##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

PLN EIC is one of PLN’s business units and is responsible for the development of electrical infrastructure in the working area of DKI Jakarta, Banten Province, and its surroundings. One of the national strategic projects included in the PLN is the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project, with a COD target of 2026. The delay in the completion of this project and the non-fulfillment of stakeholders’ expectations will certainly have a broad impact on the operation of the electricity system, the impact on PLN’s financial performance, the social impact, the environmental impact, as well as the direct impact on the performance and image of PLN EIC. This research aims to assist management in making decisions related to the best transmission line design for the Cawang-Gandul project so that project completion can be on time and in accordance with stakeholder expectations. In this research, several methodological approaches were used to gain a broader and more complete understanding. The Problem Tree Analysis approach, combined with brainstorming and structured interview techniques, was used to explore business issues. Two complementary approaches, namely Value-Focused Thinking (VFT) and the Stakeholder Analysis method, are used to formulate stakeholder expectations and will become guidelines for formulating alternative strategies. Using a structured interview technique, 4 alternative strategies were formulated in the form of the transmission line design, namely (1) Compact Lattice Tower, (2) Underground Cable, (3) Combine Design (Compact Lattice Tower + Underground Cable), and (4) Steel Pole Tower. The next methodological approach uses the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to determine the best transmission line design, which is then analyzed using AHP Super Decision software. The results of this research show that the Underground Cable design is the best design alternative that can be implemented in the Cawang-Gandul project with several advantages, namely minimal social conflict, easy implementation, and a relatively faster work process. The final stage of research is to make an implementation plan.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Introduction

Electricity is at the heart of the Indonesian economy, and along with economic growth, the growth of electricity infrastructure will also follow. PLN, as a state-owned enterprise, has duties and responsibilities for supporting and providing electricity to the community. Through PLN Electrical Infrastructure Company (anonymized as PLN EIC), which is one of PLN’s business units engaged in electricity infrastructure development in DKI Jakarta and its surroundings, PLN has tasks and challenges that are not easy in building electricity infrastructure.

The targets set are also not easy and full of challenges, especially when related to transmission line projects that pass through densely populated residential areas. This can be seen in Fig. 1, where the target set for the completion of the transmission line project is quite varied, and the realization is quite dynamic for each year. In certain periods, the project completion capacity target is not achieved, but in other periods, it can be met.

Fig. 1. Graph of target vs. actual completion of transmission line capacity.

This deviation in the transmission line project completion target certainly has a cause and based on the company’s long-term plan document (PLN, 2022) and the results of brainstorming with SMEs within PLN EIC, the cause is a delay in the completion of the transmission line project caused by various factors.

One of PLN’s strategic projects and a case study in the research of this study is the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project along 20 kmr, with the target of completing the project according to PLN’s RUPTL in 2026. This project aims to improve the reliability of electricity supply to the community and PLN customers, and of course, the quality of electricity produced will be better with this project.

The challenge in building this project is very large, especially when viewed from the feasibility study of this project, where it is planned to go through a very densely populated route, utilizing the existing transmission line with the condition that the existing land has been used for other purposes, as well as the fulfillment of regulations on tower design that pass the zoning of the flight area and the fulfillment of DKI Jakarta spatial regulations.

Potential problems that can arise on the Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul 500 kV transmission line project work plan as a result of brainstorming and from internal data PLN EIC in general can be described as follow: (1) The transmission line crosses a densely populated settlement; (2) The Cawang-Gandul route plan will use the location of the existing tower site where other designations have been used such as: Fields, House Buildings, Zoos and Roads; (3) Land prices are relatively high so that the cost of Right of Way (ROW) will be even greater; (4) The transmission line is in the Flight Operation Safety Area (KKOP) of Halim Perdana Kusuma Airport and Pondok Cabe Airport with tower design recommendations, the average height is 41 meters; (5) There are several spans that need to use new lines because they do not allow uprating existing towers based on DKI Jakarta Spatial and Regional Planning regulations that do not allow the construction of new transmission lines with Over Head Line (OHL) designs.

The potential problems described above, of course, will have an impact on the potential delay in the completion of the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project. The right strategy to mitigate this potential is needed, whether it is maintaining the path using OHL design or using other designs that are more effective. It is expected that the implementation of the project will run smoothly, there will be no friction or rejection in the community, the project will be completed on time, regulations will be fulfilled, the quality of work will be appropriate, and the budget will meet the needs of the community. It is hoped that this research will help the top management of PLN EIC make decisions, especially about the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project, so that the project can be finished on time and to the satisfaction of all stakeholders.

To achieve the objectives of this study, there are three research questions (RQ) compiled by the author that must be answered, namely:

RQ 1 : What are the expectations of stakeholders on the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project?

RQ 2 : What are the alternative transmission line designs in the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project that meet stakeholder expectations?

RQ 3 : What is the best transmission line design to maximize the project completion time of the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project and meet stakeholder expectations?

The approach that the author uses in this study uses multimethodological concepts. Starting from the Problem Tree Analysis approach to understand and identify problems in certain contexts, the stakeholder analysis approach is used simultaneously with the Value-Focused Thinking (VFT) approach for complex decision-making by focusing on the desired or expected values. The next stage is to use the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) approach for complex decision-making by systematically organizing and comparing different preferences. Data analysis using the AHP method will be assisted by the AHP Super Decision software.

Research Methods

An appropriate research approach and careful methodology are key aspects of designing and running this research. In determining the right research approach, researchers must consider the purpose of the research and the data sources to be used, where the purpose of the research is to assist the top management of PLN EIC in making decisions related to the case study completion of the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project.

Research Design

Fig. 2 shows the research stage that will be a guideline in achieving the objectives of this study to assist decision-makers in the context of choosing the best transmission line design for the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project. As seen in the framework, this research stage consists of four main stages: business issue exploration, business issue analysis, business issue solution and determining the best solution, and implementation plan.

Fig. 2. Research design.

In the business issue exploration stage, the author will identify the problem, study the literature, and collect data. At the business issue analysis stage, stakeholder analysis and VFT approaches will be carried out (see Table II as a summary table of the calculation of rating levels of power and interest). While at the business issue solution stage, AHP’s approach is to determine alternatives and determine the best alternative. The final stage is the implementation plan.

Score Level of power Level of interest
1 Less of power Less interest
2 Quite of power Quite interest
3 Powerful Interest
4 Very powerful Very interest
Table I. Rating Levels of Power and Interest
Stakeholder Level of interest Level of power
X1 X2 Xi Y1 Y2 Yi
1. … … … …. … … ….
2. … … … …. … … ….
k X¯¯ Y¯¯
Table II. Rating Levels of Power and Interest

In the first stage of the exploration of business issues, the author will try to identify several problems that could arise from the Cawang-Gandul transmission line project. This is so that a complete list of problems can be made (like how doctors first make observations before deciding what drug to give a patient) and several good strategic alternatives can be made. Still, at the same stage, problem identification is carried out to determine the root causes of a problem. It involves breaking down the problem into its component parts and analyzing each one to determine what is causing the problem. When root causes have been identified, a problem tree can be created that shows how all of the different parts of the problem are interconnected. After that, the literature review process related to the object of research and data collection, including both primary and secondary data derived from internal research objects, can be carried out to support the research process and further analysis.

In the second stage of business issue analysis, the analysis will be carried out starting from stakeholder analysis. The stakeholder analysis process typically involves identifying all relevant stakeholders, assessing their level of interest and influence, and mapping out their perspectives through a power-interest matrix. Furthermore, from the results of the stakeholder perspective on the Cawang-Gandul project, the author will analyze the stakeholder perspective through the VFT approach, which will produce fundamental objectives and means objectives and be illustrated through the means-fundamental objectives hierarchy. From the fundamental objectives that have been synthesized, the author will conduct interviews with several Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to produce several alternative strategies in order to meet these fundamental objectives. Then, after that, the criteria for the next analysis process are determined through the conversion of means objectives from VFT results.

In the third stage, business issue solutions and the determination of the best alternative will be carried out using the AHP approach. Starting from building a hierarchical structure of the AHP model consisting of three levels, namely goals, criteria, and alternatives, we continued with the pairwise comparison model through the distribution of questionnaires to respondents, who in this case are decision makers, who then processed the data to get pairwise comparison criteria and pairwise comparison alternatives. The next stage is to create a pairwise comparison matrix for both criteria and alternatives and after that, data processing is done with the help of AHP Super Decision software. The results of synthesis using the software will produce ranking priorities for criteria, alternative ranking priorities for each criterion, a consistency ratio, and the best alternative (first priority).

In the fourth stage, the implementation plan is an implementation plan of the best alternatives that have been analyzed in the previous stage.

Data Analysis Method

The stages of data analysis generally involve a systematic and structured series of steps to process, analyze, and interpret data. It should be noted that the stages of data analysis may vary depending on the methods and approaches used, as well as the complexity of the research or the problem at hand. Fig. 3 shows the data analysis method used with the multimethodological approach concept.

Fig. 3. Multimethodological integration concepts.

The methods used in this study are Problem Tree Analysis, Cynefin Framework, Stakeholder Analysis, VFT, and AHP. The entire methodology is integrated into the concept of the Divergent-Convergent model, where Divergent thinking refers to the ability to generate ideas, choices, or various solutions to a problem or challenge. Convergent thinking, on the other hand, focuses on the ability to narrow down choices and choose the best or most relevant ideas.

Stakeholder Analysis

The quantitative approach to this analysis starts with distributing questionnaires to each key respondent to assess the level of importance and stakeholder influence using a scoring method with a scale of 1 to 4 (See Table I).

The value of the level of interest and level of power of each stakeholder is added up and then averaged using (1) so that the value is obtained Y¯ and X¯ on each stakeholder. (1) is used because there is more than one key respondent who assesses the level of interest and level of power. The next step is the calculation result of (1) is added and then averaged using (2) so that a value is obtained Y¯¯ and X¯¯. The result of (2) is a value Y¯¯ and X¯¯ used as quadrant boundary in cartesian diagrams. (1)X¯=∑Xin;Y¯=∑Yin

(2)X¯¯=∑X¯ik;Y¯¯=∑Y¯ikwhere Xi is value of the i-th interest level; Yi is value of the i-th power level; X¯ is the average value of interest; Y¯ is the average value of power; X¯¯ is the average of the average value of interest; Y¯¯ is the average of the average value of power; n is number of key respondents; and k is number of stakeholders involved.

After obtaining grades Y¯¯ and Y¯¯ as a quadrant boundary in the cartesian diagram, then the power level value (Yi) and interest level value (Xi) of each stakeholder are plotted into the power-interest matrix (see Fig. 4).

Fig. 4. Matrix Power-Interest Stakeholder (Source: Oxford College Marketing (2018, April 23)).

The power-interest matrix describes the position and role of each stakeholder through quadrant division, where the x-axis represents interest while the y-axis represents power. Stakeholders are divided into four groups, namely key players (quadrant I), keep informed (quadrant II), keep satisfied (quadrant III), and minimal effort (quadrant IV). Key players have high interest and power, keeping informed have high interest but low power, keeping satisfied have low interest but high power, and minimal effort have low interest and power.

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

From the results of the previous qualitative analysis formulation in the form of the AHP hierarchy structure, quantitative analysis was carried out starting from the distribution of questionnaires related to several paired questions that were interconnected at each level that had been mapped previously in the AHP hierarchy structure. Table III illustrates how SMEs can use the fundamental scale of value (a pairwise numerical rating) to represent the intensities of judgments.

Intensity of importance Definition Explanation
1 Equal importance Two activities contribute equally to the objective
3 Moderate importance Experience and judgement slightly favour one activity over another
5 Essential importance Experience and judgement strongly favour one activity over another
7 Very strong importance An activity is favoured very strongly over another; its dominance demonstrated in practice
9 Extreme importance The evidence favouring one activity over another is of the highest possible order of affirmation
2, 4, 6, 8 Intermediate values When compromise is needed between two
Table III. Pairwise Numerical Rating

After all questionnaire data is obtained from the respondents, the next step is to process the data into a pairwise comparison matrix. Before creating the matrix, the first step is to make a comparison table of numerical reting results both at the criteria level and at the alternative level for each respondent (see Table IV).

Criteria/Alternatives Respondent Geometric mean
R1 R2 …. Ri
C1-2 R¯1−2
C1-3 R¯1−3
C1-k R¯1−k
Table IV. Table Pairwise Comparison Per Criteria and Alternatives for Each Respondent

The numerical value in each respondent column is filled in the following way:

  • If Respondent 1 (R1) chooses Criteria 1 (C1) which is better than Criteria 2 (C2), then in column R1 rows C1-2 are filled in according to the numerical value (round number) of respondent 1’s choice; While
  • If Respondent 2 (R2) chooses Criteria 2 (C2) better than Criteria 1 (C1), then in column R2 rows C1-2 are filled with the formula: 1 divided by the numerical value of respondent’s choice 2 (formula: 1/[numerical value R2]).

The geometric column mean is the geometric mean using (3):

(3)R¯=R1×2×R3×…Rnnwhere R¯ is geometric mean; Rn is pairwise comparison results per criterion; n is the number of respondents; k is the number of criteria. The alternative level comparison table also has the same method as the method above.

Marginal Theoretical Contribution

Table V illustrates the position of this study against similar studies that have been carried out previously. This table will also help in looking at the contribution of research to the development, merger, and integration of existing theories. Additionally, it makes clear the added value that this research provides in the context of the research carried out and demonstrates how this research results in a more thorough and all-encompassing approach to solving complex problems.

No. Study author and year Method(s) Study objectives Criteria of decision-making The context of the object of study Location & level of the studied object Finding
External Internal
Politic Eco-nomic Social Techno-logy Environ-mental Legal
1 Khoirunnisa et al . (2021) AHP Analyze potential areas for the development of renewable energy systems that are appropriate in areas with high levels of electricity consumption. Renewable energy source Indonesia, Kepulauan Seribu (Province level) The findings show that solar energy has a high potential to be developed in the Kepulauan Seribu.
2 Barusman and Redaputri (2018) AHP, MCDM, WSM, WPM Identify criteria and alternative solutions and determine the best alternative solutions to overcome the electricity deficit in Lampung Province. Fulfillment and sustainability of electricity supply Indonesia, Lampung (Province level) PLN is able to improve Lampung’s electricity condition with several existing alternatives, in particular, building transmission lines. PLN also needs to build an additional power plant to improve the electricity reliability of the local area.
3 Sonjaya et al . (2018) FAHP Assist management or the appraisal team in selecting the best PLN Rayon in a more objective way that fits the company’s criteria. Selection of the best PLN Rayon unit by objectives Indonesia, East Cirebon (City level) Fuzzy AHP can recommend an objective selection by recalculating the important intensity of six criteria to make a decision on the best Rayon. The best Rayon Selection of PT PLN (Persero) Cirebon area from the customer perspective is the Kuningan Rayon.
4 Wang et al . (2021) DEA, AHP Identify the optimal location and determine the best location for a solar photovoltaic (PV) power plant. Location of PV power plant Taiwan (Country level) The top three cities suitable for solar PV energy system construction in Taiwan are Tainan, Changhua, and Kaohsiung.
5 John et al . (2021) LCA, AHP Choosing the best renewable energy source in Tatu, Sarawak. Renewable energy source Malaysia, Tatau (Region level) The AHP results showed that solar energy received the highest score of 0.299 in terms of the evaluated criteria, followed by mini-hydro, biomass, and wind energy.
6 Muis and Santosa (2021) FAHP Choosing the best transmission tower route from Larona to Balambano. Transmission tower route Indonesia, East Luwu (Regency level) The results of each alternative are 0.477 for the North route, 0.364 for the Middle route, and 0.159 for the South route.
7 Moreno Rocha et al . (2022) AHP Choosing the best renewable energy sources in the Colombian Caribbean region. Renewable energy source Colombian, Caribbean (Region level) Regarding the technological component, photovoltaic energy seems the most favorable due to its low environmental impact and the considerable reduction in prices experienced by the solar panel market in recent years.
8 Shafie et al . (2022) AHP This study aims to model the optimum design of fuel cell-based electricity generation in Malaysia. Location for design of fuel cell-based electricity generation Malaysia (Country level) Considering both criteria for the economic and environmental concerns, the best optimum location is in Sarawak State.
9 Lenarczyk et al . (2022) AHP, MCDM, NT Find out what is the appropriate technology of renewable energy sources (RES) for the production of electricity in Poland under the current socio-economic conditions. Renewable Energy Source in the Context of Energy Policy Poland (Country level) The results show that offshore wind farms are the RES technology with the greatest development opportunities in Poland. The following three technologies, distributed photovoltaic energy, biogas plants, and biomass power plants, respectively, received a similar ranking. Hydropower and geothermal were the lowest-ranked technologies.
10 This Study PTA, SA, VFT, AHP Assist management in making decisions regarding the best transmission line design in the Cawang-Gandul project so that project completion can be timely and in line with stakeholder expectations. Transmission line design that passes through densely populated areas and complex permits Indonesia, Jakarta (City level) Underground cable design is the best design alternative that can be implemented in the Cawang-Gandul project. It has several advantages, namely minimal social conflict, easy implementation, and a relatively faster work process.
Table V. The Position of this Study

In general, based on the results of literature on similar research that focuses on the decision-making process, this study offers a more effective decision-making concept because it focuses on the values expected by stakeholders. This concept is not only related to quantitative analysis but also balanced with qualitative analysis so that the determination of criteria and alternative strategies is more proportional to complex decisions, as in this case study.

Results and Discussion

Problem Identification

With the target of completing the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project in 2026 and the potential problems that occur in the transmission line, there is also the potential for delays in project completion if the existing risks are not mitigated appropriately and properly. Based on the results of brainstorming with SMEs and a literature review, the potential cause of project delay is caused by several factors:

Social Factors

Complexity in land acquisition and community resistance can cause projects to be hampered in obtaining the necessary land access. Legal issues, disputes overcompensation, concerns about their health or property value, environmental concerns, public dissatisfaction with PLN’s transmission line project, and concerns about the visual impact of the tower can also slow down the process.

Regulatory Factors

The complex and lengthy permitting process can cause delays in obtaining the permits required to carry out transmission line projects. Permits involving various parties, such as government authorities, environmental agencies, airport authorities, local governments, and other stakeholders, often take a long time and can slow down project progress.

Contractual Factors

Vagueness in the contract is one of the causes of this factor, which includes unspecific or ambiguous project requirements, the absence of a clear definition of responsibility, and errors or deficiencies in the contract that affect the common understanding between all parties concerned.

Technical Factors

Inaccurate Design and Planning due to errors or deficiencies in project design and planning can cause delays.

Financial Factors

Funding delays, ineffective budget control, unexpected cost changes due to changes in field conditions and fluctuating material prices, financing complexity, and the last, currency exchange rate fluctuations.

From the discussion above, it is known that the factors causing potential delays in this project are very diverse and complex. In accordance with the Cynefin Framework approach for decision-making on the transmission line project, the author can conclude that it falls into the complicated category, considering that the context of this project has a known-unknown nature where the level of uncertainty is included in the medium-level. Leaders who are in a complicated context must feel, analyze, and respond, and to overcome these problems, a leader must listen to experts while welcoming thoughts on new solutions from others.

Stakeholder Analysis

This stakeholder analysis is part of the value-focused thinking framework, which is one of the theoretical approaches used by the author to obtain the position of PLN EIC stakeholders on the power-interest matrix quadrant. Based on the internal data, it is known that PLN EIC has 29 stakeholders divided into 5 groups, namely government agencies, customers, PLN head office, partners, and society.

Each of these stakeholders has a role or function, with the status of involvement starting from the pre-construction, construction, and post-construction phases of projects.

Stakeholder analysis in this study starts with measuring the value of the level of interest (Xi) and the level of power (Yi) of each stakeholder. After these values are obtained, the next step is to do an analysis starting from (1) to obtain the average value of the interest level (X¯) and power level (Y¯). From this average value, the average value of the interest level will be calculated (X¯¯) and the average value of the power level (Y¯¯) using (2) above, so that the limiting value in the cartesian diagram will be obtained, namely (3.28; 3.28) as the summary level of interest-power of PLN EIC in Table VI.

No. Stakeholder Interest (X¯) Power (Y¯) Category
1 Ministry of LH & Forestry 3.45 3.55 Key players
2 Ministry of ATR/BPN 3.64 3.64 Key players
3 Ministry of energy and mineral resources 3.82 3.73 Key players
4 Ministry of transportation 2.73 2.82 Minimal effort
5 Ministry of PUPR 2.91 3.00 Minimal effort
6 Ministry of finance 3.45 3.73 Key players
7 Ministry of SOEs 3.73 3.73 Key players
8 BPK; BPKP 3.45 3.45 Key players
9 KPK 3.27 3.36 Keep satisfied
10 Local government 3.73 3.82 Key players
11 Indonesian public prosecution service 3.36 3.64 Key players
12 TNI & POLRI 3.73 3.73 Key players
13 PLN Unit Induk Distribusi (UID) 3.00 2.73 Minimal effort
14 PLN Unit Induk Transmisi (UIT) 3.82 3.55 Key players
15 PLN UIP2B 3.64 3.64 Key players
16 High voltage customers 3.36 2.91 Keep informed
17 BOD of PLN 3.91 3.91 Key players
18 Directorate of Project Management & EBT 3.82 3.82 Key players
19 PLN Pusmanpro 3.27 3.18 Minimal effort
20 PLN Pusertif 3.73 3.73 Key players
21 PLN Pusdiklat 2.45 2.18 Minimal effort
22 PLN Puslitbang 2.55 2.36 Minimal effort
23 PLN Subsidiary 2.45 2.45 Minimal effort
24 Contractor EPC 3.73 3.73 Key players
25 Consultant 3.45 3.45 Key players
26 University 1.91 1.91 Minimal effort
27 General public 3.55 3.91 Key players
28 NGO 2.91 3.18 Minimal effort
29 Electricity association 2.36 2.36 Minimal effort
X¯¯ = 3.282 Y¯¯ = 3.282
Table VI. The Summary of the Level of Interest and Power of Stakeholders

After that, stakeholder group mapping was carried out on the power-interest matrix, as presented in Fig. 5. From the power-interest matrix map, it is known that there are 17 stakeholders in the Key Players category, 1 stakeholder in the Keep Informed category, 1 stakeholder in the Keep Satisfied category, and 10 stakeholders in the Minimum Effort category.

Fig. 5. Power-interest matrix of PLN EIC stakeholder.

Based on the results of the power interest matrix map and considering stakeholders with a high level of interest and power, where this category of stakeholders has a strong level of influence for the smooth implementation of the project, the expectations of these stakeholders must certainly be considered and become a guide in the preparation of the fundamental objectives of this study. A summary of the results of primary data analysis related to stakeholder perspectives can be seen in Table VII.

No. Stakeholder Perspective of stakeholder
1. Ministry of LH & Forestry Environmental permit compliance; Standard compliance; Environmental Awareness; Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Electrical system reliability; Minimize social conflict.
2. Ministry of ATR/BPN Project on time; Regulation compliance; No land disputes; Minimize social conflict.
3. Ministry of energy and mineral resources Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Regulation & and standard compliance; Contract compliance; National economic impact; Energy sector impact.
4. Ministry of finance Project on time; Project on budget.
5. Ministry of SOEs Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Regulation & standard compliance; Energy sector impact.
6. BPK; BPKP Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Regulation & standard compliance; No fraud; Minimize Contract Amendment; Financial management accountability.
7. KPK Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Regulation & standard compliance; No fraud; No corruption; No conflict of interest; Transparent; Accountability; Integrity.
8. Local government Permit compliance; Regulation compliance; Project on time; Good project quality; Minimize social conflict; Regional economic impact
9. Indonesian public prosecution service Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Minimize legal issues; Regulation & standard compliance; Minimize social conflict; Transparent; Accountability; Integrity.
10. TNI & POLRI Project on time; Minimize social conflict; There is no security issue.
11. PLN (UIT) Good project quality; Project on time; The project handover process going smoothly; Electrical system reliability; Permission to system shutdown.
12. PLN UIP2B Good project quality; Project on time; Electrical system reliability; The project handover process going smoothly;
13. High voltage customers Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Minimize Contract Amendment; Electrical system reliability.
14. BOD of PLN Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Minimize Contract Amendment; Regulation & standard compliance; No stalled projects.
15. Directorate of project management & EBT Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Minimize Contract Amendment; No stalled projects.
16. PLN Pusertif Good project quality; Project on time; Regulation & and standard compliance; Permit compliance; Electrical system reliability.
17. Contractor EPC Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Minimize Contract Amendment; Minimize social conflict; Permit compliance;
18. Consultant Good project quality; Project on time; Project on budget; Minimize Contract Amendment; Regulation & standard compliance; The engineering process going fast and well.
19. General public Project on time; Minimize social conflict; Permit compliance; Environmental Awareness; Zero Accident; Consider the wisdom of the local community; Concern for community satisfaction; Concern about the safety of the community; Consider community empowerment around the project.
Table VII. Stakeholder Perspectives on the High Power-Interest Category

Value-Focused Thinking (VFT)

Value-Focused Thinking (VFT) is a decision-framework concept introduced by Keeney (1992), which emphasizes that values are used for evaluation and should reflect the objectives of the decision-makers. There are two distinct types of objectives: fundamental objectives (an essential cause for interest in the decision situation) and mean objectives (a method to attain them). Based on Table VIII and the synthesis results, it is known that the mean-end objectives hierarchy tool can help determine the fundamental objectives of this study. The top-level fundamental objectives are “Maximizing the completion time of the project based on stakeholder expectations,” and at the second level, there are six mean objectives, namely:

No. Mean objectives (VFT) Criteria (AHP) Description
1. Maximizing the cost-effectiveness of the project Cost Refers to the costs associated with the planning, construction, and operationalization of the transmission line.
2. Maximizing the quality of the project Quality Refers to the standards and specifications that must be met during the planning, construction, and operationalization of transmission lines.
3. Maximizing the project on time Schedule Refers to the schedule or time plan set for the planning, construction, and completion of the project.
4. Maximizing the social and environmental aspects Social & Environmental Covers the social and environmental impacts associated with the transmission line’s construction.
5. Maximizing compliance with project regulations and permits Regulations & Permits Includes compliance with legal requirements and all permits necessary to plan, construct, and operate transmission lines.
6. Maximizing the project’s contract management and control Contract Management The contractual aspect involves agreements and contracts between PLN as the project owner and the second party involved in the planning, construction, and operation of the transmission line.
Table VIII. Mean Objectives (VFT) to Criteria Design (AHP) Conversion Table
  1. Maximizing the cost-effectiveness of the project,
  2. Maximizing the quality of the project,
  3. Maximizing the project on time,
  4. Maximizing the social and environmental aspects,
  5. Maximizing the compliance of project regulations and permits,
  6. Maximizing the project’s contract management and control.

The six mean objectives will be converted (transition phase) into criteria used in the preparation of the AHP structure hierarchy model. The results of converting the mean objective to AHP criteria can be seen in Table VIII.

Generate Alternatives

Before making a decision, the VFT analysis in the previous discussion is intended to help decision-makers concentrate on fundamental objectives and mean objectives that form the basis and guide in decision-making. After problems are identified and the values (criteria) to be considered in the evaluation are determined, the values-driven approach is typically used to generate significant alternatives to achieve the values.

Then, based on SME interviews with questions about what alternative strategies are appropriate in the context of determining transmission line designs that pass through densely populated areas to meet fundamental objectives (“Maximizing the completion time of the project based on stakeholder expectations”), it is known that there are four alternative transmission line designs, namely:

  1. 500 kV Compact Lattice Tower Design Route,
  2. 500 kV Underground Cable Design Route,
  3. 500 kV Combine Design Route (Compact Lattice Tower + Underground Cable),
  4. 500 kV Steel Pole Tower Design Route.

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Construct Structure of the Hierarchy

The purpose of this analysis is to select the best transmission line design for the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project. The context of choosing this transmission line design is to maximize the project completion time. The structure of the AHP Model Hierarchy is shown in Fig. 6.

Fig. 6. The structure of the Hierarchy of the AHP model.

Pairwise Comparison of AHP-Model

The pairwise comparisons of the aforementioned criteria and sub-criteria have been translated into a questionnaire for the selected respondents to complete with their ratings for each comparison table. As a result of interviews with four SMEs, point values for pairwise comparisons of criteria and alternative solutions were obtained from each SME. For the next calculation, use (3) above in order to get the mean geometric mean value of each pairwise comparison value of SMEs. The summary of calculation results is displayed in Table IX for the pairwise comparison of criteria and Table X for the pairwise comparison of alternative design.

No. Criteria Respondent Geometric mean
R1 R2 R3 R4
1 Cost-Quality 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.76
2 Cost-Schedule 0.33 0.20 0.33 0.33 0.29
3 Cost-Social & Environmental 1.00 0.33 0.14 1.00 0.47
4 Cost-Regulations & Permits 1.00 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.76
5 Cost-Contract Management 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
6 Quality-Schedule 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 0.58
7 Quality-Social & Environmental 0.33 0.33 0.20 3.00 0.51
8 Quality-Regulations & Permits 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00 0.67
9 Quality-Contract Management 0.33 0.33 1.00 3.00 0.76
10 Schedule-Social & Environmental 1.00 1.00 0.20 3.00 0.88
11 Schedule-Regulations & Permits 1.00 1.00 0.20 0.33 0.51
12 Schedule-Contract Management 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 2.28
13 Social & Environmental-Regulations & Permits 1.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 1.50
14 Social & Environmental-Contract Management 3.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 1.97
15 Regulations & Permits-Contract Management 3.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 3.41
Table IX. Pairwise Comparison of Criteria
Criteria Alternatives Respondent Geometric mean
R1 R2 R3 R4
Quality Compact Lattice Tower-Underground Cable 3.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 3.41
Compact Lattice Tower-Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC) 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 2.28
Compact Lattice Tower-Steel Pole Tower 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Underground Cable-Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC) 0.33 0.33 0.20 0.33 0.29
Underground Cable-Steel Pole Tower 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.20 0.29
Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC)-Steel Pole Tower 0.33 0.33 3.00 1.00 0.76
Schedule Compact Lattice Tower-Underground Cable 0.20 0.14 0.33 0.33 0.24
Compact Lattice Tower-Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC) 0.33 0.20 0.33 0.33 0.29
Compact Lattice Tower-Steel Pole Tower 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.20 0.29
Underground Cable-Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC) 3.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 3.41
Underground Cable-Steel Pole Tower 3.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 3.41
Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC)-Steel Pole Tower 3.00 3.00 0.33 1.00 1.32
Social & Environmental Compact Lattice Tower-Underground Cable 0.14 0.14 0.33 0.20 0.19
Compact Lattice Tower-Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC) 0.33 0.33 0.20 0.33 0.29
Compact Lattice Tower-Steel Pole Tower 0.33 0.20 0.33 0.20 0.26
Underground Cable-Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC) 3.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 3.41
Underground Cable-Steel Pole Tower 3.00 3.00 5.00 7.00 4.21
Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC)-Steel Pole Tower 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.73
Regulations & Permits Compact Lattice Tower-Underground Cable 0.20 0.20 1.00 0.33 0.34
Compact Lattice Tower-Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC) 0.33 0.33 1.00 0.33 0.44
Compact Lattice Tower-Steel Pole Tower 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 0.76
Underground Cable-Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC) 3.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 2.59
Underground Cable-Steel Pole Tower 3.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 3.41
Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC)-Steel Pole Tower 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 2.28
Contract Management Compact Lattice Tower-Underground Cable 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.76
Compact Lattice Tower-Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC) 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 2.28
Compact Lattice Tower-Steel Pole Tower 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 0.76
Underground Cable-Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC) 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.73
Underground Cable-Steel Pole Tower 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 2.28
Combine design (Lattice tower + UGC)-Steel Pole Tower 0.33 0.33 1.00 0.33 0.44
Table X. Pairwise Comparison of Alternative Design

Synthesize the Results to Determine the Best Alternative Solution

From the results of the pairwise comparison of both criteria levels and alternative levels in Tables X and XI, the next step is to synthesize calculations with the help of Super Decision AHP software, with the results shown in Fig. 7.

No Item Consistency ratio (CR) by super decision Result Remarks
1. Pairwise comparison level-1 0.065 CR < 0.1 Acceptable
2. Pairwise comparison level-2:
● Cost 0.000 CR < 0.1 Acceptable
● Quality 0.025 CR < 0.1 Acceptable
● Schedule 0.055 CR < 0.1 Acceptable
● Social 0.058 CR < 0.1 Acceptable
● Regulation 0.024 CR < 0.1 Acceptable
● Contract 0.053 CR < 0.1 Acceptable
Table XI. Summary Result of Consistency Ratio Calculation

Fig. 7. Analysis results of super decision AHP.

Development of Priority Ranking

The calculation process of the data that has been collected is analyzed with the help of Super Decision AHP software so that ranking priorities are obtained both at the criteria level and at alternative levels, as presented in Fig. 9.

Consistency Ratio

The consistency of the decision-maker’s judgments during the series of pairwise comparisons is an important factor in determining the quality of the ultimate decision. The consistency ratio calculation has also been carried out with the help of Super Decision AHP software, with the result that both at the criterion level and at the alternative level show a ratio value below 0.1 (see Table XI). This means that the pairwise comparison submitted by respondents is consistent (Acceptable).

Conclusion

Based on the results of analysis and calculations using Super Decision AHP, it is known that the synthesis of pairwise comparison results (see Fig. 8) is as follows:

Fig. 8. Alternatives synthesized priorities from super decision AHP.

Fig. 9. Priority ranking table from super decision AHP.

  1. 500 kV Underground Cable Design = 42.38%
  2. 500 kV Combine Design (Compact Lattice Tower + Underground Cable) = 22.19%
  3. 500 kV Steel Pole Tower Design = 19.72%
  4. 500 kV Compact Lattice Tower Design = 15.70%

From the analysis above, it can be concluded that the 500 kV Underground Cable Design Route gets the highest value and is the best choice for transmission line design in the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project, which is expected to be in accordance with the expectations of stakeholders.

Implementation Plan

The Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul 500 kV transmission line project proposes using a 500 kV underground cable line design in accordance with the results of the analysis above. Underground cable is an electrical power delivery system that uses cables located below ground level. The description of this project is shown in Table XII.

No. Item Specification Reference
1. Rated voltage 500 kV Internal data
2. Cable type Single core XLPE; 2xCu 2000 sqm copper conductor (3 × 1 single core cable) Manufacturer website
3. Cable jointing specifications Copper case with coffin box (2000 × 670 mm) Manufacturer website
4. Path length ± 22 kmr Internal data
5. Number of circuits 2 circuit Internal data
6. Number of joint boxes ± 25 set Internal data
Table XII. Project Description

Implementing this project should ideally follow the rules of project management with milestones, as depicted in the project timeline in Fig. 10.

Fig. 10. Roadmap of the implementation project.

Conclusion

After undergoing a series of comprehensive studies, it can be concluded that the results of this study provide a deep understanding of the “selection of the best transmission line design to maximize the project completion time of the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/CCililitan-Gandul transmission line project based on stakeholder expectations”. The study identifies and analyzes the main findings provided to answer the research question:

RQ1: What are the expectations of stakeholders on the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project? The answer is maximizing the cost-effectiveness of the project, maximizing the quality of the project, maximizing the project on time, maximizing the social and environmental aspects, maximizing the compliance of project regulations and permits, and maximizing the project contract management and control.

RQ2: What are the alternative transmission line designs in the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project that meet stakeholder expectations? The answer is 500 kV Compact Lattice Tower Design Route, 500 kV Underground Cable Design Route, 500 kV Combine Design Route (Compact Lattice Tower + Underground Cable), and 500 kV Steel Pole Tower Design Route.

RQ3: What is the best transmission line design to maximize the project completion time of the 500 kV Cawang Baru II/Cililitan-Gandul transmission line project and meet stakeholder expectations? The answer is a 500 kV Underground Cable Design Route.

References

  1. Decision-making model of electric power fulfillment in lampung province using soft system methodology. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy. 2018;8(1):128-36.
     Google Scholar
  2. Selection of renewable energy in rural area via life cycle assessment-analytical hierarchy process (LCA-AHP): A case study of tatau, sarawak. Sustainability. 2021;13:1-18.
     Google Scholar
  3. Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision-Making. Harvard University Press; 1992.
     Google Scholar
  4. Potential areas for the development of renewable energy system in Kepulauan Seribu: A case study for households in Pari Island, Tidung Island, and Pramuka Island. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2021;649:1-11.
     Google Scholar
  5. The application of a multi-criteria decision-making for indication of directions of the development of renewable energy sources in the context of energy policy. Energies. 2022;15(24):1-21.
     Google Scholar
  6. Implementation of the hierarchical analytical process in the selection of the best source of renewable energy in the Colombian Caribbean Region. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy. 2022;12(2):111-9.
     Google Scholar
  7. Determining 150 kv transmission tower route using FAHP method. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 2021;1072:1-8.
     Google Scholar
  8. What is Mendelow’s matrix and how is it useful?. Oxford College Marketing Blog; 2018.
     Google Scholar
  9. PLN EIC Long-Term Plan Development Team; 2022.
     Google Scholar
  10. The analytic hierarchy process-what it is and how it is used. ScienceDirect. 1987;9(3–5):161-76.
     Google Scholar
  11. Multi-criteria analysis of biogas feed fuel cell-based electricity generation: Economic and environmental factors. Journal of Renewable Energy and Environment. 2022;9(3):101-4.
     Google Scholar
  12. Selecting the best Rayon in customer’s perspective using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 2018;332:1-7.
     Google Scholar
  13. A two-stage multiple criteria decision making for site selection of solar photovoltaic (PV) power plant: A case study in Taiwan. IEEE Access. 2021;9:75509-25.
     Google Scholar