Refer to Table ZS-3, Table ZS-3a and Figure ZS-7

Summary of key findings 

• In the 2019 study year, potential constraints were identified occurring broadly across the U.P. All identified issues have either a mitigation plan or project associated with them. Please refer to Table ZS-3 (Project or Mitigation column) for details.

Longer term, more robust solutions, involving upgrades, rebuilds, and/or new construction is possible. These results are presented fully in the ATC Energy Collaborative - Michigan section. This section presents a Strategic Flexibility approach to the multiple factors emerging across the U.P.

Zone 2 - 2019 futures study results

Two potential 2019 futures were studied as part of this Assessment:

• 20% Wind Future
• Slow Growth Future

Please refer to the Methodology & Assumptions for details about how the futures models were developed.

In the 20% Wind Future, voltages and line overloads in the Escanaba area worsen, but increasing area generation mitigates the situation(s). These results occur because of area generation dispatch and the associated change in the flow of power associated with the 20% Wind scenario.

In the Slow Growth Future, voltages improve throughout Zone 2. In addition, line overloads generally improve, but worsen under certain contingencies. This result is consistent with the reduced loading and associated generation redispatch throughout the zone.

The Pine River-Straits 69-kV line overload, which occurs under single contingency in the 2019 Summer Peak model, does not appear in either the 20% Wind or Slow Growth Future. Please refer to Table ZS-3a for the limitations and performance criteria exceeded for these futures.