2 Overview Approval TSS Charter 2011 Annual Study Program Outline Base Case Coordination System – Request for Proposal Status SRWG Activities MVWG Activities Project Coordination and Three-Phase Rating Status
3 TSS Charter Purpose The purpose of TSS is to undertake those studies related to the reliability of the interconnected bulk power systems that have been approved and authorized by the PCC.
4 TSS Charter Responsibilities Conduct studies and evaluate study results to determine the reliability of the Western Interconnection. Prepare annual state of the system reports and other reports covering study results and evaluations, and make recommendations to the PCC. Collect, coordinate, and maintain data files for power flow and stability studies. Monitor data submission for quality assurance. Determine program or modeling requirements and evaluate, validate, and propose modifications to existing WECC computer programs.
5 TSS Charter Responsibilities (continued) Conduct and evaluate studies to investigate special conditions. Evaluate and explore new developments and techniques of interest to WECC. Review and evaluate reports from member systems covering proposed additions or alterations to facilities in relation to NERC Planning Standards and WECC Regional Criteria. Recommend liaising with other areas when required. Prepare and submit an annual budget. Perform such other functions as may be delegated by the Planning Coordination Committee.
6 TSS Charter Proposed Motion: TSS requests PCC approval of the TSS Charter as modified related to the appointment of the TSS Chair
7 SRWG Activities 2010 Annual Study Program 2011 Annual Study Program Outline - Approval Performance Log Representation Log Base Case Coordination System (BCCS) - Request for Proposal (RFP) - Approval
Annual Study Program The 2010 Annual Study Program is in progress The areas of focus for 2010 studies include Path 15: Midway-Los Banos and Path 46: West of Colorado River SRWG is editing the proposed disturbance list based on input received from TSS
Annual Study Program Outline The 2011 Annual Study Program includes 11 cases and is typical for Annual Study Program Outlines Five Operating Cases One 5-year winter Planning Case One 5-year summer Planning Case One 10-year winter Planning Case Three Scenario Cases 2015HA1: Stress paths in S. Nevada/Arizona/New Mexico 2022LS1: High renewable generation simultaneous with light summer conditions 2017LW1: High renewable generation displacing thermal generation with S-N flow from California to the Northwest.
Annual Study Program Outline Regular Cases HW2-OP: Heavy Winter Operating LW1-OP: Light Winter Operating 2012HSP1-OP: Heavy Spring Operating 2012HS2-OP: Heavy Summer Operating 2012LS1-OP: Light Summer Operating 2017HS2-G: 5-Year Summer Planning HW2-G: 5-Year Winter Planning 2022HW1-G: 10-Year Winter Planning
Annual Study Program Outline Proposed Motion: SRWG and TSS request PCC approve the general structure of the 2011 Annual Study Program Outline
12 Performance Log (Closed) Log/DisturbanceResponsible EntityDescription/Status P07-02-NT D0709 IPC, PACA 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. Status: Closed at TSS in August 2009 P07-06-NT D0713 TSGT, PSCOA 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. Status: Closed at TSS in August 2009 P07-08-NT D0728 TSGT, PSCOA 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. Status: Closed at TSS in August 2009 P08-01-NT D0837 PACLoss of St.George SVC. Post-transient case did not solve; Status: Closed at TSS in August 2009
13 Performance Log (Conditional Closure) Log/DisturbanceResponsible EntityDescription/Status P07-01-NT D0706 NV EnergyA 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. Status: Conditional Closure at TSS in August Project completion anticipated after June P07-05-FT D0712 TSGT, PSCOA three-phase Comanche 230 kV fault and loss of the Comanche- Walsenburg 230 kV line on the 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. Status: Conditional Closure at TSS in August Project completion anticipated after December P08-02-NT D0829 NV EnergyA three-phase Hesperus 345 kV fault and loss of Hesperus – San Juan 345 kV line resulted in 26 buses in southwest Colorado exceeding the 5% post-transient voltage limit. Largest was 12.7%. Status: Conditional Closure at TSS in August Project completion anticipated after June 2011.
14 Performance Log (Open) Log/DisturbanceResponsible EntityDescription/Status P08-03-FT D0815 WAPAA 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. Status: Open – Resolution anticipated in July 2010
15 Representation Log
16 Base Case Coordination System – RFP BCCS Task Force has completed drafting a Request for Proposal – RFP TSS approved the BCCS-RFP at the April 2010 TSS Meeting Branden Sudduth - WECC (TF Co-Lead) will give a presentation on the BCCS-RFP after the TSS presentation
17 MVWG Activities Load Modeling System Model Validation Solar PV Generation Modeling Wind Power Plant Modeling Generator Testing and Model Validation SVC Modeling HVDC Modeling
WECC Composite Load Model Electronic M M M 115-kV 230-kV Static M UVLS UFLS Load Model Composition Data Load Component Model Data Distribution Equivalent Data
19 Load Modeling Composite Load Model Structure Composite load model is implemented in PSLF and PSS®E as specified by WECC Default load composition data sets are available Used as a starting point for load model validation studies Tools for creating load model records are available in PSLF Creates load records with default data for every load that meets filter criteria (area/zone, etc.) Success of load model implementation is highly dependent of availability of tools for managing load model data and for creating load model data sets
20 Composite Load Model - System Impact Studies System impact studies are on-going, model revisions are very likely FIDVR Validation Studies Valley and Palo Verde – Devers faults in Southern California 2003 Hassayampa fault 2009 Utah Mid-Valley fault System-Wide Validation Studies August 4, 2000 oscillation June 14, 2004 West-Wing disturbance July 2003 Palo Verde single unit outage Major Path System Impact Studies
Composite Load Model – Outstanding Issues Load Model Data Tool Motor and Electronic Load Modeling Industrial Load Representation Distribution-Connected Generation Post-Transient Load Models Load model implementation process Support review of WECC voltage dip criteria
System Model Validation Studies NERC TIS developed a White Paper on System Model Validation System model validation is a deliverable under Western Interconnection Synchrophasor Project (WISP) WECC needs to start doing regular system model validation studies Enough evidence that the overall model performance is diverging from the system performance
System Model Validation Studies Validation Base Cases Use element code to match dynamic data with West-wide System Model? Interconnection-Wide Data Disturbance data for the model validation process will be supported by WISP Performance baselining analysis is done by North American Synchrophasor Initiative (NASPI), to become an automated continual process by end of May System Model Validation Tools Power plant model validation tools are available from MVWG System-wide model validation tools are tested
Solar PV Generation Modeling A comprehensive overview of solar PV generation, including technologies, performance issues, operations and modeling was provided by Abe Ellis (Sandia) From a modeling perspective, solar PV generation can be grouped into two categories Central plant solar PV installations and Distribution-connected PV installations Issues under consideration include Power Flow Representation, Guide Understanding Dynamic Behavior Specifications for WECC PV System model
Wind Power Plant Models Generic model structures are developed for all type 4 wind-turbine generators Frequency response not part of original specification For under-frequency events, all generic models show good agreement with typical WTG manufacturer model No significant issues reported with respect to the WT3 and WT4 generic models. Validation against actual system disturbances is needed
Wind Power Plant Models Wind Power Plant Data Developing generic model parameter sets for different manufacturers is critical Model acceptance/adoption User feedback and model refinement Several efforts underway Initial model verification at Siemens and GE NREL/UM (CEC and DOE sponsoring) EnerNex/UWIG (DOE sponsoring)
Wind Power Plant Model Data WT1WT2WT3WT4 Vestas V MW, 50/60Hz Vestas V MW, 60Hz GE 1.5 MW, 50/60 HzEnercon E MW, 50 Hz Bonus 1.3 MW, 50/60 Hz Vestas V kW, 50/60 Hz GE 3.6 MW, 50/60 HzEnercon E MW, 50 Hz Bonus 2.3 MW, 50 HzVestas V MWGamesa G80, G83, G87, G90 2 MW, 50/60 Hz General Electric 2SX 2.5 MW, 60 Hz Mitsubishi MWT1000A 1 MW, 60 Hz Gamesa G MW, 60 Hz NORDEX N MW, 50Hz Siemens 2.3 SWT MW, 60 Hz Suzlon S MW, 50 Hz Suzlon S MW, 50/60Hz REPower MD70 and MD MW, 50Hz Clipper Liberty 2.5MW 2.5MW, 60 Hz REPower MM70/MM82/MM MW, 50/60Hz Samsung 2.5 MW Mitsubishi MWT-92/95 / MW Vestas V MW & 3 MW Acciona 1.5/3.0 MW (*) Fuhrlaender FL 2.5 MW, 60 Hz RED: Default WTG Model Data. BLUE: ongoing work to identify parameters
Wind Power Plant Modeling Guide Resource to transmission planers, project developers on WPP modeling using WECC generic models Applicability and limitations Model structure and default data Examples Approval process Submit to MVWG for comment Then present to TSS for approval Larger question How to migrate to WTG models Standards compliance issue
Generator Testing and Model Validation Generator model data review (WECC Staff) Donald Davies provided log of suspicious data Model validation and system impact studies with GENTPJ model – on-going John Undrill provided a program to create OEL and Generator Protection models with default data Shawn Patterson reviewed hydro governor data – many questionable data records Kaplan turbine model data – no progress is made
SVC Models Progress is slower than expected SVSMO1 – SVC model with TSC and TCR is most mature and implemented in PSLF beta version. The model is being tested and expected to be ready for approval at July meeting SVSMO2 – SVC model with TSC is under development. SVSMO3 – STACTCOM model is prototyped MSS01 – relay model for switching mechanical shunt capacitors and reactors is under development
HVDC Models IPP DC model LADWP provided a new model for IPP DC controls for PSLF and PSS ® E programs. PDCI model TOS brought up an issue with PDCI responses during close AC system faults MVWG recommended a code to simulate DC converter bypass to represent commutation failures when a fault occurs close to HVDC inverter Need to confirm with TOS that this issue has been addressed
32 Project Coordination No new projects entered or completed the Project Coordination Process since the March 2010 PCC Meeting
33 Project Rating Process – Phase One Phase One No new projects entered or completed the Phase One since the March 2010 PCC Meeting
34 Project Rating Process – Phase Two Phase Two No new projects have entered or completed Phase Two since the March 2010 PCC Meeting
35 Project Rating Process – Phase Three Phase Three The following projects have entered or completed Phase Three since the March 2010 PCC Meeting Project NameSponsorRatingDate Path 14 and Path 75 Redefinition and the Hemingway Transmission Project Idaho Power1200 MW (W-E) 2400 MW (E-W) 550 MW (W-E) 1500 MW (E-W) Completed 6/8/10