TSS Report

PCC MeetingAlbuquerque, NMMarch 5-7, 2008

PCC 2

TSS Report Approval

2007 Annual Study Program ReportMVWG Budget

AssignmentsRegional Reliability Standards

StatusMVWGDMWGSRWGRegional Planning / Rating Process

2007 Annual Study Program Report

PCC 4

2007 Study Program Report Goal:

Provide base cases for WECC member and staff use Provide an ongoing reliability and risk assessment of the Western

interconnected electric system as it exists and as planned over the next ten years

One of several resources used for meeting NERC Reliability Standards: MOD 010,012 – Steady State and Dynamics Data for Transmission

System Modeling and Simulation FAC 005 – Electrical Facility Ratings for System Modeling PRC 006 – UFLS Dynamics Data Base PRC 014 – Special Protection System Assessment PRC 020 - UVLS Dynamics Data Base TPL 001-004 - System Performance

PCC 5

2007 Study Program Report

Eleven Cases:Five operating cases One General 10-Year Winter Case One General 5-Year Summer CaseFour Scenario Cases:

10HS2SA - 2010 Heavy Summer Scenario (maximum generation in Arizona. Mild coastal and extreme desert heat weather conditions.)

10LA1SA - 2010 Light Autumn Scenario (high flows from California/Montana to the Northwest.)

11LSP1SA - 2011 Light Spring Scenario (heavy exports from Idaho/Montana in an off-peak case.)

15HS1SA - 2015 Heavy Summer Scenario (maximum achievable EOR/WOR flows with heavy future IPP generation in California and DSW.)

PCC 6

2007 Study Program ReportDisturbances

41 Disturbances:24 N-15 N-28 G-21 N-33 DC Bipole

2 Outside of Criteria 6 Did not meet performance, but limited to local system

PCC 7

2007 Study Program ReportPerformance Results

Disturbance Description Responsible Entity

D0706 A three-phase Midpoint 345 kV fault and loss of the Midpoint-Humboldt 345 kV line on the 2011 HS1B configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 5.9% in northeastern California and southern Oregon.

Sierra, IPC

D0709 A single-line-to-ground Jim Bridger 345 kV fault and loss of the Jim Bridger-Kinport and Jim Bridger-Goshen 345 kV lines on the 2011 HS1B configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 15.2% in eastern Idaho and southwestern Montana.

IPC, Pace, NWE

PCC 8

2007 Study Program Performance ResultsDIST Description Responsible

Entity

D0707 A three-phase Valmy 345 kV fault and loss of the Valmy-Coyote Creek 345 kV line on the 2007-08 LW1A configuration. Results for this simulation indicate a post-transient voltage deviation of 6.8% at the Meikle 120 kV bus in northern Nevada. A solved follow-up post-transient power flow case with northern Nevada loads increased to 105% indicates voltage stability is maintained.

SPR(DONE)

D0710 A three-phase Jim Bridger 345 kV fault and loss of the Jim Bridger-Goshen 345 kV line on the 2015 HS1-SA configuration. Results for this simulation indicate transient frequency deviations below 59.6 Hz for longer than six cycles at six load buses in southwestern Wyoming.

Pace, IPC

D0712 A three-phase Comanche 230 kV fault and loss of the Comanche-Walsenburg 230 kV line on the 2016-17 HW1A configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 7.3% in southern Colorado. A solved follow-up post-transient power flow case with southern Colorado loads increased to 105% indicates voltage stability is maintained. Results for this simulation also

TSGT, PSCO

D0713 A three-phase Comanche 230 kV fault and loss of the Comanche-Walsenburg 230 kV line on the 2010 HS2-SA configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 17.8% in southern Colorado. A solved follow-up post-transient power flow case with southern Colorado loads increased to 105% indicates voltage stability is maintained. Results for this simulation also indicate that Rosebud pump load in northern New Mexico trips by frequency relay.

TSGT,PSCO

D0727 A three-phase Jim Bridger 345 kV fault and loss of the Jim Bridger-Goshen 345 kV line on the 2011 LSP1-SA configuration. Results for this simulation indicate transient frequency deviations below 59.6 Hz for longer than six cycles at six load buses in southwestern Wyoming.

Pac,IPC

D0728 A three-phase Comanche 230 kV fault and loss of the Comanche-Walsenburg 230 kV line on the 2011 LSP1-SA configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 22.1% in northeastern New Mexico and -iv-southern Colorado. A solved follow-up post-transient power flow case with southern Colorado loads increased to 105% indicates voltage stability is maintained. Results for this simulation also indicate that Rosebud pump load in northern New Mexico trips by frequency relay.

TSGT, PSCO

PCC 9

2007 Study Program Report

Motion:

TSS requests PCC approval of the 2007 Annual Study Program Report

PCC 10

MVWG Funding Request MVWG has prioritized the need for funding as follows:

1. Composite load model acceptance tests in PSLF program.2. Load model system impact studies.3. Review of generator model data in WECC database.4. Composite load model acceptance tests in PSS/E program.5. Load Model Data Tool.6. Validating SVC models.

PCC has approved spending $100,000 in 2008. Proposal is for $25,000 for Item 1, $50,000 for Item 2, and $25,000 for Item 3, for a total of $100,000.

Motion: TSS requests PCC approval of the MVWG spending proposal.

WECC Document Categories

PCC 12

Regional Reliability Standards

BOD Approved Four CategoriesRegional Reliability StandardRegional CriteriaPolicyGuideline

Current Assignment:Focus on placing documents into last 3 categories

PCC 13

WECC Document Categories Regional Reliability Standards: A WECC Board approved

document whose purpose is to establish mandatory rules which must be followed by all entities within the interconnection in order to maintain reliability.

Regional Criteria: A WECC Board approved document whose purpose is to establish consistency among WECC member entities with respect to business practices, technical procedures, documentation procedures and/or administrative procedures.

Policy: A WECC Board approved document whose purpose is to establish the general path, direction and objectives agreed to by the Board, and provide guidance for subsequent Regional Reliability Standards, Regional Criteria, and Guidelines.

Guideline: A WECC Committee approved document whose purpose is to educate, train, and/or promote consistency among members.

SRWG

PCC 15

SRWG Study Program 2007

2007 Report up for Approval 2008

in progressdeveloping disturbance lists

2009Survey due FebruaryInput Still Welcomewent to SRWG, TSS, and PCC

PCC 16

SRWG Performance LogLog Description Entity

P03-01-NT A three-phase Montrose 345 kV fault and loss of the Montrose-Hesperus 345 kV line, simulated using the 2006 HS3SA power flow case (Case D0309), indicates post-transient voltage deviations up to 6.4% in southwestern Colorado. Status: Open

TSGT

P03-03-NT A three-phase Comanche 230 kV fault and loss of the Comanche-Walsenburg 230 kV line, simulated using the 2006 HS3SA power flow case (Case D0333), indicates post-transient voltage deviations up to 11% in southeastern Colorado and frequency dips to 59.46 Hz at Rosebud load. Status: SRWG/TSS approved to move Frequency at Rosebud into exception list. Voltage deviation remains open

TSGT

P04-01-NT A three-phase Montrose 345 kV fault and loss of the Montrose-Hesperus 345 kV line, simulated using the 2005 HSP1A power flow case (Case D0421), indicates post-transient voltage deviations up to 6.2% in southwestern Colorado.Status: Open

TSGT

P04-02-NT A three-phase Comanche 230 kV fault and loss of the Comanche-Walsenburg 230 kV line, simulated using the 2005 HSP1A power flow case (Case D0424), indicates post-transient voltage deviations up to 6.2% in southeastern Colorado. Status: Open

TSGT

P05-01-NT A three-phase Montrose 345 kV fault and loss of the Montrose-Hesperus 345 kV line, simulated using the 2006 HSP1A power flow case (Case D0509), indicates post-transient voltage deviations up to 9.5% in southwestern Colorado. Status: Open

TSGT

PCC 17

SRWG Representation Log

Case under current study: 08hsp2bCase previously studied: 08hw2a MOD-011 MOD-011 MOD-013 MOD-013 MOD-013

TPL-001 FAC-005 PRC-006Owner Previous Current Device No LSDT9 Required Generator StdName case case Change Overload Ratings bus not in PSS Data w/o Total

total total n-0 powerflow is Due dyn models

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Totals 186 506 320 14 15 27 397 0 453

NERC StandardsRequirements Data

Case under current study: 08hsp2bCase previously studied: 08hw2a

Owner Previous Current Ownership Duplicate Incorrect Non-stdName case case Change no bus Zone/Area Total

total total owner name Owner

(1) (2) (3) (4) (11) (12) (13) (14)

Totals 186 506 320 31 20 2 53

Non-NERC StandardsMisc

Modeling and Validation Work Group

PCC 19

MVWG Activities Load Modeling Generating Unit Modeling

NERC Standard developmentNew generation equipment modelsAGC Modeling

Wind Farm Modeling Modeling of Power Electronics Devices

Static VAR SystemsHVDC Systems

Disturbance Analysis and System Performance Validation

PCC 20

MVWG - Load Model Structure

Load ModelComponents

Interim

Static

M115-kV230-kV

20%

Static

MTransformer FeederEquivalent

M

M

New

115-kV230-kV

M

PCC 21

MVWG - Load Model StructureMVWG - Load Model Structure

LMTF developed EPCL routines for explicit load representation in PSLF program in 2005

WECC developed composite load model specifications in March 2006

WECC Composite Load Model is implemented in GE PSLF 16.1

LMTF tested model performance:

Simple test system

WECC-wide system model

PCC 22

MVWG - Load Model Structure – MVWG - Load Model Structure – Outstanding IssuesOutstanding Issues

Single-phase Motor Model:

Research is complete, Bernie Lesieutre made modeling recommendations, MATLAB model matches all tests well

John Undrill implemented model prototype, “motorc”, in PSLF, stand-alone “motorc” model is being tested

Performance and hybrid models are developed and tested, OK

Make the decision at the next meeting (March 2008)

Three-phase Motor Model:

correspondence between “cmpldw” and “motorw” models

Other load model components:

electronic drives and solar generation

UVLS and UFLS:

Connect UVLS and UFLS records with “cmpldw” records

PCC 23

NERC Transmission Issues NERC Transmission Issues SubcommitteeSubcommittee

Dmitry Kosterev (BPA) and Bob Yinger (SCE) presented WECC work on AC stall modeling and solutions at NERC TIS meeting on January 15, 2008 in Scottsdale, AZ

The issue is relevant to other regions in North America

NERC is developing a White Paper on Fault-Induced Delayed Voltage Recovery:

Experiences

Modeling and system studies

Solutions

PCC 24

MVWGMVWGGenerating Unit ModelingGenerating Unit Modeling

PCC 25

NERC Generation Verification StandardsNERC Generation Verification Standards MOD-024 - Verification of Generator Gross and Net Real

Power Capability MOD-025 - Verification of Generator Gross and Net

Reactive Power Capability MOD-026 - Verification of Models and Data for

Generator Excitation System Functions MOD-027 - Verification of Generator Unit Frequency

Response PRC-019 - Coordination of Generator Voltage Regulator

Controls with Unit Capabilities and Protection PRC-024 - Generator Performance During Frequency

and Voltage Excursions

PCC 26

NERC Generation Verification StandardsNERC Generation Verification Standards Met in Atlanta, GA on October 30 – November 1 2007

NERC regions presented their experiences

Three Drafting Teams

MOD-024 & 025, PRC-19

Tom Bradish, Dmitry Kosterev MOD-026 & 027:

– Donald Davies, Baj Agrawal PRC-024:

Craig Quist and Chifong Thomas

Regular Conference Calls within sub-groups and the entire group

Face Meeting is scheduled for February 13–15 2008 in Houston, TX. Hosted by Reliant Energy

PCC 27

NERC Generation Verification StandardsNERC Generation Verification Standards Heads up:

Periodicity: Verification of Real power capability – 1 year Verification of Reactive power capability – 5 years Verification of dynamic models – 10 years

Applicability: Single unit 20 MW Generating Facility 75 MW 80% of generating capacity in an interconnection

Responsibilities: Generator Operator vs. Generator Owner Transmission Planner

PCC 28

MVWGMVWGWind Farm ModelingWind Farm Modeling

Abe Ellis, PNM Abe Ellis, PNM Juan Sanchez-Gasca, GE Juan Sanchez-Gasca, GE Bill Price, GEBill Price, GEYuri Kazachkov, Siemens PTIYuri Kazachkov, Siemens PTIEduard Muljadi, NRELEduard Muljadi, NREL

PCC 29

MVWG - Wind Farm Powerflow ModelMVWG - Wind Farm Powerflow Model

WWind - Turbine

Generator

PF Correction

Shunt Capacitors

Collector

System

Equivalent

Interconnection Transm. Line

Point Of Interconnection

Main

Transformer

KV, R, X, B

kV, MVA, R, X kV, MVA R, X

kV, R, X, B

Plant-Level Reactive Compensation

Equivalent pad-mounted Transformer

Model structure is approved for wind farm representation in WECC basecases

Powerflow Modeling Guidelines are developed Data request form is proposed

PCC 30

Proposed Standard ModelsProposed Standard Models Four basic topologies based on grid interface

Type 1 – conventional induction generatorType 2 – wound rotor induction generator with variable rotor resistance

Type 3 – doubly-fed induction generator Type 4 – full converter interface

generator

full power

PlantFeeders

actodc

dctoac

generator

partia l power

PlantFeeders

actodc

dctoac

generator

Slip poweras heat loss

PlantFeeders

PF controlcapacitor s

actodc

generator

PlantFeeders

PF controlcapacitor s

Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4

PCC 31

    

• Type 1 – Preliminary implementation in place, based on PTI turbine governor representation.

• Type 2 – Preliminary implementation in place. Based on model proposed by Graeme (TNEI, UK)

• Type 3 – Model is approved and a part of standard PSLF and PSSE library of dynamic models

• Type 4 – Model verification (EMTP vs. detailed PSLF model) in progress at GE

Wind Farm Dynamic Models

PCC 32

MVWGMVWGSVC ModelsSVC Models

PCC 33

MVWG - SVC ModelingMVWG - SVC Modeling

SVC Survey is Completed

21 SVCs and 5 Statcoms identified

SVC Power Flow Models

SVC Generic Dynamic Models

Prototype is developed, ready to begin testing soon

PCC 34

Les Pereira RetiredLes Pereira Retired

MVWG Chair after 1996 outages in the Western Interconnection

Led development of WSCC Generator Testing Guidelines in 1997

Led development of “Interim” Load Model in 2001

Led development of New Governor Model in 2002, received IEEE PES Prize Paper award

Disturbance Monitoring Work Group

PCC 36

DMWG Activities WECC Funding for approved sites

Hardware, Software, Maintenance Networking PDC sites Disturbance data requests WECC Disturbance Data website / Data Storage Guidelines to initiate a disturbance data request Generator Performance Monitor procurement & Testing Event reporting and Analysis DFR/SER Survey – list ( NERC PRC-002) NERC Disturbance Monitoring standards & compliance

PCC 37

DMWG - Other Related ActivitiesDMWG - Other Related Activities

Regular WG Meetings & Training workshops Analysis of disturbances, DC Probe Tests & Brake

tests etc. Sharing programs and other project info

BPA Phasorfile / Stream reader, PNNL DSI Tool box, SCE Power System Outlook & SMART programs, RTDMS & others

CERTS/CEC/ California ISO projects Load Models & Wind Generator Models validation BPA Initiative to use signals for stability control,

increase inter-tie rating Wide-Area stability and voltage Control System (WACS) DC Probe Tests

PCC 38

DMWG - Past ActivitiesDMWG - Past Activities

Past DMWG Activities The DMWG has been functional since 2002-2003 and is fairly well established, Because of the WECC funding mechanism, PMUs installed at most strategic locations About 45 PMUs have been funded by WECC, and about 30 funded by the Transmission

system operators and others A server has been installed at WECC office and important files/data can be stored Regular meetings and conference calls are held  

Activities During 2007 Monitoring system disturbances and sending short reports out Funding installation of PMU Installation and maintenance of PMU Holding regular meetings – October 24-26, 2007 Holding regular conference calls – every 5-6 weeks Working on a paper – “Benefits of System Monitoring” Information interchange and coordination Developing “Road-Map” for data interchange, storage, analysis, real-time monitoring Procuring and testing a low cost Generator performance equipment Coordination with WECC WAMS group

PCC 39

WECC Disturbance Monitoring Working Group Monitor Installation Status (WECC Funded)

With Agreement or in processSubmittal expectedExpressed IntentMember FundedUncommitted* Some Comm. Work Needed

In Service In Service 2007 ScheduledAlamitos Langdon MeadAult Los Banos*BA 345 Maple ValleyBell MicaBig Eddy MidpointBorah MidwayCamp Williams* MohaveCaptain Jack Moss LandingChief Joseph NavajoColstrip Palo VerdeCoulee 19-24 PittsburgCraig RevelstokeCuster Ruth LakeDiablo Canyon San JuanEmpress San OnofreFour Corners SundanceGates* TeslaG.M. Shrum The Dalles (Big Eddy 230)Harry Allen Tracy (NV)Hassayampa ValleyJim Bridger* VincentJohn Day WestwingKeeler WillistonKyrene

47 1

PCC 40

WECC Disturbance Monitoring Working Group WECC Disturbance Monitoring Working Group List of 2007 events for which files have been sentList of 2007 events for which files have been sent

Date Date Time Time Freq. Freq. Event DescriptionEvent Description

(PDT)(PDT) dropped dropped

toto011507-1011507-1 14301430 59.9259.92 770 MW of Generation trip at Four Corners 770 MW of Generation trip at Four Corners

012307-1012307-1 13441344 59.76 59.76 2935 MW Gen drop – BC Hydro2935 MW Gen drop – BC Hydro

020107-1020107-1 11161116 59.8859.88 1750 MW Gen. loss1750 MW Gen. loss

020707-1 020707-1 00580058 59.8859.88 1340 MW Palo Verde unit trip 1340 MW Palo Verde unit trip

032207-1032207-1 15101510 59.40 59.40 SRP lost 750 MW SRP lost 750 MW

032207-1032207-1 16391639 59.9259.92 SRP lost 750 MW SRP lost 750 MW

041007-1041007-1 08460846 59.8359.83 Colstrip gen. trip Colstrip gen. trip

041107-1041107-1 15181518 59.7959.79 Colstrip gen. tripColstrip gen. trip

052307-1052307-1 18081808 59.7459.74 Big Eddy Trans. Trip, 2321 MW drop; CJB Big Eddy Trans. Trip, 2321 MW drop; CJB

062007-1062007-1 13591359 59.9359.93 MPC NEW Gen trip – 740 MWMPC NEW Gen trip – 740 MW

062007-2062007-2 15471547 59.8959.89 SRP Gen drop - 750 MWSRP Gen drop - 750 MW

062007-3062007-3 22512251 59.8959.89 SCE – SONGS Gen drop – 1080 MWSCE – SONGS Gen drop – 1080 MW

062107-1062107-1 11111111 59.9159.91 NEW Gen drop – 740 MWNEW Gen drop – 740 MW

062207-1062207-1 14481448 59.9159.91 PNSC – Gen drop – 717 MWPNSC – Gen drop – 717 MW

071207-1071207-1 16391639 59.8859.88 BCTC -1217 MW Gen drop BCTC -1217 MW Gen drop

071807-1071807-1 06430643 59.8459.84 BPA 1442 Gen drop; CJB BPA 1442 Gen drop; CJB

071907-1071907-1 14141414 59.9059.90 LA DWP Gen drop – 950 MW (IPP)LA DWP Gen drop – 950 MW (IPP)

080207-1080207-1 13321332 59.92 59.92 MPC lost 740 MW Generation MPC lost 740 MW Generation

PCC 41

Regional PlanningCompleted Since Last PCC

Project Name Sponsor Proposed Rating Date Completed

Northern Lights Celilo TransCanada 1496 MW 02/13/08

West of McNary ColumbiaGrid 4500 MW 02/08/08

I5 ColumbiaGrid 5000 MWS. of Allston

March 2008?

Entered Since Last PCC

PCC 42

Phase 1

Entered Since Last PCC

Project Name Sponsor Proposed Rating Date Entered

Canada – N. California PG&E, Avista +/-3000 10/31/2007

Northern Lights Celilo TransCanada 1496 MW 02/13/08

West of McNary ColumbiaGrid 4500 MW ?

I5 ColumbiaGrid 5000 MWS. of Allston

?

PCC 43

Phase 2

Entered Since Last PCC

Project Name Sponsor Proposed Rating Date Entered

Path 51 Southern Navajo APS 3100 11/7/07

PCC 44

Phase 3

Entered Since Last PCC

Project Name Sponsor Proposed Rating Date Entered

Path 54 Springer #3 SRP 1133 MW 12/04/07

Path 54 Springer #4 SRP 1494 MW 12/04/07