Tracking a storm is an exacting, inexact science. Power-outage restoration following a major storm is equally dependent upon the nature and extent of the damage. However, the ability to efficiently carry out the processes and procedures involved in restoration efforts can determine the success or failure of those efforts in the public's eyes.

In December 2002, Duke Power (Charlotte, North Carolina) experienced the worst ice storm in its history. Reports of outages in South Carolina started rolling in during the afternoon of Wednesday, December 4. Before it was all over, a 100-mile swath of ice had blanketed the Duke Power service area from Anderson, South Carolina, to Durham, North Carolina, leaving nearly 1.4 million customer locations without electricity. Field personnel responding to the storm numbered 8800. Total restoration took nine days and cost an estimated US$89 million. The storm inflicted the greatest ice accumulation, damage and power outages to ever occur in North Carolina.

Duke Responds

Duke Power quickly implemented its emergency response plan, mobilizing employees before the storm hit, while requesting assistance from outside utilities. The first off-system field personnel arrived on December 5, with additional resources pouring in to help over the next several days.

With the large number of resources, power was restored to all areas affected by the ice storm by December 14 at 6 a.m., except locations where damage to customer equipment needed repair. The company resumed normal operations Saturday morning, December 14.

Safety First

In an outage this large, restoration efforts must be prioritized. The first concern is for the safety of the public and the workers restoring power. Duke Power prioritized its efforts according to the following rules of thumb:

• Public safety-related situations, such as live downed power lines, came first.

• Emergency services (hospitals, fire departments and police stations).

• Critical infrastructure, such as water/sewer facilities and major traffic signals.

• Main feeders and sub-feeders to restore the greatest number of customers in the shortest amount of time.

• Lateral tap lines, followed by transformer outages and individual customer services.

Frequently, Duke Power's early focus is restoring service to its main feeders, which often enables it to restore service to critical customers on that feeder. Flexibility is the key to prioritizing all of the work. Every storm presents its own unique circumstances that require special attention and must be prioritized within the mix of other requests.

Further Storm Response

When the ice storm hit, restoration forces mobilized on the Duke Power system included company personnel and utility workers (off-system) from other states. The number of personnel working peaked on December 10, with more than 11,000 Duke Power off-system and support personnel.

During this major storm, all available company employees were activated to assist with the storm restoration efforts. Individuals from other utilities were brought in along with contractors to assist. Prior to the storm, the utility had mutual assistance agreements with organizations, including the Southeastern Electric Exchange.

Managing these resources and efficiently deploying construction teams to the damaged areas is a major undertaking. The normal field workforce can increase by tenfold, stretching the normal day-to-day leadership workforce to its limits. In order to help manage all of the field performers, several approaches are used.

First, to the extent possible, Duke Power creates groups of “self-contained teams” that consist of leadership, construction crews, safety personnel and logistics people. These teams can be dispatched to major outage areas, where they are given ownership for restoration and repair work in the assigned area. Instead of assigning individual outages to individual crews, a self-contained team might have responsibility for restoring power to everyone within a given area. This concept helps decentralize the restoration efforts by breaking up service areas into smaller, more manageable chunks of work.

Many off-system workers that come to assist can create self-contained teams with their existing personnel, thus taking some of the burden off of local Duke Power supervision.

Another technique to help manage the field personnel who come to assist is to use general office personnel and field staffing, including engineers, experienced linemen and retirees, all of whom have electrical line experience, to temporarily serve as supervisors in charge of construction teams.

By using these techniques, Duke Power is able to stretch its capabilities to effectively manage the crews. Off-system personnel came from 18 states and the District of Columbia to help with the December storm. They arrived at three separate staging areas where crews were assigned to restoration areas relative to damage sustained.

Over nine days, crews restored a significant amount of the 89,000-mile electrical infrastructure. Based on the materials required and logistics needed to support more than 8000 field workers, this storm was the most expensive in Duke Power's history. Company officials determined those costs would be recovered without pursuing a rate increase. Storm cleanup efforts continued for several weeks.

Communicating the Effort

Duke Power's restoration effort was bolstered by continuous communications with government officials, the media and its customers. These communications included:

• Phone agents were tripled at the customer call center to 600 strong.

• Information was regularly exchanged with local and state governmental officials regarding conditions and status. This included a conference call with then-Duke Power President Bill Coley on the restoration.

• Dozens of news releases and media updates were issued, and several on-air media interviews conducted. These updates were posted on a Voice Response Unit (VRU).

• The Duke Power and Duke Energy Web sites were updated with the most recent information a minimum of four times each day.

• VRU for media was updated on the same schedule as news releases.

• Spanish-language messages were added to the 1-800-PowerOn customer service line.

• A radio ad was placed on service-area Latino stations.

Duke Power executives pitched in by answering customer calls; account managers served as scouts. Two Duke Energy public affairs employees, fluent in Spanish, offered interviews with Latino media.

Cooperation Helps

Duke Power also contacted its sister company, Union Gas, who made available 72 small generators. The hardest hit communities used these generators to power traffic signals and other emergency situations. Duke Power also worked with the The Gaston Gazette, which made its parking lot available for a staging area. The paper even opened its building as a dining hall for 250 electric workers.

While Duke Power's strategy was sound (it restored more than 152,000 customers per day — far and away the best the utility has ever done), it was dealing with other external issues that made the task of storm restoration more challenging.

More Obstacles

Other issues faced included:

• Customer Trust Factor

  The downfall of several major energy-marketing companies cast a shadow of doubt and suspicion over the entire industry. In addition, fallout lingered from the California energy crisis.

• Customer Expectations

  Duke Power's customer reliability statistics are among the best in the country, creating a double-edged sword. Its customers expect continuous power, even during adverse conditions. As with most businesses today, customers expect immediate results. Customers also demand information, such as times of restoration, and sometimes don't understand why a utility can't provide specific estimated times of restoration (ETOR) or why it is difficult to predict when crews will work on a specific outage.

• Magnitude of the Storm

  This was the largest storm ever to affect the Duke Power system. Compounding the problem were pleasant weather conditions shortly after the storm, which made it difficult for customers to understand why power had not been restored. In addition, trees were weakened from a drought that began in 1998. Worse, the storm hit while most trees still had foliage.

• Comparisons with Neighboring Utilities

  Politicians and members of the public made it a point to compare Duke Power's restoration efforts with those of other utilities and co-ops. This was an unfair comparison because Duke Power's service territory was the hardest hit.

• Media Coverage

  Duke Power was dealing with media questions and requests virtually around the clock on every conceivable storm-related issue. Instead of reporting the positive restoration efforts, the media focused on the negatives. In some cases, local government officials spoke out against Duke Power's restoration efforts.

Following the storm, Duke Power immediately initiated an internal critique, which was a significant endeavor because of the magnitude of the storm's impact and recovery efforts. The governor of North Carolina formed a Natural Disaster Preparedness Task Force as a result of the storm to review current preparedness in the state. The North Carolina Utilities Commission conducted public hearings to get citizens' feedback about Duke Power and other utilities' performance during the restoration; Duke Power participated in each of these.

The commission concluded storm restoration efforts were “diligent, effective and well-managed on the whole. Given the extraordinary scope and intensity of the storm, the utilities' performance, though not flawless, was commendable.”

The panel added that “line workers and field personnel deserve special recognition for their part in the restoration effort.” The South Carolina Public Service Commission is conducting its own audit of Duke Power's response to this storm.

As part of a continuous improvement process, five teams were created to address major areas of concern: corporate governance; event communications; agency and governmental interface; information and operational enhancement; and enterprise.

In addition, smaller teams were established to address other issues that have been identified. Target dates were established to complete quick-hit, medium-range and long-range issues. The teams completed their work, and these improvements are now included in Duke Power's emergency preparedness procedures and processes.

Additional steps taken include:

• Increasing communications with emergency management officials, local government leaders, school systems, public health and safety organizations and other utilities.

• Enhancing communications with Spanish-speaking customers.

• Adding the capability to report outages by county.

• Working with local Emergency Operating Centers to identify locations of critical facilities.

• Proactively reaching out to key emergency response stakeholders to identify areas where communications channels can be enhanced.

• Continuing to identify and use technological enhancements to meet customers expectations for more precise estimated times of restoration

Déjá Vu

On Thursday, Feb. 27, 2003, another dangerous ice storm affected 350,000 customers. Most of these customers were in the northern one-third of Duke Power's service area. The utility was able to initiate many of the process improvements discovered from the December ice storm, especially in the area of proactively communicating with legislators, regulators and stakeholders. A new approach was implemented to provide customer ETORs — by circuit. Furthermore, outbound proactive calls were placed to Medical Alert customers.

Duke Power's new tools include:

• OutageLink provides better methods of dissecting information and providing more-detailed information on outage restoration efforts to the news media and public. For example, outage statistics are now reported by county. The system also offers graphical displays of where outages are being experienced and has capabilities for future expansions with other outage tools that should help improve future restoration processes.

• MapLink provides a virtual service area with customer locations easily identified.

• Crew Resource Tools allows more precise tracking of crews and crew movement.

As a result of these tools, customers, regulators, local and state officials, and the media were supportive of Duke Power's efforts. The general perception was that the utility performed well, and significant positive reviews of its February storm restoration efforts were received.

Staying Committed

The winter weather of 2002-2003 wreaked the most storm-caused havoc in Duke Power's history. The utility endured two major ice storms, one minor ice storm and windstorms in between. The difference in public opinion changed considerably from the first storm to the second because Duke Power successfully implemented key improvements between major ice storms. Obviously, there is much more to learn and change. Duke Power will continue the effort to improve its processes through critiques, teams and other tools. As a result, it will be better prepared for future events. And while storms will always occur at the whim of nature, Duke Power will strive to make its response a more exact science.

E.O. Ferrell is senior vice president of power delivery for the northern region for Duke Power, which is responsible for the installation, operation and maintenance of the power-delivery system. Ferrell, who joined Duke Power in 1970, holds a BSEE degree from North Carolina State University and an MBA degree from the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. He is the past chair and a current member of the engineering and operations executive committee of the Southeastern Electric Exchange and a member of the AEIC power-delivery committee.
eferrell@duke-energy.com