1 / 25

Utah Service Quality Review Group Benchmarking at PacifiCorp

This report from February 22, 2006, discusses performance comparisons and benchmarking at PacifiCorp, focusing on ePerformance and PA Consulting within the company. It delves into outage metrics, merger commitments, targets, and results, providing insights into benchmarking characteristics and results from various participants including BC Hydro, Hydro Quebec, and more. The document highlights the importance of identifying opportunities for utilizing best practices to enhance performance, comparing system types, and understanding data derivation methods. It also addresses the significance of determining differences in practices that impact outcomes and exploring explanatory variables. The report details the benchmarking results from the T&D Benchmarking Study in 2005, offering valuable insights for organizations aiming to improve their operational efficiencies and service quality.

arielm
Download Presentation

Utah Service Quality Review Group Benchmarking at PacifiCorp

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Utah Service Quality Review GroupBenchmarking at PacifiCorp February 22, 2006

  2. Performance Comparisons Benchmarking requires: • ePerformance • PA Consulting • Within PacifiCorp • IEEE Distribution Reliability • Other benchmarks • Identifying how data is derived • Comparing types of systems • Looking for other explanatory variables • Determining differences in practices that may lead to different results • Identifying opportunities for utilizing other practices to improve performance

  3. System CharacteristicsePerformance

  4. System Characteristics

  5. System Characteristics, cont’d.

  6. Outage Metrics

  7. Merger Commitment Targets & Results

  8. PA ConsultingBenchmarking Results

  9. PA Consulting – T&D Benchmarking Study 2005 (for Calendar 2004) Participants EPCOR BC Hydro Altalink HydroOne Hydro Quebec XCEL-MN (2) NWE-MT Pacificorp NWE NYSEG WE Energies METC NWE-SD DTE RG&E ATC ITC Exelon- PECO OPPD PSE&G Exelon- ComEd IPL BG&E PHI PHI-PEPCO PHI-Delmarva PHI-Altantic XCEL-CO (2) Westar KCPL SCE LG&E TXU ED El Paso International Eskom CenterPoint Entergy Services

  10. PA Benchmarking Characteristics

  11. PC PC PC SAIDI: Overall Outage Duration

  12. PC PC PC SAIFI: Outage Frequency

  13. PC PC PC CAIDI: Outage Responsiveness

  14. Florida Power & LightBenchmarking Results

  15. PC PC PC FPL Benchmark Results: Calendar 2004 w/ Major Events

  16. PC PC PC FPL Benchmark Results: Calendar 2004 w/out Major Events

  17. IEEEBenchmarking Results

  18. IEEE Reliability Benchmark • 105 Companies have responded at some time • 2004 Survey • 78 responded in 2004 • 56 provided details • 40 were same as 2003 respondents

  19. Questions

  20. Appendix

  21. Outage Metrics by State

  22. Outage Metrics by State

  23. Outage Metrics State

  24. Average Retail Rates by State

  25. Utah Power Rates vs. Western Utilities

More Related