, Alternative #1 is the recommended alternative because of its lower cost and will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \n\"Alectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\"\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable injection projects over the past three years were  $75/m. This project is estimated at $80/m."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there was 1 cable failure since 2017. If not rehabilitated, this cable  will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is over 31 years old, which exceeds the Kinectrics Report ''Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board'' results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",2525]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.08 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 38994 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.08 x 38994 /1000 = 3 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central North Control Room data, there were , 1, 0, 0, 0,and 0 Cable failures in 2016 to 2021, respectively (6-year average is 0.167 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 0.167 Cable failures affecting 8 customers and 717 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 8/0.167 = 40 customers affected and 717/0.167 = 4294 CMI.\nImpact of 3 failures: 40 x 3 = 120 customers affected and 4294 x 3 = 12882 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 3 potential cable faults and 12882 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"," (G2) -Wanless - Kennedy - Bovaird - Main, Brampton"]

{"sheet":"151315","index":21,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151315]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (G5) - Steeles - Kennedy - Hwy 407 - Main, Brampton"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the Steeles - Kennedy - Hwy 407 - Main area (Grid G5) to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nThis area has experienced 1 cable failure from 2016 to 2018 and 2 failures from 2019 to 2021 impacting 231 customers for 74 minutes, less than once a year. Alectra sees an increase on cable failures in last three years. This area comprises residential customers and 13 commercial customers including the courthouse.  In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in fair condition.  This investment will inject 24923 m of direct-buried XLPE cables. It is proposed to replace 8307 m each year in 2023, 2024 and 2025 based on work that can be executed within these years.\n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 4 failures per year impacting 308 customers for 74 minutes.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets. "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","805 Sandalwood Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",26849]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Agostini, Robert (Robert.Agostini)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by the cable failure risks impacting the reliability of the distribution system in this area.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable remediation within the next 2 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 2 cable failures per year in 2024 and will increase to 4 failures per year starting 2026."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","260 Residential and 48 Commercial customers / 23928 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","Alectra Utilities ensure all policies and practices don’t unnecessarily create barriers to economic development which are primarily focused within our communities."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure, and respond to outages under emergency condition."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Inject all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 3 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 31 to 35 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #2 is not recommended because on average, cable replacement is 5 times more expensive than cable injection, and cables at this location are feasible for cable injection.\n\nCables in this area have failures and therefore cable remediation is required.  Since the cables are eligible for cable injection, Alternative #1 is the recommended alternative because of its lower cost and will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \n\"Alectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\"\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable injection projects over the past three years (2018, 2019, and 2020) were  $80/m."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there were 3 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, this cable  will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cables in this area are 36 years old, which exceeds Alectra Utilities' Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",1881]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.16 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 24923 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.16 x 24923 /1000 = 4 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central North Control Room data, there were , 1, 0, 0, 1,and 1 Cable failures in 2016 to 2021, respectively (6-year average is 1 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 0.5 Cable failures affecting 39 customers and 2853 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 46/0.5 = 77 customers affected and 2853/0.5 = 5705 CMI.\nImpact of 4 failures: 77 x 4 = 308 customers affected and 5705 x 4 = 22820 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","Based on the Central North 5-year average Reliability, 1 cable failure causes approximately 5705 CMI. Thus, this project will help avoid a total of 4 potential cable faults and 22820 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"," (G5) - Steeles - Kennedy - Hwy 407 - Main, Brampton"]

{"sheet":"151318","index":22,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151318]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (I3) -Bovaird - Dixie - Queen -  Hwy 410, Brampton"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the Bovaird - Dixie - Queen -  Hwy 410 (Grid I3) area to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nThis area has experienced 9 cable failures prior to 2019 and 1 cable failure in 2019. Based on regional reliability data, 990 customers were impacted for 69 minutes, less than once a year. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.  This investment will inject 35,086 m of direct-buried XLPE cables. It is proposed to inject 7,379 m in 2020, 6,790 m in 2021, 4,203 m in 2022, 9,242 m in 2023,  and 7,472 m in 2024 based on the work that can be executed during these years.\n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 3.5 failures per year impacting 1733 customers for 69 minutes.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","805 Sandalwood Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",35086]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Agostini, Robert (Robert.Agostini)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",634194]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by occurrences of cable failures impacting reliability on the distribution system in the area.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the next 5 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not injected within the next 5 years, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 1 cable failure per year in 2021 and will increase to 3.5 failures per year starting 2025."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1726 Residential and 7 Commercial customers / 3490 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","Alectra Utilities ensure all policies and practices don’t unnecessarily create barriers to economic development which are primarily focused within our communities."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure, and respond to outages under reactive capital. This would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Inject all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 2 cable failures since 2018. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are over 31 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #2 is not recommended because on average, cable replacement is 5 times more expensive than cable injection, and cables at this location are feasible for cable injection.\n\nCables in this area have failures and therefore cable remediation is required.  Since the cables are eligible for cable injection, Alternative #1 is the recommended alternative because of its lower cost and will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid having some of the issues, where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable injection projects over the past three years (2016, 2017, and 2018) were  $78/m. This project is forecasted to be $70/m. The difference is based on the assumption that this project is less complicated (has fewer splices to replace) than projects already completed in prior years."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there were 2 cable and splice failures since 2018. If not rehabilitated, this cable  will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cables in this area are 31 to 35 years old, which exceeds Alectra Utilities' Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",2807]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.1 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 35086 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.1 x 35086 /1000 = 3.5 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central North Control Room data, there were 41, 62, 38, 40, and 49 Cable failures in 2017 to 2021, respectively (5-year average is 46 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 46 Cable failures affecting 22753 customers and 1562780 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 22753/46 = 495 customers affected and 1562780/46 = 33973 CMI.\nImpact of 3.5 failures: 495 x 3.5 = 1733 customers affected and 33973 x 3.5 = 118906 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 3.5 potential cable failures and 118906 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"," (I3) -Bovaird - Dixie - Queen -  Hwy 410, Brampton"]

{"sheet":"151336","index":23,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151336]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement Project - (BA22) - Sunnidale and Anne, Barrie"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 30,076 m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the East (Barrie) BA22 grid – Sunnidale and Anne area. \n\nThis project scope area has experienced 3 cable/splice failures since 2017 with 250 customers affected on average.  More specifically, customers in the project scope area in 2016-2018 had 1 outage, where from 2019-2021 this increased to 2 outages. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable failures easier to avoid.\nIf not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027. Based on the condition of the assets cable replacement is recommended and is the alternative that provides the greatest value to customers.\n\nThe total cable quantity for replacement is approximately 30,076m. It is proposed to complete 2,858m in 2020, 5,473m in 2021, 4,236m in 2022, 4,374m in 2023, 11,019m in 2024, and 2,116m in 2025. This investment will help avoid a total of 3 potential cable failures and 63516 potential CMI."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","825 Patterson Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",27961]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tran, Quan (Quan.Tran)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",634211]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the next 2 years to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further. Deteriorated cables fail at greater rates, and Alectra Utilities forecast that if the investment is not made, that the rate of cable failures per year will increase to 0.3 in 2021 and 2 failures per year starting 2025."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","3536 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGiven that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative"]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are at end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers. \n  \nIn this area there were 3 cable/splice failures since 2017. If not rehabilitated these cables will get older and will fail more often to a level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nReplacing only the segments that failed negates the issue that the other segments were affected by cable faults which further degrades the cables' insulation and therefore, will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has  multi-year Master Service Agreement with external contractors. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable replacement projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there were 3 cable/splice failures since 2017. If not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","The cable in this area is 45 - 48 years old (installed in 1974 - 1977), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report ''Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board'' results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",2180]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 3 failures in this project area since 2017.\n\n5 year average of failures is 3 failures / 5 years = 0.6 failure(s) per year \n\nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failures in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 250 customers affected, 21172 CMI, and average outage duration is 389 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 3 potential cable failures and 63516 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"," (BA22) - Sunnidale and Anne, Barrie"]

{"sheet":"151360","index":24,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151360]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (M31) - 14th - Old Kennedy - Steeles - Warden, Markham"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment will inject 53,146m of direct-buried XLPE cables; 13,287m in 2022, 13,287m in 2023, 13,286m in 2024 and 13,286m in 2025 of the project (to account for an appropriate monetary division amongst the years) in the East (Markham) grid M31 - 14th Ave, Old Kennedy Rd, Steeles Ave and Warden Ave area.\n\nThis investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the area to maintain system reliability and customer service.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nThis project scope area has experienced 18 cable/splice failures since 2010 with 87 customers affected on average. More specifically, customers in the project area in 2015-2018 had 6 outages, where from 2019-2022 they had 7 outages. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area. During the 2020 ACA process, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.  \n\nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 3 failures in 2023, up to 7 failures by 2027. It is expected that completion of this project will avoid 7 failures per year as of 2027 and 101,080 potential CMI.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Cost of Investment"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Project is re-estimated and re-submitted"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",53812]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tran, Quan (Quan.Tran)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",643850]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the next 4 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the next 4 years, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","561 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as decribed in the project descripiton.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will reduce the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 18 cable/splice failures since 2010. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 34 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk reduction strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable injection projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","This project scope area has experienced 18 cable/splice failures since 2010 with 87 customers affected on average. More specifically, customers in the project area in 2015-2018 had 6 outages, where from 2019-2022 this increased to 7 outages. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is 35 years old (installed in 1987), which exceeds Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",281]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 12 failures in this area since 2016.\n \nFrequency of Failure is 12 failures / 6 years = 2 failure(s) per year \n \nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 3 failures in 2023, up to 7 failures by 2027.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 87 customers affected, 14110 CMI, and average outage duration is 214 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. This project will help avoid 7 failures per year as of 2027 and 101,080 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"," (M31) - 14th - Old Kennedy - Steeles - Warden, Markham"]

{"sheet":"151362","index":25,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151362]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (M39) - 16th - Warden - Hwy 7 - Woodbine, Markham"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment will inject 66,593m of direct-buried XLPE cables; 11,870m in year 1 (2023), 20,000m in year 2 (2024), 20,000m in year 3 (2025) and 14,723m in year 4 (2026) of the project (to account for an appropriate monetary division amongst the years) in the East (Markham) grid M39 - 16th Ave, Warden Ave, Hwy 7 and Woodbine Ave area.\n\nThis investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the area to maintain system reliability and customer service.  \n\nThis project scope area has experienced 14 cable/splice failures since 2016 with 247 customers affected on average. During the 2020 ACA process, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.  \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 7 failures per year as of 2027 and 236,215 potential CMI.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Cost of Investment"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Project is re-estimated and re-submitted"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",66593]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tran, Quan (Quan.Tran)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the next 4 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the next 4 years, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1952 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as decribed in the project descripiton.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will reduce the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 14 cable/splice failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 33 - 40 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk reduction strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable injection projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there were 14 cable/splice failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 3 failures in 2023, up to 7 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cables in this area are 33 to 40 years old (installed in 1982 to 1989), which exceed the Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",2767]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 14 failures in this area since 2016.\n\n- From 2016-2017, there were 8 failures.\n- From 2020-2021, there were 6 failures\n \nFrequency of Failure is 14 failures / 6 years = 2.3 failure(s) per year \n \nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 3 failures in 2023, up to 7 failures by 2027.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 247 customers affected, 33745 CMI, and average outage duration is 187 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid 7 failures per year as of 2027 and 236,215 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"," (M39) - 16th - Warden - Hwy 7 - Woodbine, Markham"]

{"sheet":"151363","index":26,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151363]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (M25) - 14th - McCowan - Steeles - Old Kennedy, Markham"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment will inject 64,537m of direct-buried XLPE cables; 13,000m in year 1 (2023), 13,000m in year 2 (2024), 13,000m in year 3 (2025) and 25,537m in year 4 (2026) of the project (to account for an appropriate monetary division amongst the years) in the East (Markham) grid M25 - 14th Ave, McCowan, Steeles and Old Kennedy Rd area.\n\nThis investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the area to maintain system reliability and customer service.  \n\nThis project area has experienced 12 cable/splice failures since 2011 with 216 customers affected on average.  More specifically, customers in the project scope area in 2016-2018 had 3 outages, where from 2019-2021 this maintained at 3 outages. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area. During the 2020 ACA process, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.  \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 5 failures per year as of 2027 and 210,185 potential CMI.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Cost of Investment"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Project is re-estimated and re-submitted"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",64737]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tran, Quan (Quan.Tran)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the next 4 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the next 4 years, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","3787 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as decribed in the project descripiton.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will reduce the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 12 cable/splice failures since 2011. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 33 - 40 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk mitigation strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable injection projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","This project area has experienced 12 cable/splice failures since 2011 with 216 customers affected on average.  More specifically, customers in the project scope area in 2016-2018 had 3 outages, where from 2019-2021 this maintained at 3 outages. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cables in this area are 35 to 40 years old (installed in 1982-1987), which exceed the Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",222]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 12 failures in this area since 2011.\n\n- From 2016 - 2018, there were 3 failures\n- From 2019 - 2021, there were 3 failures\n\n6 year average of failures is 6 failures / 6 years = 1 failure(s) per year \n \nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 2 failures in 2023, up to 5 failures by 2027.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 216 customers affected, 42037 CMI, and average outage duration is 286 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid 5 failures per year as of 2027 and 210,185 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","(M25) - 14th - McCowan - Steeles - Old Kennedy, Markham "]

{"sheet":"151364","index":27,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151364]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (V23) - Hwy 7 - Keele - Langstaff - Jane, Vaughan"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment will inject 10,500m (2023) of direct-buried XLPE cables in the East (Vaughan) grid V23 - Hwy 7, Keele, Langstaff and Jane area.\n\nThis investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the area to maintain system reliability and customer service.  \n\nThis project area has experienced 2 cable/splice failure since 2018 with 105 customers affected on average. During the 2020 ACA process, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.  \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 3 failures per year as of 2027 and 60,394.5 potential CMI.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Cost of Investment"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Project is re-estimated and re-submitted"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",10500]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tran, Quan (Quan.Tran)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the next 4 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the next 4 years, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","159 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as decribed in the project descripiton.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will reduce the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there was 2 cable/splice failure since 2018. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 33 - 38 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk reduction strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable injection projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this project area, there were 2 cable/splice failures since 2018. If not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cables in this area are 33-38 years old (installed in 1984-1989), which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",121]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 2 failures in this project area since 2018.\n \nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n \nImpact of 1 failure: 105 customers affected, 20,131.5 CMI, and average outage duration is 285 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid 3 failures per year as of 2027 and 60,394.5 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"," (V23) - Hwy 7 - Keele - Langstaff - Jane, Vaughan"]

{"sheet":"151366","index":28,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151366]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (M19) - Markham - Steeles - McCowan - 14th, Markham"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment will inject 42,960m of direct-buried XLPE cables; 21,480m in year 1 and 21,480m in year 2 of the project (to account for an appropriate monetary division amongst the years) in the East (Markham) grid M19 - Markham, Steeles, McCowan and 14th Ave area.\n\nThis investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the area to maintain system reliability and customer service.  \n\nThis project scope area has experienced 6 cable/splice failures since 2017 with 234 customers affected on average. More specifically, customers in the project scope area in 2016-2018 had 2 outages, where from 2019-2021 this increased to 4 outages. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 2 failure in 2023, up to 5 failures by 2027. During the 2020 ACA process, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.\n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 5 failures per year and 227675 potential CMI.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Cost of Investment"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Project is re-estimated and re-submitted"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",42960]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tran, Quan (Quan.Tran)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",643851]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the next 4 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the next 4 years, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","4522 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as decribed in the project descripiton.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this project scope area, there were 6 cable/splice failures since 2017. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 34 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk reduction strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable injection projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","This project scope area has experienced 6 cable/splice failures since 2017 with 234 customers affected on average. More specifically, customers in the project scope area in 2016-2018 had 2 outages, where from 2019-2021 this increased to 4 outages. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 2 failure in 2023, up to 5 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is 34 years old (installed in 1988), which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",183]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 6 failures in this project area since 2017.\n\n-\tFrom 2017-2019, there were 2 failures.\n-\tIn 2020, there was 1 failure.\n-\tIn 2021, there were 3 failures.\n\n 5 year average of failures is 6 failures / 5 years = 1.2 failure(s) per year \n\n Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 2 failures in 2023, up to 5 failures by 2027.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 234 customers affected, 45535 CMI, and average outage duration is 214 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 5 failures per year and 227675 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable"]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","(M19) - Markham - Steeles - McCowan - 14th, Markham "]

{"sheet":"151374","index":29,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151374]
[null,"Project Name","Cable and Transformer Replacement - (893) - 176 - 224 Janefield Ave Subdivision, Guelph"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 1654m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the Alectra Southwest (Guelph) area at 176 - 224 Janefield Ave,  built in 1974. \n\nThis area has seen 2 failures as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 121 failures/100km. It is mostly Residential with 226 customers. Along with the cable remediation, 7 transformers will also be replaced as part of the project. This investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable replacements easier to implement.\n"]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","This is the initial submission of the project."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","Guelph Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",1]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Bolton, Ian (Ian.Bolton)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the near term to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","226 customers. Total connected  transformation capacity for this area is 650 kVA and existing customer demand is at 638.4 kVA. Existing transformers have more than the standard number of customer attachments per transformer, causing overloading and potentially causing premature deterioration."]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The oldest cables are at end-of-life and are failing. Since cables are the main component of the underground electrical distribution system, when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected. For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages - system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. These projects are a result of continuous assessments, prioritizing, and remediating the worst cable segments by a combination of cable injection and cable replacement. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria. Segments that do meet the criteria for cable injection are covered under a separate project. \n\nTherefore, planned cable replacement within the area is selected as the preferred alternative. While it is a costly alternative, the added benefit of installing new conduit which will help with future cable issues as well as avoiding future outages on other cable segments that have been subjected to previous high stress fault conditions. The benefits to the customer include reducing the likelihood of unplanned disruptions and new underground equipment which should provide reliable, continuous service for many more years.  Furthermore, the replacement of several transformers that are at risk of failing allows for an opportunistic renewal of assets while work crews are already in the area performing cable replacement, minimizing the outage impacts for customers who would otherwise eventually experience an unplanned outage once the transformer fails. This aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable replacement projects in 2015, 2016, and 2017 were $328/m on average. This project is forecasted to be $312/m. The difference is based on the assumption that the unit cost is to be $300/m in the base year of 2019 (less complicated than projects already completed in prior years) and increased with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There is 1 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 121 failures/100km.   If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area are 48 years old (installed in 1974), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years.\n\nAll transformers within the scope are live front transformers installed on concrete slabs.  Current standards would require these existing transformers to be replaced with new dead-front transformer on a concrete base and sized appropriately."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",226]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","This area has seen 8 equipment failures since 2011, including cable faults and defective transformers. Due to these 8 incidents, there were 288 customers affected with a total of 46,000 total customer minutes.\n\nFor 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 1654m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 1654 /1000 = 0.41 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra Southwest, there were 14 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 4,333 customers and 111,060 CMI\nImpact of 1 failure: 4,333/14 = 310 customers affected and 111,060/14 = 7,933 CMI\nImpact of 0.41 failures: 310 x 0.41 = 127 customers affected and 7,933 x 0.41 = 3,253 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in one year, the estimated quantity is 1654m in Year 1. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 7 totaling 650 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nFor Year 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 1654 /1000 = 0.41 failures\nImpact of 0.41 failures: 310 x 0.41 = 127 customers affected and 7,933 x 0.41 = 3,253 CMI\nThe benefit following the project is based on 0.41 failures\nPeak KVA = 650 KVA"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","• O&M Cost for emergency cable failure repair = $20,000 per failure\n• O&M Cost for 1 cable failure repairs = $20,000 x 1 = $20,000."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 0.41 potential cable failure and 3,253 potential CMI per year."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition, it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"151385","index":30,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151385]
[null,"Project Name","Cable and Transformer Replacement - (892) - 74 - 176 Janefield Ave Subdivision, Guelph"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 1200m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the Alectra Southwest (Guelph) area at 74 - 176 Janefield Ave,  built in 1974. \n\nThis area has seen 6 failures as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 500 failures/100km. It is mostly Residential with 122 customers. Four of the 6 failures have occured in the last 3 years. Along with the cable remediation, 12 transformers will also be replaced as part of the project. This investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable replacements easier to implement"]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Postpone the project to 2024, due to other higher priority projects."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","Guelph Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",1]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Bolton, Ian (Ian.Bolton)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the near term to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","122 customers. Total connected transformer capacity in this subdivision is 400kVA and existing customer demand is 337.9kVA. The existing transformers are overloaded."]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Guelph constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Guelph participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Guelph also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The oldest cables are at end-of-life and are failing. Since cables are the main component of the underground electrical distribution system, when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected. For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages - system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. These projects are a result of continuous assessments, prioritizing, and remediating the worst cable segments by a combination of cable injection and cable replacement. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria. Segments that do meet the criteria for cable injection are covered under a separate project. \n\nTherefore, planned cable replacement within the area is selected as the preferred alternative. While it is a costly alternative, the added benefit of installing new conduit which will help with future cable issues as well as avoiding future outages on other cable segments that have been subjected to previous high stress fault conditions. The benefits to the customer include reducing the likelihood of unplanned disruptions and new underground equipment which should provide reliable, continuous service for many more years.  Furthermore, the replacement of several transformers that are at risk of failing allows for an opportunistic renewal of assets while work crews are already in the area performing cable replacement, minimizing the outage impacts for customers who would otherwise eventually experience an unplanned outage once the transformer fails. This aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable replacement projects in 2015, 2016, and 2017 were $328/m on average. This project is forecasted to be $312/m. The difference is based on the assumption that the unit cost is to be $300/m in the base year of 2019 (less complicated than projects already completed in prior years) and increased with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 6 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 500 failures/100km.  If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area are 48 years old (installed in 1974), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years.\n\nAll transformers within the scope are live front transformers installed on concrete slabs.  Current standards would require these existing transformers to be replaced with new dead-front transformer on a concrete base and sized appropriately."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",122]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 1200m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 1200 /1000 = 0.3 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra Southwest, there were 14 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 4,333 customers and 111,060 CMI\nImpact of 1 failure: 4,333/14 = 310 customers affected and 111,060/14 = 7,933 CMI\nImpact of 0.3 failures: 310 x 0.3 = 93 customers affected and 7,933 x 0.3 = 2,380 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in one year, the estimated quantity is 1200m in Year 1. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 12 totaling 400 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nFor Year 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 1200 /1000 = 0.3 failures\nImpact of 0.3 failures: 310 x 0.3 = 93 customers affected and 7,933 x 0.3 = 2,380 CMI\nThe benefit following the project is based on 0.3 failures\nPeak KVA = 400 KVA"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","Medium"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","This project will have no material impact on planned O&M costs."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 0.3 potential cable failure and 2,380 potential CMI per year."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition, it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"151408","index":31,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151408]
[null,"Project Name","Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (AREA24) - Burnhamthorpe & Miss. Road, Mississauga"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 10365 m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the Central South (Mississauga) within the Burnhamthorpe & Miss. Road (AREA24) area. \n\nThis area has experienced 1 cable failure from 2016 to 2018 and 13 failures from 2019 to 2021, 99 customers were impacted for 101 minutes, 6 times a year in recent years. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be at the end of useful life of 40 years and in very poor condition. It is expected that completion of this project will avoid 5.5 failures per year impacting 545 customers for 101 minutes per failure.\n\nInstalling the new cables in conduit will make future cable remediation  easier to implement."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","New project based on number of cable failures and other deteriorating assets."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","800 Mavis Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",10365]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Lucic, Marko (Marko.Lucic)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",643853]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This investment is driven by a progressive decline in reliability at this location.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the next 2 years to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further. Deteriorated cables fail at greater rates, and Alectra Utilities forecast that if the investment is not made, that the rate of cable failures per year will be 5.5 in 2025."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","534 Residential and 11 Commercial customers / 5484 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 14 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\n25% of the transformers in this area were identified in very poor condition in the most recent ACA. Logistically, it would be beneficial to address these transformers at the same time as the cables. In addition, this strategy would improve customer experience as they would experience one less outage during construction. If not replaced and these transformers fail, Alectra would have to go back to replace them and clean up from oil leaks which would again be disruptive to the customers. Therefore, Alternative #1 is not recommended.\n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to other assets and therefore cable and transformer replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \n\nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\n\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \n\nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar replacement projects were Rathburn Rd W Cable Replacement in 2019 for $3.6 M, and Copenhagen Cable Replacement in 2019 for $3.9 M."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there have been 14 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, the cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by the customers. \n\nUnder this option, the underground cables will continue to experience faults and will lead to power outages, resulting in deteriorating service reliability for the area. It is also possible that the cable may no longer be repairable and useable which poses a significant amount of operational risk and cost to Alectra Utilities.  Reactive repair of cables in an emergency situation is very time consuming and costly. Given the history of cables failing in this area, Alectra Utilities has determined the looped supply cables, which provide an alternative supply upon a system fault, are also no longer reliable."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cables in this area are on average 40 years old, which is at Alectra Utilities' End-of-Useful Life of 40 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",545]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.53 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 10365 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.53 x 10365 /1000 = 5.5 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 1,0,1,6,6 Cable failures in 2017 to 2021, respectively (5-year average is 2.8 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 2.8 Cable failures affecting 277 customers and 27838 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 277/2.8 = 99 customers affected and 27838/2.8 = 9942 CMI.\nImpact of 5.5 failures: 99 x 5.5 = 545 customers affected and 9942 x 5.5 = 54681 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","- Cost for emergency cable failure repair = $20,000 per failure\n- Cost for 5.5 cable failure repairs = $20,000 x 5.5= $110,000"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project will help avoid a total of 5.5 potential cable faults and 54681 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Burnhamthorpe & Miss. Road (13)"]

{"sheet":"151424","index":32,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151424]
[null,"Project Name","Cable and Transformer Replacement Project - (AREA21) - Miss. Valley & Bloor, Mississauga"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the Miss. Valley & Bloor area (AREA21) to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nAlectra Utilities’ planned Underground Asset Renewal investments are driven by an increasing decline in reliability on the distribution system.  Cable and cable accessories are the highest cause of failure, this area has experienced 8 cable failures from 2016 to 2018 and 5 failures from 2019 to 2021 impacting 1443 customers for 127 minutes, more than twice a year. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.  This investment will replace 10780 m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit. It is proposed to replace 400 m in 2023, 3400 m in 2024,  3450 m in 2025,  and 3530 m in 2026 based on work that can be executed within these years.\n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 8 failures per year impacting 899 customers for 127 minutes."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","New project based on number of cable failures and other deteriorating assets."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","800 Mavis Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",10780]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Lucic, Marko (Marko.Lucic)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Reliability"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by the outage impact in reliability on the distribution system in this area.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacement within the next 2 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 0.3 cable failures per year in 2023 and will increase to 8 failures per year starting 2027."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","794 Residential and 105 Commercial customers / 52492 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 13 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nRear lot primary poses a problem for both reliability and safety, and have historically shown to be susceptible to adverse weather events. Due to the reduced access to the distribution assets, restoration of power to customers is significantly impacted by not having access to powered equipment, while also presenting risks to workers. Since the cables are required to be replaced, execution of this project will be disruptive to the customers as their backyards will be destroyed by open trenching. If the cables were installed by directional bore, Alectra has to secure easements from all the customers. In addition, the transformers are also nearing their end-of-life. \nWhen these transformers fail, Alectra would have to go back and replace them and clean up from oil leaks would again be disruptive to the customers. Therefore, Alternative #1 is not recommended.\n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \n\"Alectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\"\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the underground construction contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Previous replacement projects were Rathburn Rd W Cable Replacement in 2019 for $3.6 M, and Copenhagen Cable Replacement in 2019 for $3.9 M. This project is forecasted to be at an average of $550/m."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there have been 13 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, the cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by the customers. \n\nUnder this option, the underground cables will continue to experience faults and will lead to power outages, resulting in deteriorating service reliability for the area. It is also possible that the cable may no longer be repairable and useable which poses a significant amount of operational risk and cost to Alectra Utilities.  Reactive repair of cables in an emergency situation is very time consuming and costly. Given the history of cables failing in this area, Alectra Utilities has determined the looped supply cables, which provide an alternative supply upon a system fault, are also no longer reliable."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is 49 years old, which exceeds Alectra Utilities' End-of-Useful Life of 40 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",899]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.75 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 10780 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.75 x 10780 /1000 = 8.1 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 4, 1, 3, 1, 3,and 1 Cable failures in 2016 to 2021, respectively (6-year average is 2 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 2.167 Cable failures affecting 241 customers and 30626 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 241/2.167 = 111 customers affected and 30626/2.167 = 14133 CMI.\nImpact of 8.1 failures: 111 x 8.1 = 899 customers affected and 14133 x 8.1 = 114477 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","- Cost for emergency cable failure repair = $20,000 per failure\n- Cost for 8.1 cable failure repairs = $20,000 x 8.1 = $162000"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project will help avoid a total of 8.1 potential cable faults and 114477 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Miss. Valley & Bloor (15), Mississauga\n"]

{"sheet":"151428","index":33,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151428]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection - (AREA30) - Eglinton Ave W & Miss Rd, Mississauga"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to avoid the risk of increasing outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the Eglinton Ave W & Miss Rd (AREA30) area to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nAlectra Utilities’ planned Underground Asset Renewal investments are driven by an increasing decline in reliability on the distribution system.  Cable and cable accessories are the highest cause of failure, this area has experienced 1 cable failure from 2016 to 2018 and 1 failure from 2019 to 2021, 117 customers were impacted for 99 minutes, less than once a year. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.  This investment will inject 14,541 m of direct-buried XLPE cables. It is proposed to inject 7,417 m in 2022 and 7,124 m in 2023 based on the work that can be executed within these years.\n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 2 failures per year impacting 234 customers for 99 minutes.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","N/A"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","800 Mavis Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",14541]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Lucic, Marko (Marko.Lucic)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",643854]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by failure risks on the distribution system in this area.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the next 2 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not injected within the next 2 years, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will be experiencing 2 cable failures per year starting in 2024."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","230 Residential and 4 Commercial customers / 1994 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide Cable TV, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","Alectra Utilities ensure all policies and practices don’t unnecessarily create barriers to economic development which are primarily focused within our communities."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure, and respond to outages under reactive capital. This would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Inject all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nAt this location, there were 2 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are  34 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #2 is not recommended because on average, cable replacement is 5 times more expensive than cable injection, and cables at this location are feasible for cable injection.\n\nCables in this area have failures and therefore cable remediation is required.  Since the cables are eligible for cable injection, Alternative #1 is the recommended alternative because of its lower cost and will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","\"Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid having some of the issues, where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar replacement projects were worth  $76/m in the area of Erin Mills Parkway & Battleford (Section 1) which had a total estimated cost of $328,441."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, two of the 27 segments  marked by their individual Feature IDs (FIDs) which have failed once and would need to be rehabilitated through cable injection including the adjacent cable segments as they would have experienced fault current during the 2 cable fault events. If not rehabilitated, this cable  will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is on average 34 years old, which exceeds Alectra Utilities' Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",234]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.14 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 14541 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.14 x 14541 /1000 = 2 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 1 cable failure from 2016 to 2018 and 1 failure from 2019 to 2021 (6-year average is 0.33 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 0.33 cable failures affecting 39 customers and 3837 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 39/0.33 = 117 customers affected and 3837/0.33 = 11628 CMI.\nImpact of 2 failures: 117 x 2 = 234 customers affected and 11628 x 2 = 23256 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","- Cost for emergency cable failure repair = $20,000 per failure\n- Cost for 2 cable failure repairs = $20,000 x 2= $40,000."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","Based on the Central South 5-year average Reliability, 1 cable failure causes approximately 11628 CMI. Thus, this project will help avoid a total of 2 potential cable faults and 23256 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable"]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category","1a / Lines Replacement Program/Projects"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category","Sustainment Capital (1)"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category","Cable Remediation"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Eglinton Ave W & Miss Rd, Mississauga"]

{"sheet":"151430","index":34,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151430]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection- (AREA 38) - Bristol & Creditview, Mississauga"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the Bristol and Creditview area (AREA38) to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nAlectra Utilities’ planned Underground Asset Renewal investments are driven by an increasing decline in reliability on the distribution system.  Cable and cable accessories are the highest cause of failure, this area has experienced 1 cable failure prior to 2016 and zero failures since 2016, impacting an average of 414 customers for 51 minutes, less than once a year, based on regional reliability data. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.  This investment will inject 11046 m of direct-buried XLPE cables. \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 1.4 failures per year impacting 580 customers for 51 minutes.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","800 Mavis Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",11193]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Lucic, Marko (Marko.Lucic)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by the cable failure risks impacting the reliability of the distribution system in this area.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable remediation within the next 5 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 1.4 cable failures per year in 2026."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","577 Residential and 3 Commercial customers / 1396 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide Cable TV, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","Alectra Utilities ensure all policies and practices don’t unnecessarily create barriers to economic development which are primarily focused within our communities."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure, and respond to outages under reactive capital. This would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Inject all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 0 cable failures since 2016 but had experienced one failure prior to 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 34 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #2 is not recommended because on average, cable replacement is 5 times more expensive than cable injection, and cables at this location are feasible for cable injection.\n\nCables in this area have failures and therefore cable remediation is required.  Since the cables are eligible for cable injection, Alternative #1 is the recommended alternative because of its lower cost and will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \n\"Alectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\"\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Injection projects in other Alectra regions cost an average of $80/m. This project is estimated at $80/m."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there are 15 segments  marked by their individual Feature IDs (FIDs) which have failed a maximum of 1 time which accounts for 9 failures/100km and would need to be rehabilitated through cable injection. If not rehabilitated, this cable  will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is on average 34 years old, which exceeds Alectra Utilities' Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",580]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.13 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 11046 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.13 x 11046 /1000 = 1.4 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 214, 238, 154, 183, and 185 Cable failures in 2017 to 2021, respectively (5-year average is 195 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 195 Cable failures affecting 80556 customers and 4145700 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 80556/195 = 414 customers affected and 4145700/195 = 21260 CMI.\nImpact of 1.4 failures: 414 x 1.4 = 580 customers affected and 21260 x 1.4 = 29764 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","- Cost for emergency cable failure repair = $20,000 per failure\n- Cost for 1.4 cable failure repairs = $20,000 x 3= $28,000."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project will help avoid a total of 1.4 potential cable faults and 29764 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable"]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category","1a / Lines Replacement Program/Projects"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category","Sustainment Capital (1)"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category","Cable Remediation"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Bristol & Creditview, Mississauga"]

{"sheet":"151433","index":35,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"OEB Multi-Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151433]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection - (AREA46) - Glen Erin & Aquitane, Mississauga"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the Glen Erin & Aquitane area (AREA46) to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nAlectra Utilities’ planned Underground Asset Renewal investments are driven by an increasing decline in reliability on the distribution system.  Cable and cable accessories are the highest cause of failure, this area has experienced 6 cable failures prior to 2016 and 1 failure from 2019 to 2021 impacting 538 customers for 86 minutes, less than once a year. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.  This investment will inject 18174 m of direct-buried XLPE cables. \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 1.8 failures per year impacting 968 customers for 86 minutes.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","N/A"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","800 Mavis Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",18174]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Lucic, Marko (Marko.Lucic)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",634189]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by the cable failure risks impacting the reliability of the distribution system in this area.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable remediation within the next 2 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 1 cable failure per year in 2023 and will increase to 1.8 failures per year starting 2024."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","950 Residential and 18 Commercial customers / 8973 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide Cable TV, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as decribed in the project descripiton.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 1 cable failure since 2021. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 34 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #2 is not recommended because on average, cable replacement is 5 times more expensive than cable injection, and cables at this location are feasible for cable injection.\n\nCables in this area have failures and therefore cable remediation is required.  Since the cables are eligible for cable injection, Alternative #1 is the recommended alternative because of its lower cost and will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \n\"Alectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\"\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","No historical projects."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","Similar injection projects were worth  $80/m in other rate zones."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is on average 34 years old, which exceeds Alectra Utilities' Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",968]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.1 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 18174 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.1 x 18174 /1000 = 1.8 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,and 1 Cable failures in 2016 to 2021, respectively (6-year average is 0 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 0.167 Cable failures affecting 90 customers and 7713 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 90/0.167 = 538 customers affected and 7713/0.167 = 46186 CMI.\nImpact of 1.8 failures: 538 x 1.8 = 968 customers affected and 46186 x 1.8 = 83135 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","- Cost for emergency cable failure repair = $20,000 per failure\n- Cost for 1.8 cable failure repairs = $20,000 x 1.8= $36,000."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 1.8 potential cable faults and 83135 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable"]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category","1a / Lines Replacement Program/Projects"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category","Sustainment Capital (1)"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category","Cable Remediation"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Glen Erin & Aquitane, Mississauga"]

{"sheet":"151457","index":36,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151457]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (V25) -  Major Mackenzie - Keele - Rutherford - Jane, Vaughan"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the (V25) -  Major Mackenzie - Keele - Rutherford - Jane area in Vaughan to maintain system reliability and customer service. Cables in this area are 33 to 35 years old, whereas the typical useful life of non-tree retardant XLPE cable is 30 years. There was 1 cable/splice failure in 2021 affecting 40 customers on average.\nMore specifically, customers in the project scope area in 2016-2018 had 0 outages, where from 2019-2021 this increased to 1 outage. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area.\n\nIf not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n\nThe total cable quantity for injection is approximately 20,481m. It is proposed to complete 7,647m in 2021, 6,417m in 2022, and 6,417m in 2023. This investment will help avoid a total of 3 potential cable failure and 233523 potential CMI."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Cost of Investment"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Project is re-estimated and re-submitted"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",20481]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","Yes"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tran, Quan (Quan.Tran)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",639204]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","Alectra Utilities’ service area has a population of underground cables totaling approximately 21 million linear meters of cable.  Alectra Utilities’ planned Underground Asset Renewal investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  Alectra Utilities plans to gradually but significantly increase its spending to rejuvenate or replace Cross-Linked Polyethylene (XLPE) cable and related accessories that are either in poor or very poor condition. It is expected that completion of this project will reduce customer outage frequency and duration. This aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets. \n \nCable manufacturers introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems of having impurities due to the nature of the manufacturing processes. Utilities installed these cables directly in the ground. These led to breakdown of insulation over time and are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period. \n \nWhen failed, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. In addition, it does not solve the underlying issue, since the older direct-buried cable remains installed and likelihood of failing again increases over time. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service. Failing cables are significantly and increasingly impacting the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. Specifically, this area has had 1 failure between 2019-2021.\n \nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must not only halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. Without the proposed expenditures, cables will continue to degrade, and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults. Future failures are predicted at an escalating rate as cables deteriorate."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","1347 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","Alectra Utilities ensure all policies and practices don’t unnecessarily create barriers to economic development which are primarily focused within our communities."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure, and respond to outages under reactive capital. This would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction. This project scope area has had 1 failure in 2021. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Inject all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n \nAlternative #2 is not recommended because on average, cable replacement is 5 times more expensive than cable injection, and cables at this location are feasible for cable injection. \n \nThe recommended Alternative is Alternative #1 because it will decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the (V25) -  Major Mackenzie - Keele - Rutherford - Jane area in Vaughan. In contrast to cable replacement (alternative 1), these cables are optimal candidates for cable injection and the relative cost-benefit to customers ensures greater value for use of cable injection in order to maintain system reliability and customer service. Cables in this area are 33 to 35 years old, whereas the typical useful life of non-tree retardant XLPE cable is 30 years. There was 1 cable/splice failure in 2021. More specifically, customers in the project area in 2016-2018 had 0 outages, where from 2019-2021 this increased to 1 outage. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area.\n\nIf not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n\nThe total cable quantity for injection is approximately 20,481m. It is proposed to complete 7,647m in 2021, 6,417m in 2022, and 6,417m in 2023.  This investment will help avoid a total of 3 potential cable failure and 233523 potential CMI.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by rehabilitating all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk reduction strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable injection projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there was 1 cable/splice failure since 2021. If not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failures in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cables in this area are 33 to 35 years old (installed in 1987-1989), which exceed the Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",641]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 2 failure in this project area since 2017.\n\n5 year average of failures is 2 failures / 5 years = 0.4 failure(s) per year \n\nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n\nWe will use Alectra wide reliability information as a proxy for this project's reliability.\nImpact of 1 failure: 277 customers affected, 77841 CMI, and average outage duration is 104 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. This investment will help avoid a total of 3 potential cable failure and 233523 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","(V25) -  Major Mackenzie - Keele - Rutherford - Jane, Vaughan"]

{"sheet":"151458","index":37,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151458]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (V31) - Langstaff - Weston - Rutherford - Jane, Vaughan"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment will inject 9,798m of direct-buried XLPE cables in the East (Vaughan) grid V31 - Langstaff, Weston, Rutherford and Jane area. It is proposed to be completed in 2026.\n\nThis investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the area to maintain system reliability and customer service.  \n\nThis project area has experienced 1 cable/splice failure since 2017 with 39 customers affected on average. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027. During the 2020 ACA process, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in fair to poor condition.  \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 3 failures per year and 233523 potential CMI.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Cost of Investment"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Project is re-estimated and re-submitted"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",9798]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","Yes"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tran, Quan (Quan.Tran)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the next 4 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the next 4 years, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","138 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as decribed in the project descripiton.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this project area, there was 1 cable/splice failure since 2017. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 32 - 34 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable injection projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","This project area has experienced 1 cable/splice failure since 2017 with 39 customers affected on average. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cables in this area are 33 to 35 years old (installed in 1987-1989), which exceed the Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",136]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There was 1 failure in this project area since 2017.\n\n5 year average of failures is 1 failures / 5 years = 0.2 failure(s) per year \n\nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n\nWe will use Alectra wide reliability information as a proxy for this project's reliability.\nImpact of 1 failure: 277 customers affected, 77841 CMI, and average outage duration is 104 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","The project will help avoid a total of 3 failures per year and 233523 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","(V31) - Langstaff - Weston - Rutherford - Jane, Vaughan"]

{"sheet":"151462","index":38,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151462]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (G1) - Hwy 410 - Kennedy - Wanless - Main, Brampton"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the Hwy 410 - Kennedy - Wanless - Main area (Grid G1) to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nThis area has experienced 1 cable failure from 2016 to 2018 and 7 failure from 2019 to 2021 impacting 304 customers for 185 minutes, more than once a year.  One cable segment failed three times in 2021 which caused customer frustrations and drove complaints. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in poor condition.  This investment will inject 15263 m of direct-buried XLPE cables. It is proposed to replace 7000 m in 2022, and 8263 m in 2023 based on work that can be executed within these years.\n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 3.8 failures per year impacting 144 customers for 186 minutes.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets. "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","805 Sandalwood Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",15263]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","Yes"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Agostini, Robert (Robert.Agostini)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",639205]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by the cable failure risks impacting the reliability of the distribution system in this area.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable remediation within the next 2 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 1.8 cable failures per year in 2023 and will increase to 3.8 failures per year starting 2024."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","137 Residential and 8 Commercial customers / 3789 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","Alectra Utilities ensure all policies and practices don’t unnecessarily create barriers to economic development which are primarily focused within our communities."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure, and respond to outages under emergency condition."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Inject all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 8 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 35 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #2 is not recommended because on average, cable replacement is 5 times more expensive than cable injection, and cables at this location are feasible for cable injection.\n\nCables in this area have failures and therefore cable remediation is required.  Since the cables are eligible for cable injection, Alternative #1 is the recommended alternative because of its lower cost and will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \n\"Alectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\"\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable injection projects over the past three years (2018, 2019, and 2020) were  $80/m."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there were 8 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables  will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is 35 years old (installed in 1986), which exceeds Alectra Utilities' Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",144]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 15263 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 15263 /1000 = 3.8 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central North Control Room data, there were 0, 1, 0, 0, 2,and 5 Cable failures in 2016 to 2021, respectively (6-year average is 1 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 1.333 Cable failures affecting 51 customers and 9383 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 61/1.333 = 38 customers affected and 9383/1.333 = 7039 CMI.\nImpact of 3.8 failures: 38 x 3.8 = 144 customers affected and 7039 x 3.8 = 26748 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","The project will help avoid a total of 3.8 potential cable failures and 26748 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","(G1) - Hwy 410 - Kennedy - Wanless - Main, Brampton"]

{"sheet":"151465","index":39,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151465]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement - Mississauga Left Behind Cable"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing “Left-Behind” underground Cross-Linked Polyethylene (XLPE) cables in the Central South region.  \"Left-behind\" cable segments are those segments that were intended for cable injection but turn-out to be not injectable for various reasons (e.g. too many splices, corrosion).\n\nAlectra Utilities’ planned Underground Asset Renewal investments are driven by an increasing decline in reliability on the distribution system.  Cable and cable accessories are the highest cause of failure. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life and in very poor condition.  This investment will replace the direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit.  If this project is not implemented, Central South would experience 2 failures per year, due to \"Left Behind\" cables, by 2025. It is expected that each year this project is executed, 1 failure, impacting 346 customers for 55 minutes, will be avoided."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","Yes"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","Timing"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Budget was moved to 2023.  Cable injection project will not start in Mississauga until 2022."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","800 Mavis Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units",1]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","Yes"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Lucic, Marko (Marko.Lucic)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","Yes"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Reliability"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the year following the completion of cable injection project where the \"Left Behind\" cables were identified, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 1 cable failure per year starting in 2023 and 2 failures per year starting 2025."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","344 Residential and 2 Commercial customers / 1,516 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","Alectra Utilities ensure all policies and practices don’t unnecessarily create barriers to economic development which are primarily focused within our communities."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure, and respond to outages under reactive capital. This would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Replace only the cable segments that experienced cable faults. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are at end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers. \n\nReplacing only the segments that failed negates the issue that the other segments were affected by cable faults which further degrades the cables' insulation and therefore, will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-  general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has  multi-year Master Service Agreement with external contractors. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery Group allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Project cost estimates are based on historical cable replacement cost per m."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","According to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 250, 251, 214, 238, and 154 Cable failures in 2015 to 2019, respectively (5-year average is 221 failures per year). If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this project exceeds Alectra Utilities' End-of-Useful Life of 40 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",554]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 6,500 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 6500 /1000 = 1.6 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 250, 251, 214, 238, and 154 Cable failures in 2015 to 2019, respectively (5-year average is 221 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 221 Cable failures affecting 76,534 customers and 4,200,120 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 76,534/221 = 346 customers affected and 4,200,120/221 = 19,005 CMI\nImpact of 1.6 failures: 346 x 1.6 = 554 customers affected and 19,005 x 1.6 = 30,408 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","Based on the Central South 5-year average Reliability, 1 cable failure causes approximately 19,005 CMI. Thus, this project will help avoid a total of 1.6 potential cable faults and 30,408 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable installed according to new Standards which call for the cable to be installed in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition, it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, minimal digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description","Various locations in Alectra Mississauga"]

{"sheet":"151516","index":40,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151516]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement Project - (AREA46)- Millcreek Dr & Erin Mills Pkway, Mississauga"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 7,627m (3,003m in 2022, and 4,624m in 2023) of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the Central South (Mississauga) within the Millcreek Dr & Erin Mills Pkwy (AREA46). \n\nThe cables in this project had experienced 6 cable failures from 2016-2018 and 4 failures from 2019-2021, 348 customers were impacted for 32 minutes, 2 times a year. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond end of useful life of 40 years and in very poor condition. It is expected that completion of this project will avoid 2.2 failures per year impacting 766 customers for 32 minutes.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to failing underground system assets.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable failure remediation easier to implement."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","New project"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","800 Mavis Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",7627]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Lucic, Marko (Marko.Lucic)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",643857]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This investment is driven by continuing cable failures impacting the reliability in the Millcreek Drive area.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the continuous occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the next 2 years to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further. Deteriorated cables fail at greater rates, and Alectra Utilities forecast that if the investment is not made, that the rate of cable failures per year will increase to 0.9 in 2023 and 2.2 failures per year starting 2024."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","742 Residential and 24 Commercial customers / 13212 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. Several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. \n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 10 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nReplacing only the segments that failed negates the issue that the other segments were affected by cable faults which further degrades the cables' insulation and therefore, will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories. Therefore, Alternative #1 is not recommended.\n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \n\nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\n\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \n\nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid having some of the issues, where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar replacement project was Rathburn Rd W Cable Replacement in 2019 for $3.6 M."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there have been 33 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, the cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by the customers. \n\nUnder this option, the underground cables will continue to experience faults and will lead to power outages, resulting in deteriorating service reliability for the area. It is also possible that the cable may no longer be repairable and useable which poses a significant amount of operational risk and cost to Alectra Utilities.  Reactive repair of cables in an emergency situation is very time consuming and costly. Given the history of cables failing in this area, Alectra Utilities has determined the looped supply cables, which provide an alternative supply upon a system fault, are also no longer reliable."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is 46 years old, which exceeds Alectra Utilities' End of Useful Life of 40 years for non-tree retardant XLPE and does not meet Alectra's age criterion for cable injection eligibility."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",766]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.29 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 7627 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.29 x 7627 /1000 = 2.2 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 1, 3, 2, 0, 2, and 2 Cable failures from 2016 to 2021, respectively (6-year average is 1.67 failures per year).\nAnnually on average 1 cable failure affecting 348 customers and 11015 CMI.\n\nImpact of 2.2 failures: 2.2 x 348 = 766 customers affected and 2.2 x 11015 = 24233 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","- Cost for emergency cable failure repair = $20,000 per failure\n- Cost for 2.2 cable failure repairs = $20,000 x 2.2= $44,000"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","Based on the Central South 5-year average Reliability, 1 cable failure causes approximately 21260 CMI. Thus, this project will help avoid a total of 2.2 potential cable faults and 24233 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"151556","index":41,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151556]
[null,"Project Name","Cable and Transformer Replacement - (HAM) - Hollybush - Parkside - Dundas - Spring Creek"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 20,340m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the Alectra West (Hamilton/Waterdown) area between Dundas St and Parkside Dr. (while project #151308 covers the cable injection portion). It is served by the 2D13X which was on the Worst Performing Feeders list. It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 1705 customers. Along with the cable remediation, some of the distribution transformers will also be replaced as part of the project.\n\nThis area has seen 6 failures as a result of cable faults for a failure rate of 29.5 failures/100km. Five failures occuring in the last 3 years. Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable replacements easier to implement.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets. "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Initial submission of project."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","820 Nebo Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",20340]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",2]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the near term to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1705 customers and 9500 kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it mitigates future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The oldest cables are at end-of-life and are failing. Since cables are the main component of the underground electrical distribution system, when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected. For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages - system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. These projects are a result of continuous assessments, prioritizing, and remediating the worst cable segments by a combination of cable injection and cable replacement. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria. Segments that do meet the criteria for cable injection are covered under a separate project. \n\nTherefore, planned cable replacement within the area is selected as the preferred alternative. While it is a costly alternative, the added benefit of installing new conduit which will help with future cable issues as well as avoiding future outages on other cable segments that have been subjected to previous high stress fault conditions. The benefits to the customer include reducing the likelihood of unplanned disruptions and new underground equipment which should provide reliable, continuous service for many more years.  Furthermore, the replacement of several transformers that are at risk of failing allows for an opportunistic renewal of assets while work crews are already in the area performing cable replacement, minimizing the outage impacts for customers who would otherwise eventually experience an unplanned outage once the transformer fails. This aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable replacement projects in 2015, 2016, and 2017 were $328/m on average. This project is forecasted to be $318/m, $325/m and $331/m in 2022, 2023, and 2024 respectively. The difference is based on the assumption that the unit cost is to be $300/m in the base year of 2019 (less complicated than projects already completed in prior years) and increased with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 6 failures in this project scope, for a failure rate of 27.8 failures/100km. Five of the failures occuring in the last 3 years.  If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 26 to 72 years old (installed in 1993 and 1947 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"\"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\"\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",1705]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","Area is supplied by 2D13X which is on the Worst Performing feeder list.\nFor 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 20343m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 20343 /1000 = 5.09 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 5.09 failures: 598 x 5.09 = 3044 customers affected and 52,945 x 5.09 = 269,491 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in phases over a period of three years, the estimated quantity is 7627m in Year 1, 9868m in Year 2, and 2848m in Year 3. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 188 totalling 12,854 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 7627 /1000 = 1.91 failures\nImpact of 1.91 failure: 598 x 1.91 = 1142 customers affected and 52,945 x 1.91 = 101,125 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 1.91 failures\nPeak KVA = 3,600 KVA\n\nYear 2\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (7627+9868) /1000 = 4.37 failures\nImpact of 4.37 failure: 598 x 4.37 = 2613 customers affected and 52,945 x 4.37 = 231,370 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 4.37 failures\nPeak KVA = 8,200 KVA\n\nYear 3\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (7627+9868+2848) /1000 = 5.09 failures\nImpact of 5.09 failures: 598 x 5.09 = 3044 customers affected and 52,945 x 5.09 = 269,491 CMI\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 5.09 failures\nPeak KVA = 9,500 KVA"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 5.09 potential cable failures and 269,491 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition, it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"151855","index":42,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151855]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement and Switchgear Removal -  (AREA19) - Fieldgate and Ponytrail Dr, Mississauga"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the Fieldgate and Ponytrail Dr area (AREA19) to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nThis area has experienced 4 cable failures from 2016 to 2018 and 0 failures from 2019 to 2021 impacting 336 customers for 53 minutes, less than once a year. One of the cable segments at this location had experienced 3 cable failures which impacted the 10 commercial customers.  This cable need to be replaced to avoid having more frequent failures in the future. In addition, SG1471 is in very poor condition.  Customers here are supplied radially which does not provide backup in outage events. This project will not only remove the switchgears which incurs OM&A reduction but also reconfigure the system into a looped system so customers can have backup supply in case of outages.\n\nIn 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond end of useful life of 40 years and in very poor condition.  This investment will replace 5280 m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit. \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 1.3 failures per year impacting 109 customers for 53 minutes.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable remediation easier to implement."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","800 Mavis Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",5280]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Lucic, Marko (Marko.Lucic)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",1]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  This area has radial supplies which does not provide backup in case of outage. One switchgear is in very poor condition and one cable segment had experienced 3 cable faults. Remediation is required to avoid more frequent outages due to deteriorated underground assets. At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the risk of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the next 2 years to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 1.3 cable failures per year in 2024."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","92 Residential and 17 Commercial customers / 8425 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Switchgear failures pose safety risk to staff and the public. The switchgear may fail when staff are working on the unit or when the public is in close proximity to the unit. When the switchgear unit fails, there may be flashover or rupture of the enclosure, which may result in injury."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not applicable"]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","For coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable and switchgear run to failure and respond to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to only replace the switchgear SG1471 on a like for like basis.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to remove the switchgear and install new cable segments as described in the project description. The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 2 cable failures since 2016 which caused one cable segment to have experienced 3 cable failures.  If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nRunning the SG1471 to failure is not acceptable as a large number of customers are impacted by a switchgear failure. This alternative will not avoid the issue of declining reliability. For this reason, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nProactively replacing SG1471 only misses out on the opportunity to eliminate all switchgear in this area entirely. This alternative is at a lower cost but this investment avoids only the risk associated with SG1471.  Leaving the customers with radial supplies does not avoid risks of failure thus would still impact reliability. Therefore Alternative #1 is not recommended.\n\nReconfiguring the distribution system in the area by removing all switchgear and kbar and providing looped supplies to all transformer banks will not only improve reliability but also reduce maintenance cost on switchgears. Therefore, Alternative #2 is the recommended alternative."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Alectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:\n-       customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-       inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-       delays to material shipment from vendors\n-       general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar replacement projects were Rathburn Rd W Cable Replacement in 2019 for $3.6 M, and Copenhagen Cable Replacement in 2019 for $3.9 M."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there have been 2 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, the cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by the customers. \n\nUnder this option, the underground cables will continue to experience faults and will lead to power outages, resulting in deteriorating service reliability for the area. It is also possible that the cable may no longer be repairable and useable which poses a significant amount of operational risk and cost to Alectra Utilities.  Reactive repair of cables in an emergency situation is very time consuming and costly. Given the history of cables failing in this area, Alectra Utilities has determined the looped supply cables, which provide an alternative supply upon a system fault, are also no longer reliable."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Alectra Utilities' Typical Useful Life for switchgear is 30 years. Many units of Alectra East's existing switchgear population are older than 30 years and are expected to fail more if not replaced. On average, the annual number of failures is about 22 failures per year.\n\nThe primary cables included in the scope of this project are 46 years old and are expected to fail impacting all the commercial/industrial customers that are radially supplied."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",109]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 5280 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 5280 /1000 = 1.3 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 2, 2, 0, 0, 0,and 0 Cable failures in 2016 to 2021, respectively (6-year average is 1 failure per year).\nAnnually on average there were 0.667 Cable failures affecting 56 customers and 2951 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 56/0.667 = 84 customers affected and 2951/0.667 = 4425 CMI.\nImpact of 1.3 failures: 84 x 1.3 = 109 customers affected and 4425 x 1.3 = 5753 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Switchgear failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage). Customer engagement includes preferences for Alectra Utilities to invest in projects that maintain or improve  reliability."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","This is an annual investment initiative to manage end-of-life assets.  There is nothing specific to note about the project timing."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This investment initiative will help avoid 1 cable and 1 switchgear failures and 5753 potential CMI. The project will also help avoid safety risks associated with switchgear failures."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Refer to alternative #1"]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"151879","index":43,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151879]
[null,"Project Name","Cable and Transformer Replacement - (HAM) - Upper Sherman - Stone Church - Nebo - Rymal"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 15,302m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the Alectra West (Hamilton) area bounded by Upper Sherman, Stone Church, Nebo and Rymal Rds. (while project #151307 covers the cable injection portion). It is mostly Residential/Commercial with 1283 customers. Along with the cable remediation, some of the distribution transformers will also be replaced as part of the project. \n\nCables are between 27 to 69 years old. The oldest cables were be targetted for replacment as these cables most likely have corrodied neutrals and are well beyond the end of life for these assets. In conjunction with the replacment, targetted injection will be completed are newer cables providing customers in this area with complete converage. \n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  "]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","This is the initial submission of the project."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","820 Nebo Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",15302]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Beaudrie, Scott (Scott.Beaudrie)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",1]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the near term to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1283 customers and 8000 kVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it mitigates future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The oldest cables are at end-of-life and are failing. Since cables are the main component of the underground electrical distribution system, when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected. For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages - system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. These projects are a result of continuous assessments, prioritizing, and remediating the worst cable segments by a combination of cable injection and cable replacement. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria. Segments that do meet the criteria for cable injection are covered under a separate project. \n\nTherefore, planned cable replacement within the area is selected as the preferred alternative. While it is a costly alternative, the added benefit of installing new conduit which will help with future cable issues as well as avoiding future outages on other cable segments that have been subjected to previous high stress fault conditions. The benefits to the customer include reducing the likelihood of unplanned disruptions and new underground equipment which should provide reliable, continuous service for many more years.  Furthermore, the replacement of several transformers that are at risk of failing allows for an opportunistic renewal of assets while work crews are already in the area performing cable replacement, minimizing the outage impacts for customers who would otherwise eventually experience an unplanned outage once the transformer fails. This aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar cable replacement projects in 2015, 2016, and 2017 were $328/m on average. This project is forecasted to be $318/m, $325/m and $331/m in 2022, 2023, and 2024 respectively. The difference is based on the assumption that the unit cost is to be $300/m in the base year of 2019 (less complicated than projects already completed in prior years) and increased with inflation at 2% each year."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There are 0 failures in this project scope within the 2016 - 2021 timeframe, for a failure rate of 0 failures/100km. The failures can be split between a Pre-DSP (2016 - 2018) and Post-DSP (2019 - 2021) timeframe, with 0 failures occurring Pre-DSP and 0 failures occurring Post-DSP.  If not rehabilitated, this cable will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area ranges from 27 to 69 years old (installed in 1992 and 1950 respectively), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report \"\"Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board\"\" results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",1283]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable: \nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\nFor 15302m of cable in the whole area:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 15302 /1000 = 3.83 failures\n\nAnnually on average over the past five years (2017 - 2021) in Alectra West, there were 53 cable and cable accessory failures (XLPE) affecting 31,663 customers and 2,806,080 CMI\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 31,663/53 = 598 customers affected and 2,806,080/53 = 52,945 CMI\nImpact of 3.83 failures: 598 x 3.83 = 2290 customers affected and 52,945 x 3.83 = 202,779 CMI\n\nSince this area will be implemented in phases over a period of three years, the estimated quantity is 5000m in year 1, 5302m in year 2, and 5000m in year 3. In addition, the total number of transformers in the area is approximately 105 totaling 8000 KVA.\n\nFor the purpose of Reliability Benefits:\n\nYear 1:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x 5000 /1000 = 1.25 failures\nImpact of 1.25 failure: 598 x 1.25 = 748 customers affected and 52,945 x 1.25 = 66,181 CMI\nPeak KVA = 8000 / 15302 * 5000 = 2600 KVA\nThe benefit for 2028 is based on 1.25 failures\n\nYear 2:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (5000+5302) /1000 = 2.58 failures\nImpact of 2.58 failure: 598 x 2.58 = 1543 customers affected and 52,945 x 2.58 = 136,598 CMI\nPeak KVA = 8000 / 15302 x (5000+5302) = 5400 KVA\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 2.58 failures\n\nYear 3:\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.25 x (5000+5302+5000) /1000 = 3.83  failures\nImpact of 3.83 failures: 598 x 3.83 = 2290 customers affected and 52,945 x 3.83 = 202,779 CMI\nPeak KVA = 8000 / 15302 x (5000+5302+5000) = 8000 KVA\nThe benefit from this year onwards is based on 3.83 failures"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable remediation program. The project will help avoid a total of 3.83 potential cable failures and 202,779 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"151904","index":44,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151904]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement Project  - (AREA54) - Copenhagen Rd, Mississauga"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the Copenhagen Rd area (AREA54) to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nThis area has experienced 5 cable failures from 2016 to 2018 and 4 failures from 2019 to 2021 impacting 3213 customers for 50 minutes, more than once a year. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond end of useful life of 40 years and in very poor condition.  This investment will replace 3307 m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit. \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 3.3 failures per year impacting 1178 customers for 50 minutes.\n\nInstalling the new cables in conduit will make future cable remediation easier to implement."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","800 Mavis Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",3307]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Lucic, Marko (Marko.Lucic)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",1]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by the outage impact on reliability on the distribution system in this area.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacement within the next 2 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 3.3 cable failures per year in 2025."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","1172 Residential and 7 Commercial customers / 5057 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there were 9 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nReplacing only the segments that failed negates the issue that the other segments were affected by cable faults which further degrades the cables' insulation and therefore, will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories. Therefore, Alternative #2 is not recommended.\n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \n\"Alectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\"\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the underground construction contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Similar replacement projects were Rathburn Rd W Cable Replacement in 2019 for $3.6 M, and Copenhagen Cable Replacement in 2019 for $3.9 M. This project is forecasted to be at an average of $550/m."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there have been 9 cable failures since 2016. If not rehabilitated, the cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by the customers. \n\nUnder this option, the underground cables will continue to experience faults and will lead to power outages, resulting in deteriorating service reliability for the area. It is also possible that the cable may no longer be repairable and useable which poses a significant amount of operational risk and cost to Alectra Utilities.  Reactive repair of cables in an emergency situation is very time consuming and costly. Given the history of cables failing in this area, Alectra Utilities has determined the looped supply cables, which provide an alternative supply upon a system fault, are also no longer reliable."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area are 46 years old, which is at Alectra Utilities' End-of-Useful Life of 40 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",1178]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 1 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 3307 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 1 x 3307 /1000 = 3.3 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 4, 0, 1, 0, 1,and 3 Cable failures in 2016 to 2021, respectively (6-year average is 2 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 1.5 Cable failures affecting 536 customers and 27039 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 536/1.5 = 357 customers affected and 27039/1.5 = 18026 CMI.\nImpact of 3.3 failures: 357 x 3.3 = 1178 customers affected and 18026 x 3.3 = 59486 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","- Cost for emergency cable failure repair = $20,000 per failure\n- Cost for 3.3 cable failure repairs = $20,000 x 3.3= $66,000"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project will help avoid a total of 3.3 potential cable faults and 59486potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"151911","index":45,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",151911]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement Project - (A05) - Golf Links, Aurora"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 14,112 m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the East (Aurora) A05 grid – Golf Links area. \n\nThis project scope area has experienced 10 cable/splice failures since 2017 with 563 customers affected on average.  More specifically, customers in the project scope area in 2017-2018 had 3 outages, where from 2020-2021 this increased to 7 outages. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area. \n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 7 failures per year as of 2027 and 698,320 potential CMI.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable failures easier to avoid.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable replacements easier to implement.\nIf not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 3 failures in 2023, up to 8 failures by 2027. Based on the condition of the assets cable replacement is recommended and is the alternative that provides the greatest value to customers.\n\nThe total cable quantity for replacement is approximately 14,112m.  It is proposed to complete 3,528m in 2022, 3,528m in 2023, 3,528m in 2024, and 3,528m in 2025.. To further improve reliability, the scope of this project includes the installation of 2 new automated switchgear units. This investment will help avoid a total of 5 potential cable failures and 215,655 potential CMI."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Units"]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tenorlas, Reynaldo (Reynaldo.Tenorlas)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number",1]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#",643893]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the next 2 years to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further. Deteriorated cables fail at greater rates, and Alectra Utilities forecast that if the investment is not made, that the rate of cable failures per year will increase to 0.3 in 2021 and 2 failures per year starting 2025."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","168 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable"]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGiven that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it avoids future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are at end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers. \n  \nIn this project scope area there were 10 cable/splice failures since 2017. If not rehabilitated these cables will get older and will fail more often to a level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nReplacing only the segments that failed negates the issue that the other segments were affected by cable faults which further degrades the cables' insulation and therefore, will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms"]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable replacement projects since 2010,"]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","This project scope area has experienced 10 cable/splice failures since 2017 with 563 customers affected on average.  More specifically, customers in the project scope area in 2017-2018 had 3 outages, where from 2020-2021 this increased to 7 outages. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 3 failures in 2023, up to 7 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","The cable in this area is 38 years old (installed in 1984), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report ''Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board'' results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",408]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 10 failures in this area since 2017.\n \nFrequency of Failure is 10 failures / 5 years = 2 failure(s) per year \n\nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 3 failures in 2023, up to 7 failures by 2027.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 563 customers affected, 99760 CMI, and average outage duration is 228 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production"]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. This project will help avoid 7 failures per year as of 2027 and 698,320 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable installed according to new Standards. Which call for the cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"152281","index":46,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",152281]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Replacement Project - (M31) - Denison and Birchmount, Markham"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is for replacing 3,699 m of direct-buried XLPE cables with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables installed in conduit in the East (Markham) M31 grid – Denison and Birchmount area. \n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable replacements easier to implement.\nIf not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. \n\nIn this project scope area, there were 8 cable/splice failures since 2015 affecting 52 customers on average. More specifically, customers in the project area in 2016-2018 had 2 outages, where from 2019-2021 this increased to 5 outages. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 2 failures in 2023, up to 5 failures by 2027. Based on the condition of the assets cable replacement is recommended and is the alternative that provides the greatest value to customers.\n\nThe total cable quantity for replacement is approximately 3,726m. It is proposed to complete this in 2022. This investment will help avoid a total of 5 potential cable failure(s) as of 2027 and 38640 potential CMI."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","New Project."]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed","Not applicable."]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units"]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Handy, James (James.Handy)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number"]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation –Replacement"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.  This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nCable manufactures introduced the first-generation XLPE cable into the market in the late 1960’s. These cables have inherent problems due to the nature of the manufacturing processes, which led to impurities developing over time in the insulating medium. These impurities are responsible for the increase in cable failures that Alectra Utilities and other utilities have been experiencing with cables from this period.  \n\nXLPE cables also fail because of the way they were installed. Decades ago, utilities buried cable directly in the ground. Over time, the construction standard shifted to installing cable in protective conduits, but much of the system still consists of “direct-buried” cable. When more modern cable-in-conduit fails, it can typically be entirely removed and replaced with brand-new cable with relative ease. In contrast, direct-buried cables can only be repaired by excavating the cable and splicing in a replacement segment. This approach is fundamentally reactive and introduces further complications, since the installed splice may itself become a future failure point. It does not solve the underlying issue, since the older, direct-buried cable remains installed and increasingly likely to fail again. Failing direct-buried cables are causing an increasing number of outages, and when buried cables fail it can take a significant amount of time to restore service and impact the quality of service received by Alectra Utilities’ customers. \n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this vintage of cable, Alectra Utilities must execute cable replacements within the next 2 years to end the trend and to reverse it by reducing the number of cable failures. This should return customers to historical reliability levels. Without this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further. Deteriorated cables fail at greater rates, and Alectra Utilities forecast that if the investment is not made, that the rate of cable failures per year will increase to 0.3 in 2021 and 2 failures per year starting 2025."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","2236 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGiven that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to perform replacement only of cable segments that have experienced a fault. While this area has not seen a large number of faults, several sections of cable would need to be replaced under this alternative. This approach provides a bare minimum investment approach to targeting segments that have already seen repair action taken place, and is intended to remove the possibility of future failures occurring on an already compromised cable segment by installing a new length of cable. This approach neglects the impact that failures have on adjacent equipment within the area. Under this alternative, no transformer replacements would occur, allowing those units to run-to-failure and be replaced reactively.\n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to replace all the cables in this area that are of the same vintage as those that have experienced cable faults.  The cables will be replaced with Tree-Retardant XLPE cables and installed in conduits. Transformer replacement will also be carried out on those transformers within the scope area that are at risk of failure or do not meet minimum condition criteria to leave in place. \n\nThe benefit in replacing these transformers is that it reduces future outages and potential damage to newly installed cable once the transformers fail.\n\nThis is the recommended alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are at end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will reduce the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers. \n  \nIn this project scope area there were 8 cable/splice failures since 2015. If not rehabilitated these cables will get older and will fail more often to a level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nReplacing only the segments that failed negates the issue that the other segments were affected by cable faults which further degrades the cables' insulation and therefore, will not halt or reverse the increasing trend of outages due to cable failure as the cables of the same vintage are at end-of-life, have deteriorated and are at risk of failing soon as exhibited in many areas with multiple cable failures across Alectra Utilities' service territories. \n\nOne other alternative Alectra Utilities considered for cable remediation is cable injection.  However, these cables did not meet Alectra Utilities' cable injection criteria.\n\nCables in this area have failures and partial replacement will not deal with the degradation and damage done to adjacent segments and therefore total cable replacement is required."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has  multi-year Master Service Agreement with external contractors. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk reduction strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable replacement projects since 2010,"]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","There were 8 cable/splice failures since 2015 affecting 52 customers on average. More specifically, customers in the project area in 2016-2018 had 2 outages, where from 2019-2021 this increased to 5 outages. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 2 failures in 2023, up to 5 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","The cable in this area is 38 - 42 years old (installed in 1980 - 1984), which exceeds the Kinectrics Report ''Asset Amortization Study for the Ontario Energy Board'' results for Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 25 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",307]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 8 failures in this area since 2015.\n \nFrequency of Failure is 8 failures / 7 years = 1.14 failure(s) per year \n \nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 2 failures in 2023, up to 5 failures by 2027.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 52 customers affected, 7728 CMI, and average outage duration is 196 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Local approvals and weather."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 5 potential cable failure(s) as of 2027 and 38640 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","When the direct buried cable is replaced, the new cable will be installed according to new Standards - cable to be put in conduit. The conduit provides additional mechanical protection for the cable. In addition it will also facilitate for future cable replacement (faulted cable can be pulled out and new cable be pulled in, no digging is required)."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"152383","index":47,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",152383]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection - (AREA 39) - Erin Mills Pkwy & Thomas St, Mississauga"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the  area (AREA39) to maintain system reliability and customer service.\n\nThis area has experienced 0 cable failure from 2016 to 2018 and 1 failure from 2019 to 2021 impacting 2444 customers for 47 minutes, less than once a year. In 2021 ACA, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in fair condition.  This investment will inject 47313 m of direct-buried XLPE cables. It is proposed to replace 12000 m in 2024, 12000 m in 2025,  12000 m in 2026,  and 11313 m in 2027 based on work that can be executed within these years.\n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 5.9 failures per year impacting 14420 customers for 47 minutes.\n\nThis aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets.  Installing the new cables in conduit will make future cable remediation easier to implement."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","800 Mavis Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units",47313]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Lucic, Marko (Marko.Lucic)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number"]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","This project is driven by the cable failure risks impacting the reliability of the distribution system in this area.  At present, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable remediation within the next 2 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. \n\nWithout this proposed expenditure, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults and Alectra Utilities will start experiencing 1.5 cable failures per year in 2025 and will increase to 5.9 failures per year starting 2028."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","14408 Residential and 12 Commercial customers / 27512 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide Cable TV, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this area, there was 1 cable failure since 2020. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 32 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","\"Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid having some of the issues, where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk prevention strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Completed injection projects from other Alectra regions cost $80/m which is used to estimate this project."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this area, there had been 1 cable failure since 2020. If not rehabilitated, the cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by the customers."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cable in this area is on average 32 years old, which exceeds Alectra Utilities' Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",12621]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","For 1000 m of cable:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.13 failures per 1000 m of cable per year\n\nFor 46035 m of cable in the whole area:\n\nFrequency of Failure is: 0.13 x 46035 /1000 = 5.8 failure(s)\n\nAccording to Alectra Central South Control Room data, there were 0, 0, 0, 0, 1,and 1 Cable failures in 2016 to 2021, respectively (6-year average is 0.333 failures per year).\nAnnually on average there were 0.333 Cable failures affecting 725 customers and 70382 CMI.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 725/0.333 = 2176 customers affected and 70382/0.333 = 211358 CMI.\nImpact of 5.8 failures: 2176 x 5.8 = 12621 customers affected and 211358 x 5.8 = 1225876 CMI"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","- Cost for emergency cable failure repair = $20,000 per failure\n- Cost for 5.8 cable failure repairs = $20,000 x 5.8= $116,000"]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project will help avoid a total of 5.8 potential cable faults and 1225876 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable"]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type","B) Capital Works"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category","1a / Lines Replacement Program/Projects"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category","UG Lines - Planned Asset Replacement"]
[null,null,"Phase Code","11 / Alectra Initiated Capital"]
[null,null,"Rates Category","Sustainment Capital (1)"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type","Master Chart"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category","Cable Remediation"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"152385","index":48,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",152385]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (R23) - Bathurst - Weldrick - Yonge - Carville, Richmond Hill"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment will inject 23,187m of direct-buried XLPE cables in the East (Richmond Hill) grid R23 - Bathurst - Weldrick - Yonge St - Carville area.\n\nThis investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the area to maintain system reliability and customer service.  \n\nCustomers in the project scope area experienced 1 outage in 2019. During the 2020 ACA process, these cables were determined to be beyond typical useful life of 30 years and in fair condition.  \n\nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n\nThe total cable quantity for injection is approximately 23,187m.  It is proposed to be completed in 2024. It is expected that completion of this project will avoid a total of 3 potential cable failures and 233523 potential CMI.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments","Not applicable"]
[null,null,"Units"]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tenorlas, Reynaldo (Reynaldo.Tenorlas)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number"]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the next 4 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the next 4 years, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","4922 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Cyber-Security and Security is not Applicable for this investment."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this project scope area, there was 1 cable/splice failure in 2019. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 29 - 33 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms"]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable injection projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","In this project scope area, there was 1 cable/splice failure in 2019. If not rehabilitated, this cable will continue to degrade, and failures will increase to a level that is not tolerable by customers. Since the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cables in this area are 29 to 34  years old  (installed in 1988-1993), which exceed the Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",91]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There was 1 failure in this project area in 2019.\n\nSince the cables at this location are nearing end of life, it is estimated that failures will escalate starting with 1 failure in 2023, up to 3 failures by 2027.\n\nWe will use Alectra wide reliability as a proxy for this project's reliability.\nImpact of 1 failure in the project area: 277 customers affected, 77,841 CMI, and average outage duration is 104 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 3 potential cable failures and 233523 potential"]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]

{"sheet":"152388","index":49,"n_rows":72,"n_cols":4,"rows_kept":72,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["summary"]
[]
[null,null,"Project Report"]
[]
[null,"Project Code",152388]
[null,"Project Name","Cable Injection Project - (V17) - Langstaff - Keele - Rutherford - Dufferin, Vaughan"]
["Pdescription","Project Description","This investment will inject 22,734m (2024) of direct-buried XLPE cables in the East (Vaughan) grid V17 -Langstaff - Keele - Rutherford - Dufferin area.\n\nThis investment is necessary to decrease the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets within the area to maintain system reliability and customer service. \n\nSince 2017, the project area has had 6 outages. More specifically customers in the project area in 2016-2018 had 1 outage, where from 2019-2021 this increased to 5 outages. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area  Due to the age of the cable in the project scope area and reliability history of adjacent cable, we can predict that we will start to experience more frequent outages in the future starting with 1 outage in 2023, up to 3 outages in 2027.\n\nIt is expected that completion of this project will avoid 3 failures per year and 44079 potential CMI.\n\nThis investment aligns with Alectra Utilities' focus on decreasing the outage impacts due to deteriorating underground system assets."]
["autofit","Major Category","System Renewal"]
[null,"Scenario","Submitted"]
[null,"01. Changes","Are you changing this project from what was previously approved in the budget cycle","No"]
[null,null,"What is the main driver for the change","No Change/New Project"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for what has changed","Not applicable"]
[null,null,"Why has it changed","Updated information for budget purposes"]
[null,null,"Please provide additional justification for why the project has changed"]
[null,"02. Additional Information","Branch Plant","815 Addiscott Service Centre"]
[null,null,"Has Smart Grid Component","No"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Cost Estimate"]
[null,null,"Smart Grid Comments"]
[null,null,"Units"]
[null,null,"Project Class","Regular"]
[null,null,"Does this Project include R&D?","No"]
[null,null,"Will this Project generate ongoing IT OM&A Costs?","No"]
[null,null,"Project Above Material Threshhold","No"]
[null,null,"Project Estimator","Tenorlas, Reynaldo (Reynaldo.Tenorlas)"]
[null,null,"Previous FULL Business Case Approval"]
[null,null,"Business Case Approval Status","In Progress"]
[null,null,"Additional Funding Approval Status"]
[null,null,"Reporting Department","PLNC - Planned Capital"]
[null,null,"Interest Capitalization","No"]
[null,null,"Last Business Case Version Number"]
[null,null,"Is this a Multi-Year Project","No"]
[null,"03. Project Management Office Information","Is this a Technology Project or does it have a Technology Component?","No"]
[null,"04. General Project Information (OEB)","Alectra Grouping","Underground Asset Renewal"]
[null,null,"Alectra Subcategory","Cable Remediation – Injection"]
[null,null,"Contributed Capital","Contributed Capital 0%"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Type","Controllable"]
[null,null,"Rates ID","Rate Base Funded"]
[null,null,"Parent WO#"]
[null,null,"Expenditure Timing"]
[null,"05. Evaluation Criteria (OEB)","Main Driver - System Renewal","Failure Risks"]
[null,null,"Urgency and Reasons for Urgency","These investments are driven by failure risks on the distribution system.  Currently, defective equipment accounts for 45% of controllable outages in Alectra Utilities’ distribution system.  Cable and cable accessory failures account for 50% of all equipment-related outages. This has a large impact on reliability as well as customer service and satisfaction.\n\nDue to the increasing occurrence of failures caused by this cable vintage, Alectra Utilities must execute cable injection within the next 4 years, not only to halt the increasing trend, but also to reverse it and reduce the number of cable failures to return customers back to historical reliability levels. If these cables were not to be injected within the next 4 years, the only option left would be cable replacement which would cost 5 times that for cable injection. \n\nWithout this proposed investment, cables will continue to degrade and Alectra Utilities expects reliability to decline further as deteriorated cables begin to fail at greater rates, having been stressed from historical faults."]
[null,null,"Customer Attachment / Load (KVA)","266 Customers (Mixed - Commercial/Residential) / 1,458 KVA"]
[null,null,"Safety","Alectra Utilities is required to ensure its distribution system can support projected load growth while maintaining reliability and quality of service for customers on both a short-term and long-term basis, as required by the Distribution System Code (DSC). Alectra Utilities must also connect new customers within the timelines prescribed by the OEB’s service quality standards without adversely affecting the quality and safety of service to existing customers. This investment ensures that both of these requirements can be met and that the distribution system can safely distribute the required capacity."]
[null,null,"Cyber-Security, Privacy","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Coordination, Interoperability","Pertaining to coordination with utilities, regional planning and other 3rd parties, Alectra Utilities constructs all new projects using approved construction standards complying with ESA Regulation 22/04. Alectra Utilities participates in regional planning, both at an infrastructure level with local municipalities and regions, as well as at an electrical infrastructure level with Hydro One and other participants in the Regional Planning Process. Alectra Utilities also attends Public Utility Coordinating Committee (PUCC) meetings which jointly allows for the coordination and planning of investments with other utilities who provide cable tv, internet, phone and natural gas services."]
[null,null,"Economic Development","An efficient and safe distribution system maintains reliability. Business activities and customer satisfaction value reliability. Also, some customers review outage statistics as part of the site selection process, and excellent reliability is valued in this process."]
[null,null,"Environmental Benefits","Not Applicable."]
[null,"06. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Project and Project Alternatives (OEB)","Status Quo","The status quo is to do nothing, allowing the end-of-life cable to run to failure and responding to outages under reactive capital. \n\nGive that 50% of defective equipment failures are occurring due to cable and cable accessories, and that 45% of all system outages are defective equipment, this would lead to an unacceptable level of outages and customer satisfaction.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #1","Alternative #1 is to inject only the cable segments that experienced cable faults (not the entire area). \n\nThis alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nThis is not a viable alternative."]
[null,null,"Alternative #2","Alternative #2 is to inject  the cables as described in the project description.\n\nThis is the preferred alternative."]
[null,null,"Justification for Recommended Alternative","The cables in this area are nearing end-of-life and are failing.  When a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. Therefore, Status quo is not recommended.\n\nTo manage the risk of large-scale cable failures, Alectra Utilities must implement proactive cable remediation projects. This can only be managed by replacing all the cables that are of the same vintage as the cables that failed. This will avoid the risk of cascading effect of cable failure, stressing the other cables in the same circuit, leading to more failures in the same area which negatively impacts the quality of service to Alectra Utilities' customers.\n\nIn this project area, there were 6 cable/splice failures since 2017. If not rehabilitated, these cables will get older and will fail more often to the level that is not tolerable by customers.\n\nThere are two methods of cable remediation: Cable Replacement and Cable Injection. \nCable Replacement has the advantage that old cable will be replaced with new cable that may last 55 years and are up to standard (i.e. in-duct); but it has the disadvantage that the unit cost is very high (5 times higher). This comes at a higher cost but would reduce the cost of future cable replaces and expedite replacement of failures.\nCable Injection has the advantage that the unit cost is very low (5 times lower) and still can extend the life of the cables (estimated to be 20 years); but it has the disadvantage that the existing cable will remain as direct-buried after injection, and eventually must be replaced.\n\nThe cables in this area are 33 - 40 years old, which exceeds the Typical Useful Life of 30 years for non-tree retardant XLPE as defined in Alectra Utilities’ ACA but are still eligible for cable injection. \n\nThe Status Quo is not recommended because when a cable segment fails, system reliability and customer service are negatively affected.  For small-scale outages, Alectra Utilities has the capability to replace or repair the faulted cable segments under reactive capital, however, if too many cable failures occur at the same time, Alectra Utilities would not have sufficient resources to manage the large-scale and cascading outages, therefore system integrity will be compromised and reliability will be at a level unacceptable to the customers. \n\nAlternative #1 is not recommended because this alternative is costly, disruptive to customers and does not address the failure situation adequately.\n\nAlternative #2 is the recommended alternative because the cables are eligible for cable injection, this alternative has a lower cost than replacement and it will extend the cable life up to 20 years."]
[null,"07. General Information on the Project/Activity (OEB)","Risks to Completion and Risk Management","Risk:   \nAlectra Utilities considers the following as general risks to project schedule and cost:  \n- fluctuation in cost and staff resources (internal and external) to complete high annual volume of work.\n- customer delays or restricted access to work sites\n-  inclement weather, either in the form of extreme temperatures or due to restoration activities following major storms\n-  delays to material shipment from vendors\n-   general unforeseen delays such as striking rock when digging, tree conservation, municipal/regional consent forms\n\nRisk Management:\nAlectra Utilities has a multi-year Master Service Agreement with the cable injection contractor. The unit prices are kept constant during the term of the Master Service Agreement. Regular progress meetings are held to ensure technical and operational issues are resolved promptly; budget performance is monitored; and projects are on track.   \nAlectra Utilities has utilized coordination with third parties to avoid some of the issues where possible, with municipalities/region/suppliers/customers. Alectra Utilities has implemented a Planning and Scheduling solution to track projects and resources. The Program Delivery department allows Alectra Utilities to manage schedule and cost risks and improve the overall efficiency of implementation. Alectra Utilities is able to reduce controllable cost impacts on the project due to these risk avoidance strategies."]
[null,null,"Comparative Information  on Equivalent Historical Projects (if any)","Alectra has completed similar cable injection projects since 2010."]
[null,null,"Total Capital and OM&A Costs for Renewable Energy Generation portion of Projects (0 if not applicable)",0]
[null,"08. Category-Specific Requirements for Each Project/Activity (OEB)","Description of the Relationship between the Asset Characteristics and Consequences of Asset Performance Deterioration or Failure:","Since 2017, the project area has had 6 outages. More specifically customers in the project area in 2016-2018 had 1 outage, where from 2019-2021 this increased to 5 outages. This clearly indicates a worsening of the cables condition and a decrease in reliability to customers within the project area  Due to the age of the cable in the project scope area and reliability history of adjacent cable, we can predict that we will start to experience more frequent outages in the future starting with 1 outage in 2023, up to 3 outages in 2027."]
[null,null,"Condition of Asset vs. Typical Life Cycle and Performance Record","Cables in this area are 33 to 40 years old (installed in 1982-1989), which exceed the Typical Useful Life of non-tree retardant XLPE of 30 years."]
[null,null,"Number of Customers in Each Customer Class Potentially Affected by Asset Failure",194]
[null,null,"Quantitative Customer Impacts (frequency or duration of interruptions and associated risk level)","There were 6 failures in this project area since 2017.\n\n-\tFrom 2016-2018, there was failure. \n-\tFrom 2019-2021, there were 5 failures.\n\n5 year average of failures is 6 failures / 5 years = 1.2 failure(s) per year \n\nDue to the age of the cable in the project scope area and reliability history of adjacent cable, we can predict that we will start to experience more frequent outages in the future starting with 1 outage in 2023, up to 3 outages in 2027.\n\nImpact of 1 failure: 96 customers affected, 14694 CMI, and average outage duration is 184 minutes per customer per failure"]
[null,null,"Qualitative Customer Impacts (customer satisfaction, customer migration and associated risk level)","Cable failures have negative impact to system reliability and customer service. Outages cause inconvenience and financial loss to customers (office closing, production stoppage)."]
[null,null,"Value of Customer Impact","High"]
[null,null,"Factors Affecting Project Timing, if any","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Consequences for O&M System Costs Including Implications of Not Implementing","Not Applicable."]
[null,null,"Reliability and Safety Factors","This project is part of the long-term cable rehabilitation program. The project will help avoid a total of 3 failures per year and 44079 potential CMI."]
[null,null,"Analysis for \"Like for Like\" Renewal Project","Not Applicable."]
[null,"10. Obsolete","Budget Type"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Old Sub-Category"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Category"]
[null,null,"Phase Code"]
[null,null,"Rates Category"]
[null,null,"Job Cost Chart Type"]
[null,null,"PowerStream Plan Sub Category"]
[null,null,"Location Description"]