The total project value would be the sum of the calculations for each on the applicable combinations in addition to nonfinancially quantified references to the planning standards and possible avoidance of customer complaints from low voltage. Although load growth would eventually force the conductors to be upgraded, the more costly project would be deferred, freeing capital for other near-term projects.

The results of the process review and development of documented procedures and equations increased the level of efficiency and consistency at OPPD, as related to the distribution planning project business case process.

In some cases the gains in efficiency resulted from a more effective communication of processes and concepts. This was particularly true of the project selection process. The use of an incremental approach to project selection led to discussions regarding viable alternatives and previously completed projects used to mitigate unsatisfactory system conditions. Documenting a project progression, influenced by financial factors, beginning with the least expensive to the most expensive project, provided a method to quickly summarize why the present project was the preferred option in a capital-constrained environment. This method was particularly effective when communicating with individuals outside the T&D Planning department or Engineering division.

In addition to the increased ability to communicate across organizational lines, consistency gains were achieved by using a common set of valuation methodologies and formulas. The result was a standard set of guidelines that identified and resolved sources of distribution planning business case inconsistency. The standardized and systematic approach to reviewing potential benefits helped ensure projects were appropriately valued on an individual basis. Inconsistencies related to assumptions were avoided by using a standard approach of evaluating project variables.

Lastly, a contributing factor to the process review's success was the inclusion of all involved parties. Individuals representing end users and project evaluators at various levels within the organization were included at some point of the new methodologies adoption. This approach allowed each group to influence the framework and gain equity in the process. Increasing the level of acceptance among each group greatly eased the implementation of the business case development concepts.

In conclusion, increasing the consistency and credibility of distribution planning business cases can be achieved by developing and documenting agreed-upon factors specific to an individual organization. Depending on the capital constraints and attitudes toward risk, different organizations may develop extremely dissimilar factors for value classes. Conversely, other factors such as causes and effects are nearly universal throughout the industry. This presentation is in no way intended to provide a comprehensive view of the present challenges related to project valuation, but rather to provide a framework from which to begin.

Eric Easton has been an engineer in Distribution Planning with the Omaha Public Power District since 2003. He earned his BSEE degree from Prairie View A&M University and completed his MBA degree from the University of Nebraska at Omaha. edeaston@oppd.com

• Causes — These are system events that have a probability of taking place. It is important to weigh the consequences resulting from an event appropriately and consistently.

• Occurrences — These are the unsatisfactory system conditions that result from the causes or system events. Most often occurrences can be directly linked to at least one financial measure.

• Value classes — These are financial measures for occurrences that result in unsatisfactory system conditions.

• Project type — This can be any project that reasonably and cost-effectively mitigates the unsatisfactory system condition.