Central Georgia EMC modernized an aging SCADA environment around an integrated ADMS platform and centralized FLISR, then validated the automation through laboratory simulation, network-model correction, staged operator exposure, training and real-world operation. The public record is strongest after selection: it documents how the cooperative prepared people and systems for automation and measured operating results, while a separate vendor-hosted account presents Protection Settings Manager as an add-on following the SCADA / DMS modernization. The timing of the PSM decision relative to Hurricane Irma and the reported reliability results is not established.
-
Utility: Central Georgia EMC
Utility type: Electric cooperative
Technology / purchase: SCADA / ADMS modernization, centralized FLISR and later PSM use / expansion
Buying motion: Post-award implementation / validation
Stages visible in the record: Awareness → Problem Definition → Solution Exploration → Vendor Evaluation → Purchase Decision → Adoption & Implementation → Expansion & Advocacy
Stakeholders explicitly visible: Engineering / operations team; control-room operators; field personnel
Evidence / information explicitly mentioned: Peer outage/restoration analysis; in-lab scenario testing; distribution-system models and network-model correction; staged operator exposure; scenario-based employee training; Hurricane Irma operating experience; reliability results
Outcome: SurvalentONE SCADA / ADMS and FLISR implemented; a separate vendor-hosted account presents PSM as an add-on following the SCADA / DMS modernization; SAIDI reported to decline from 130 minutes to 65.8 minutes within two years
Source basis: Survalent-hosted customer case studies plus a Survalent-branded case-study excerpt hosted by FeaturedCustomers that states it was originally published in IEEE Power & Energy magazine
What triggered the purchase
Central Georgia EMC was seeking to improve service reliability and reduce outage duration while replacing an antiquated SCADA environment. The available accounts describe storms and high winds as a recurring operating challenge and state that a small number of outages accounted for a large share of outage time.
Before moving to centralized FLISR, the cooperative benchmarked and analyzed the outage durations and restoration approaches of peer utilities. The Survalent-branded article excerpt states that Central Georgia EMC concluded its outage durations were unacceptable and decided to invest in digitization and automation.
How the utility defined what it needed
The sources describe a modernization path built around an integrated ADMS platform with model-based, centralized FLISR. A Survalent-hosted case study says the utility sought a flexible, scalable and customizable platform with user-friendly SCADA, robust functionality and advanced distribution-management capabilities.
Interoperability also appears in the implementation record. The Survalent-branded article excerpt describes it as important to operator effectiveness because operators were learning new applications and needed real-time information across systems without moving among separate applications to interpret events and choose actions.
How vendors or options were evaluated
The current source set does not reconstruct a complete competitive procurement. It does not identify the vendor field, scoring method, shortlist, contract-approval chain or other details needed to describe a full comparative selection process.
A Survalent-hosted case study states that Central Georgia EMC chose the Survalent platform for flexibility, ease of implementation, functionality and value. That retrospective selection rationale is the extent of the documented vendor-comparison record used here.
The richer evidence begins after the platform and FLISR path had been chosen. Before full launch, Central Georgia EMC subjected the FLISR solution to in-lab, scenario-based testing. Distribution-system models were loaded into a test application and operating scenarios were simulated so the utility could identify technical or operating issues and correct deficiencies in the network model before commissioning.
The cooperative also introduced automation incrementally. The article excerpt describes remote-controlled pole-mounted reclosers being operated manually from the control center before fuller automation, an approach that helped operators increase confidence in the new technologies. Scenario-based training was also used with operators and other employees, including field personnel. The source explicitly states that this training was key to general acceptance and use of FLISR, particularly among field personnel.
Evidence and information explicitly mentioned
Peer outage and restoration analysis
Central Georgia EMC compared its outage duration and restoration approaches with those of peer utilities before committing to centralized FLISR. The sources do not identify a formal third-party benchmark report or document a peer reference-call process; the evidence is peer performance analysis used in framing the modernization need.
In-lab scenario testing and network-model correction
Before full launch, the utility tested FLISR in a laboratory environment using simulated operating scenarios. The tests were used to check how the system interpreted field-device data and responded to modeled conditions. The same process enabled the cooperative to identify and correct deficiencies in its network model before commissioning. The source describes laboratory and simulation work, not a field pilot.
Incremental operator exposure and scenario-based training
Central Georgia EMC exposed operators to remote control before moving to fuller automation and used scenario-based training to demonstrate FLISR, PSM and distribution power flow to employees. The source explicitly links the incremental approach to increased operator confidence and describes scenario-based training as key to general acceptance and use of FLISR, especially among field personnel.
Post-launch operating evidence
The Survalent-branded article excerpt describes Hurricane Irma in 2017 as the first real test of the ADMS. It states that the platform was used to organize restoration during the first 24 to 36 hours and that FLISR operated in automatic mode during the storm.
The same source reports that Central Georgia EMC's SAIDI declined from 130 minutes before FLISR implementation to 65.8 minutes two years later. Other performance figures differ across the vendor-hosted sources, so those disputed values are not used here as settled case facts
Outcome
Central Georgia EMC implemented the SurvalentONE SCADA / ADMS platform and centralized FLISR, with laboratory testing, network-model correction, staged operator exposure and training forming part of the implementation sequence.
A separate Survalent-hosted case study presents Protection Settings Manager as an add-on following the SCADA / DMS modernization and describes its use with FLISR and in other operating situations such as planned maintenance. The exact date of the PSM decision or implementation, including its timing relative to Hurricane Irma and the reported reliability measures, is not established in the current evidence record. Utility quotations and participation in the vendor-produced case studies also provide public advocacy evidence, but that advocacy is documented through vendor-hosted material rather than an independent utility record.
Separately, post-launch, Hurricane Irma provided documented real-world operating experience with the ADMS and FLISR. The source set also reports the decline in SAIDI from 130 minutes to 65.8 minutes within two years.
Why this case matters for vendors
Laboratory testing and training continued after the platform choice
The documented selection of Survalent did not end the utility's validation work. Central Georgia EMC still tested FLISR against modeled operating scenarios, corrected its network model, exposed operators to automation incrementally and trained employees before and during operational adoption. In this case, implementation itself generated evidence about whether the technology would behave correctly in the utility's system and whether the people expected to use it would accept it.
PSM expansion followed the modernization, but its timing relative to operating results is unresolved
The record separates the initial SCADA / FLISR modernization from PSM use, and the vendor-hosted PSM account presents PSM as a logical add-on to that modernization. The available sources do not establish whether the PSM decision occurred before or after Hurricane Irma or the reported reliability measures, and they do not establish that those operating results caused the expansion. The case therefore documents expansion without supporting a results-to-expansion sequence.
-
Survalent, Central Georgia EMC case study
Host: Survalent
Public link: https://www.survalent.com/casestudy/central-georgia-emc-case-study/Survalent, Central Georgia EMC PSM case study
Host: Survalent
Public link: https://www.survalent.com/casestudy/central-georgia-emc-case-study-psm/“Lessons Learned: Central Georgia Electric Membership Cooperative”
Host: FeaturedCustomers; Survalent-branded PDF
Public link: https://cdn.featuredcustomers.com/CustomerCaseStudy.document/survalent_central-georgia-emc_782085.pdf
The PDF states that it is excerpted from Investing for the Future by Young Ngo, Herschel Arant, Chris Bilby and Amy Grice and that the original appeared in IEEE Power & Energy magazine, January/February 2020.Source provenance: The first two are vendor-hosted customer case studies. The third is a Survalent-branded, republished case-study excerpt hosted by FeaturedCustomers and identifies an earlier IEEE Power & Energy publication. The source set is therefore useful for participant and implementation detail but is not an independent utility procurement record.
Evidence limitations: The sources do not reconstruct the complete original competitive procurement, scoring process, shortlist or authorization chain. Pre-launch laboratory testing should not be described as a pilot, and it is separate from post-launch operating evidence such as Hurricane Irma. S021 and S023 disagree on a first-year 32% reliability index and on the estimated reduction in restoration / repair time; this case therefore uses the consistent SAIDI result and does not reconcile the disputed figures. The exact timing of the PSM decision / implementation relative to Hurricane Irma and the reported reliability measures is also not established.
More Buying Cases
NEW CASES + ANALYSIS
Get new Utility Buying Cases when they’re published, plus analysis of how utilities buy. Subscribe to CONDUCTOR below
