slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
WELCOME TO THE 2006 JPA PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
WELCOME TO THE 2006 JPA PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 77

WELCOME TO THE 2006 JPA PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 260 Views
  • Uploaded on

WELCOME TO THE 2006 JPA PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING. INTRODUCTIONS. JPA AGENDA. Welcome/Introductions Power Marketing Updates (Oretta) PD Remarketing O&M Contracts Meter Testing Program (Radosevich) Short Circuit Working Group Update (Field) OATT NOPR Update (Moulton)

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

WELCOME TO THE 2006 JPA PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

WELCOME

TO THE 2006 JPA

PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING

jpa agenda
JPA AGENDA
  • Welcome/Introductions
  • Power Marketing Updates (Oretta)
    • PD Remarketing
    • O&M Contracts
  • Meter Testing Program (Radosevich)
  • Short Circuit Working Group Update (Field)
  • OATT NOPR Update (Moulton)
  • POISE Update (Steward)
  • 10 Year Studies & Maintenance/Construction Program (Johnston & Radosevich)
  • Right-of-Way Studies & Standards (Radosevich)
  • JPA 2006-2007 Goals (Moulton)
  • Next Meeting
  • Action Items
slide4

POWER MARKETING UPDATES

MARY ORETTA

(602) 605-2639 oretta@wapa.gov

power marketing updates
POWER MARKETING UPDATES
  • PD Remarketing
  • O&M Contracts
slide6

METER TESTING PROGRAM

DAVID RADOSEVICH

(602) 605-2605 RADOSEV@wapa.gov

western s integrated meter validation program
Western’s Integrated Meter Validation Program
  • Old procedure (standard) is to remove meter from service and bench test to provide an accurate validation of the meter
  • New procedure being established provides an accurate validation and is preferred because:

1) Does not interrupt power metering or billing

2) Performed faster (costs less to do)

3) Same degree of accuracy

4) Meter is not removed from service

5) Validates meter under actual load conditions

integrated meter validation procedure
Integrated Meter Validation Procedure
  • New procedure utilizes an RD-33 reference standard to validate the accuracy of the revenue meter while still in service

1) It measures the actual voltage and current applied to the meter to calculate power

2) It also monitors the KYZ pulse output of the meter

3) It then compares the calculated MW to the pulses received, providing a percent error based on this comparison

integrated meter validation procedure1
Integrated Meter Validation Procedure
  • Accuracy of the In-service Validation Test is the same as the bench test, since they both use the RD-33
  • While the in-service validation is a single test, the bench test consists of several independent tests:

1) All four quadrants (Watts Fwd, Watts Rev, VARS Fwd, VARS Rev) are tested in a bench test

2) In each quadrant, three tests are performed:

Full Load (5A) at Unity PF

Light Load (0.5A) at Unity PF

Full Load (5A) at 0.5 PF

integrated meter validation procedure2
Integrated Meter Validation Procedure
  • Since the MW load and power factor vary from line to line, the maximum acceptable error for the in-service validation is set to the maximum error allowed in the bench test, 0.3%
  • If the in-service validation fails to meet this tolerance requirement, a full bench test shall be conducted on the meter
  • If the loading on the line is insufficient to perform an in-service validation test, a bench test is performed
slide13

SHORT CIRCUIT

WORKING GROUP

TOM FIELD

(602) 605-2517 field@wapa.gov

short circuit work affects system reliability
Short Circuit Work affects System Reliability
  • Relay Misoperations – Fail to Operate or Operate When They Shouldn’t
  • Equipment Damage due to Failure to Operate Relays
  • Circuit Breakers and Other Equipment Failure because not Properly Rated
power system operational reliability
Power System Operational Reliability
  • Correct Relay Operation
  • Correct Breaker Ratings
  • Reliability Depends on Accurate Fault Current Calculations
reasons to form regional short circuit working group
Reasons to Form Regional Short Circuit Working Group
  • The interconnected system requires cooperation between everyone for accurate short circuit data
  • There was no formalized mechanism in place by WECC or other Arizona regional groups for coordination of the short circuit case
4 main areas of work
4 Main Areas of Work
  • Annual Operating Case
  • Common Impedance Maps
  • Common Study Methodologies
  • Annual Standards Review
annual short circuit operating case
Annual Short Circuit Operating Case
  • Improved Short Circuit Data for Relay Settings
  • Improved Short Circuit Data for Breaker Duty Evaluations
  • Improved Short Circuit Data for Safety Grounding and Arc Flash Evaluation
  • Improved Reliability of System Operation and Safety of Maintenance Personnel
common impedance maps
Common Impedance Maps
  • Useful for seeing Short Circuit Case and Planning Case Updates
  • One set of maps reduces duplication of effort
  • Easy to make changes for annual operating case by marking drawings
common methodologies
Common Methodologies
  • One set of breaker methodologies chosen for the jointly owned stations
  • Other methods, such as safety grounding, etc. developed as guidelines
  • Information sharing forum
annual standards review
Annual Standards Review
  • Breaker Duty Studies, TRV Studies, Switching Studies, and Safety Grounding Studies based on standards
  • Standards can change without a change in study methodologies
  • Annual review of standards changes to determine if study methodology changes required
swat scwg accomplishments
SWAT SCWG Accomplishments
  • Webpage setup and linked to SWAT Website
  • Charter (Scope) Finalized
  • All SWAT Transmission Owners joined
  • 6 meetings held since starting in January
  • Monthly meeting schedule
  • Impedance Map Plan Developed
  • Working on Combining First Case
impedance maps work
Impedance Maps Work
  • Most Impedance Maps Are Out of Date
  • List of Items to be Placed On Maps Developed
  • A Single Set of Impedance Maps to be Generated
  • Requested SWAT to Develop WestConnect Funding of Impedance Map Generation
  • Only 2 WestConnect Members not Members of SWAT SCWG
combined case
Combined Case
  • Plan Developed
  • Conversions Currently being Checked
  • Zones for Members being Developed
  • Equivalents to be Checked
  • Cases to be Combined
future work
Future Work
  • Combine CCPG SCWG Case
  • Combine STEP SCWG Case (if developed)
  • Develop Common Methodologies
  • Review of Standards
  • Start on next Annual Case and Impedance Maps Update (refinements)
future refinements
Future Refinements
  • Add Mutual Coupling
  • Add Line Charging Capacitance
  • Add Motors
  • Check Transformer, Line, Shunt, Generator, and Load Data
slide36

OATT NOPR UPDATE

RONALD MOULTON

(602) 605-2668 moulton@wapa.gov

nopr timeline for filing
NOPR TIMELINE FOR FILING
  • Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) was issued 5-18-06
  • OATT NOPR Comments/Compliance Filing Team was formed 6-1-06
  • Charter drafted 6-8-06
  • Conference Call 6-8-06 to determine issues for response and develop Western’s approach
  • Regional representatives submit input to the team by COB 6-16-06
  • Technical and Legal Team Leads compile input into first draft response by 6-30-06
  • Review by Team representatives by COB 7-7-06
nopr timeline cont d
NOPR TIMELINE (cont’d)
  • Technical and Legal Team Leads compile second draft for review by PSOC by COB 7-12-06
  • PSOC review completed by 7-17-06 and coordinated with BPA
  • Team representatives respond to PSOC comments by COB 7-24-06
  • Final draft response to DOE’s General Counsel for review by COB 7-26-06
  • DOE’s General Counsel review completed by 8-2-06
  • Western will submit the completed response to FERC by COB 8-7-06
top issues
TOP ISSUES
  • Transmission Planning
  • Imbalance Pricing
  • Capacity Reassignment
  • Redispatch Service
  • Conditional Firm Service
  • Hourly Firm Service
  • Reservation Priority
  • Secondary Network Service
slide40

POISE UPDATE

JOHN STEWARD

(602) 605-2774 steward@wapa.gov

jpa meeting 2006

JPA Meeting 2006

  • What is POISE?
  • Current Scheduling System
  • Future Scheduling System
  • OASIS Customer Support

POISE / OASIS

slide42

JPA Meeting 2006

POISE / OASIS

  • What is POISE?

P – Power

O – Operations

I – Integrated

S – Systems

E - Environment

  • Groups Comprising POISE
    • - Information Technology
    • Interchange Scheduling
    • Transmission Planning & Industry Restructuring
    • Reliability Generation
    • Load and Resources
jpa meeting 20061

JPA Meeting 2006

Customer Submit E-Tag

Transmission Request

E-Tag

OASIS

Current Scheduling System

Limited Validation

Manual Process

After Tag is Implemented

It becomes a schedule

  • Effects
  • No Communication From OASIS to E-Tag and Scheduling to OASIS
  • Manual Processes In Place

Scheduling

jpa meeting 20062

JPA Meeting 2006

Customer Submit E-Tag

Transmission Request

E-Tag

OASIS

POISE Scheduling System

Full Validation

Potential to Automate

Process

Send Approved Tags

to Scheduling System

  • Effects
  • Communications amongst all three systems
  • Automate some processes
  • Increase Non-Firm ATC
  • Industry Standardization

Scheduling

Send Schedule Data

Increase Non-Firm ATC

jpa meeting 2006 poise oasis

JPA Meeting 2006 POISE / OASIS

  • Effective date
    • The date of implementation is December 1, 2006
  • Who will be impacted
    • This will have an impact on OATT customers
  • Issues
    • There are still many open issues that need to be decided
jpa meeting 20063

JPA Meeting 2006

  • OASIS/OATT Customer Support
    • Open Access Transmission Tariff
      • Questions and “What If” Scenarios
      • Please contact:
      • John Steward
      • Email: steward@wapa.gov
      • Phone: (602) 605-2774
      • OR
      • Nancy Whitson
      • Email: nwhitson@wapa.gov
      • Phone: (602) 605-2667

POISE / OASIS

slide48

10 YEAR STUDIES &

MAINTENANCE/

CONSTRUCTION

PROGRAM

JOSHUA JOHNSTON & DAVID RADOSEVICH

(602) 605-2634 jjohnston@wapa.gov (602) 605-2608 RADOSEV@wapa.gov

10 year studies maintenance construction program
10 YEAR STUDIES & MAINTENANCE/CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM
  • Northwest Region (South of Mead)
    • Load Serving Capabilities (Johnston)
    • Maintenance/Construction Program (Radosevich)
    • Questions
  • Central Region (South of Phoenix)
    • Load Serving Capabilities (Johnston)
    • Maintenance/Construction Program (Radosevich)
    • Questions
ten year study
Ten Year Study
  • Analyze the existing construction ten year plan using engineering planning criteria
    • Analysis will aid in prioritizing future proposed construction projects
    • Results may re-shape existing construction plan
    • Results will approximate each proposed project in potential increased MW to Western’s system capabilities
ten year study1
Ten Year Study
  • Purposes
    • Benchmark DSW system 2006 to 2015
    • Identify capability of each project
  • Results
    • Transmission line operating limits
    • Load-serving capabilities
    • Import capabilities
study methodology
Study Methodology
  • WECC-approved power flow cases
    • Study cases used for EOR rating studies
    • Arizona heavy summer cases
      • Years 2006, 2008, 2012, 2015
      • Coordinated by Arizona utilities
    • DSW study cases
      • Started with 2006 contact loads
      • Evaluated possible future transmission projects
study methodology1
Study Methodology
  • Divided DSW system into study regions
    • Northwest
    • Southwest
    • Central
    • Southeast
    • All rest of DSW
study methodology2
Study Methodology
  • For each study region, developed several generation scenario base cases
  • For each generation scenario case, increased regional load with corresponding increase in regional import to identify violations:
    • Line thermal violations
    • Bus voltage violations
  • For particular generation scenarios, ran sensitivities:
    • Operation of Liberty and Perkins phase shifters
    • Level of Central Arizona Project (CAP) pumping load
    • Power factor of regional loads
northwest study region
Northwest Study Region
  • Study Results
    • Benchmarks
      • Load-serving capability approx. 2100 MW
      • Import capability approx. 2015 MW
      • Current contracts approx. 950 MW (360 MW CAP)
    • Path increases from Benchmarks
      • 50 MW on Path D TTC (Phoenix/west)
      • 50 MW on Path G TTC (S. Nevada/Davis)
      • Up to 80 MW on Path SS (Gene/Parker)
northwest study region1
Northwest Study Region

Path G (S. NV/Davis)

530 MW

(50 MW increase)

Peacock Transformer

385 MW

Path SS (Gene/Parker) 140 MW (80 MW increase pending)

Path D (Phoenix/west)

775 MW

(50 MW increase)

Total Flow Into

Region = 2015

Path BB 185 MW

northwest study region2
Northwest Study Region
  • Interconnection on Davis-Topock #1
    • Re-conductor Davis-Topock #1 year 2007
    • Commission substation year 2008
    • MEC SIS Report published June 2005
  • Re-conductor 60 miles Mead-Davis 230kV
    • In-service date 2008
    • Results in approx. increase 170 MW TTC Path G
time frames for upgrades
Time Frames for Upgrades
  • Additional system upgrades needed technically in approximately:
    • 10 years if load uniformly increases 10% per year
  • Actual projected peak loads from customers will provide greater certainty
central study region
Central Study Region
  • Study Results
    • 2006 Benchmarks
      • Load-serving capability approx. 650 MW
      • Current contracts approx. 375 MW
  • Technical violations occur in this order
    • Casa Grande - Empire - ED5 115 kV lines
    • ED5 - ED4 - ED2 - Coolidge 115kV lines
central study region1
Central Study Region
  • Load serving capability after reconductoring:
    • Casa Grande - Empire - ED5 115 kV lines
      • Approx. 1120 MW
      • Increase of 1120-650 = 470 MW
    • ED5 - ED4 - ED2 - Coolidge 115kV lines
      • Approx. 1310 MW
      • Increase of 1310-1120 = 190 MW
time frames for upgrades1
Time Frames for Upgrades
  • System upgrades needed technically in approximately:
    • 6 years if load uniformly increases 10% per year
  • After reconductoring Casa Grande - Empire – ED5
    • 11 years if load uniformly increases 10% per year
  • After reconductoring ED5 – ED4 – ED2 - Coolidge
    • 13 years if load uniformly increases 10% per year
  • Having actual projected peak loads from customers will decrease uncertainties
order of thermal violations
Order of Thermal Violations
  • Empire – ED5 (@650 MW)
  • Casa Grande – Empire (@810 MW)
  • Coolidge – ED2 (@1120 MW)
  • Voltage violations occur approx. 1200 MW
  • Saguaro – ED5 #1 (@1310 MW)
  • Saguaro – ED5 #2 (@1310 MW)
  • Tucson – Oracle (@1310 MW)
  • Coolidge – Valley Farms (@1330 MW)
  • Saguaro – Oracle (@1365 MW)
  • ED4 – ED5 (@1500 MW)
  • ED2 – ED4 (@1700 MW)
230kv system upgrade
230kV System Upgrade
  • 230kV planned upgrades do not increase system load serving capability significantly
    • Due to overloads of other existing 115kV lines
    • Does provide increased voltage support
next studies
Next Studies
  • Study all study regions with customer-provided peak load projections for next 10 years
  • Study Southwest study area
  • Study Southeast study area
  • Study rest of DSW system
slide71

RIGHT-OF-WAY

STUDIES &

STANDARDS

DAVID RADOSEVICH

(602) 605-2605 RADOSEV@wapa.gov

slide74

JPA 2006-2007

GOALS

RONALD MOULTON

slide76

ACTION

ITEMS