N-52024-2025 Bates White FAM Audit Report - Redacted
8 passages
NSPI explained that in the aftermath of the cyber event, the loss of the Process Information ("PI") system impacted its short-term load forecasting process. Specifically, the short-term load forecasting model lost its automation (from PI)...
AI summary NSPI's short-term load forecasting was significantly impacted by a cyber event, leading to manual updates instead of automated ones. Although NSPI denies biasing the model, the higher MAPE and upward bias suggest an attempt to ensure adequate online resources during the event. This approach, while understandable, may lead to overcommitment of resources, with significant start-up costs for thermal units.
g solid fuel supply that, during the Audit Period, were carried out effectively. NSPI's ability to schedule vessel shipments to either of its two receipt terminals is a useful contractual flexibility. Conclusion V-4: During the April 25, 2...
AI summary The document outlines conclusions regarding NSPI's solid fuel supply processes, including the use of spreadsheets for tracking deliveries, the continued operation of PI and DCS/SCADA systems post-cyber event, and a reduction in fuel handling costs at two marine terminals.
X.B.2.a.vi. Utilization Factor The last performance metric we reviewed was Utilization Factor ("UF"). NSPI focuses on UF for its plants as a metric that captures the "wear" on its generating units driven by capacity factors, cycling, opera...
AI summary NSPI uses the Utilization Factor (UF) as a performance metric to assess wear on its generating units, influenced by capacity factors, cycling, and operating hours. Actual UFs for 2024 and 2025 largely exceeded forecasts, potentially leading to increased sustaining capital investments and O&M costs.
Figure X-25: OM&G Costs (2015–2025, $mm)484 Plant 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Lingan $17.9 $14.4 $16.4 $16.4 $15.8 $15.2 $15.9 $17.1 $18.4 $18.5 $19.8 Tufts Cove $12.2 $12.5 $12.1 $14.6 $11.4 $11.4 $13.4 $15.6 $1...
AI summary The document presents a table showing OM&G costs for various generating plants operated by NSPI from 2015 to 2025. The costs are analyzed on a per megawatt basis, with an average of $40,237/MW for the NSPI fleet during the Audit Period.
Figure X-27: OM&G Costs During Audit Period ($/MWh) 487 Plant OM&G Costs ($mm) MWh OM&G Costs per MWh Combustion Turbines $4.2 35,367 $117.41 Biomass $12.6 346,589 $36.43 Wind $18.8 502,901 $37.39 Trenton $28.2 1,985,466 $14.21 Hydro $22.3...
AI summary The document presents OM&G costs for various power plants during an audit period, highlighting that labour constitutes the largest portion of these costs. NSPI spent $115.5 million on labour, a 10% increase from the prior audit period. Labour accounted for 59% of OM&G expenses, with NSPI regularly overestimating regular labour and underestimating overtime and contract labour.
clusion X-26: NSPI's hydro assets produced 30 percent lower output in this Audit Period compared with the prior period, driven primarily by sharp decreases in precipitation during this Audit Period. Conclusion X-27: Wreck Cove's ongoing li...
AI summary NSPI's hydro assets produced significantly lower output due to decreased precipitation. Delays in Wreck Cove's modernization impacted performance and cost savings. NSPI increased OM&G expenses and employee headcount during the Audit Period, while sustaining capital investments decreased. Fuel costs were estimated based on FAM reports.
XI.B.2.c. Summary We find, like we have found in prior audits, that numerous commitment and dispatch decisions are made outside of PortOps. Many of those decisions are based on experience and knowledge of the marketing desks and NSPSO. For...
AI summary The summary highlights that many commitment and dispatch decisions are made outside of PortOps, often by NSPSO in real time without sufficient cost information. These decisions are influenced by factors like fuel supply and unit restartability. NSPI committed to addressing these issues through the Economic Dispatch Optimization Solution.
due to the inability of the PortOps model to converge, - iii. Calculation of costs/benefits would be highly dependent on assumptions, if load rebalancing post deviation is required for the analysis, - iv. Costs associated with the initial...
AI summary The document discusses challenges in calculating costs and benefits related to load rebalancing and dispatch decisions due to limitations in the PortOps model and lack of logged deviation data. It also highlights the inability to quantify load shifting benefits for real-time ADC and the potential for net costs from real-time load deviations.