agenda -tpl standards workshop sponsored by nerc pc –june 3, 2008

Download Agenda -TPL Standards Workshop  Sponsored by NERC PC –June 3, 2008

Post on 01-Feb-2016

37 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Agenda -TPL Standards Workshop Sponsored by NERC PC –June 3, 2008. 1.NERC Antitrust Compliance Guidelines 2.Opening Remarks and Introductions 3.Workshop Objectives 4.Background • Drafting Team Objectives • Update on Standard Drafting Team Activities - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

  • Agenda -TPL Standards Workshop Sponsored by NERC PC June 3, 2008

    1.NERC Antitrust Compliance Guidelines 2.Opening Remarks and Introductions 3.Workshop Objectives 4.Background Drafting Team Objectives Update on Standard Drafting Team Activities Brief Overview of Proposed Standard *

  • Agenda -TPL Standards Workshop Sponsored by NERC PC June 3, 2008

    5.High Level Overview of Comments Received 6.Highlight of Areas where Drafting Team made changes 7.Major areas where the industry has differing views 8.Q & A 9.Proposed Drafting Team Schedule 10.Discussion of PC involvement 11. Wrap-up

    *

  • TPL Standards Workshop Sponsored by NERC PCToronto June 3, 2008

    John OdomFlorida Reliability Coordinating Council

  • ATFNSDT RosterJohn Odom, FRCC (Chair)Bob Millard, RFC (Vice chair) Darrin Church, TVABill Harm, PJMDoug Hohlbaugh, FirstEnergy Bob Jones, SouthernBrian Keel, SRP Tom Mielnik, MidAmericanBernie Pasternack, AEPBob Pierce, Duke Paul Rocha, CenterPoint Chifong Thomas, PG&EYury Tsimberg, Hydro One Jim Useldinger, KCPLDana Walters, National Grid Bob Williams, FMPA*

  • ATFNSDT ObserversRay Kershaw, ATC Doug Powell, EntergyHari Singh, ATCTom Gentile, Quanta TechnologyDaniela Hammons, Centerpoint NERC Staff Coordinator Ed Dobrowolski*

  • Update PC on Standard Drafting Team (SDT) efforts.Highlight areas where SDT made changes from 1st posting.Highlight areas where industry consensus has not been reached.Q & A to clarify SDT positions and begin to formulate a NERC PC position.

    Workshop Objectives

    *

  • Create a new standard that:Has clear, enforceable requirementsIs not a Least Common Denominator standardAddresses the issues raised in the SAR and issues raised by FERC and others

    Background Drafting Team Objectives

    *

  • The first draft was posted for comment from Sept. 12, 2007 through Oct. 26, 2007. Response was very goodMore than 80 sets of comments233 different people 80 companies 9 of the 10 Industry Segments5 face-to-face meetings & 6 full team conference calls & many more sub-team conference calls2nd posting completed & under review by NERC Staff

    Background- Update on Standard Drafting Team Activities

    *

  • Background Brief Overview of Proposed Standards

    Upcoming draft remains very similar to 1st draftR1 Maintaining models (moved modeling requirements to end)R2 Assessment and Corrective Action Plan requirementsR3 Steady State AnalysisR4 Short Circuit Analysis (was part of R2)

    *

  • Background Brief Overview of Proposed Standards

    Upcoming draft remains very similar to 1st draftR5 (old R4) Stability AnalysisR6 Define & document how cascading and voltage instability are addressedR7 (old R5) Identify work coordination amongst planners

    *

  • Background Brief Overview of Proposed Standards

    Upcoming draft remains very similar to 1st draftR8 (old R6) Make assessment available to other plannersCoordinate open and transparent peer review process R9 R14 (old R1) Modeling details, e.g. planned outages, etc.

    *

  • Background Brief Overview of Proposed Standards

    Performance TablesTable 1 Steady stateTable 2 - Stability*

  • High Level Overview of Comments Received Draft standard still not clearMany commenter's agreed with general approachMost significant disagreements were based on: Lack of clarity in the draft standard Disagreed with a specific requirement, often based on cost to implement Thought that standard caused too much study work*

  • High Level Overview of Comments Received Definitions Sensitivity Studies Corrective Action Plans Performance Requirements Stability

    *

  • High Level Overview of Comments Received 6.Generation runback and Tripping7.General QuestionsShort circuit requirementsProxies for instability, cascading outages and uncontrolled islandingActions allowed to prepare for next contingenciesApplicable ratingsDefine bus-tie breaker

    *

  • Areas Where Drafting Team Made ChangesMost definitions modified for clarityConsequential Load Loss concern about what, if any, local load should be treated the same as Consequential Load Year One more detailed acknowledge moving window*

  • Areas Where Drafting Team Made ChangesRelationship of modeling requirements in TPL standard to other modeling standards (MOD series)Identify gaps modeling needed for TPL not in MOD standardsIdentify how results of modeling standards are to be used in TPL*

  • Areas Where Drafting Team Made ChangesSensitivity studies modified and clarifiedInclude additional studies as appropriateMust run at least one basic sensitivity explain why others not neededQualifications for past studies more defined*

  • Areas Where Drafting Team Made ChangesCorrective Action PlanExamples of type of actions expanded, include SPS/RAS, etcSensitivity studies considered but not sole basis for actions*

  • Areas Where Drafting Team Made ChangesRemedial Action Schemes (RAS) or Special Protection Systems (SPS) may be allowed but should not be inadvertently encouragedEliminate differences between committed and planned projectsGenerator redispatch and tripping detailed and clarified throughout requirements*

  • Areas Where Drafting Team Made ChangesClarify the acceptable results immediately after event and also what actions are allowed to prepare for the next eventFirm Non-Consequential load should not be lost for single contingency*

  • Areas Where Drafting Team Made ChangesTreatment of firm transfers clarifiedMapped requirements to FERC Orders 693 & 890Standard must have a detailed implementation plan*

  • Areas Where Drafting Team Made ChangesPerformance Requirements (Tables)Changed Equipment Ratings shall not be exceeded to Facility Ratings shall not be exceeded. Planned System adjustments are allowed, unless precluded in the Requirements, to keep Facilities within the Facility Ratings, if such adjustments are executable within the time duration applicable to the Facility Ratings.Re-formatted tables for clarity.

    *

  • Areas Where Drafting Team Made ChangesAdded P0 Normal System ConditionsLoss of one element, followed by system adjustments, followed by loss of a second element changed to allow non-consequential load lossClarified wide area events in extreme events

    *

  • Major Areas Where The Industry Has Differing ViewsShould there be different performance requirements for facilities above 300kV?*

  • Major Areas Where The Industry Has Differing ViewsShould the use of generation tripping be limited?*

  • Major Areas Where The Industry Has Differing ViewsShould there be a requirement to model dynamic loads?*

  • Major Areas Where The Industry Has Differing ViewsShould there be an exception to allow local load loss for single contingencies?*

  • Major Areas Where The Industry Has Differing ViewsAre the performance requirement changes made in the proposed standard appropriate?*

  • Major Areas Where The Industry Has Differing ViewsAre the new study requirements and documentation in the proposed standard appropriate?*

  • Major Areas Where The IndustryHas Differing ViewsIs the starting point for required studies in the proposed standard defined adequately?*

  • Industry InvolvementSDT should issue responses to comments and the 2nd draft this monthMore consensus needed before items like VSLs are proposedEveryone is encouraged to provide specific comments and discuss issues with SDT members*

  • Questions & Answers*

  • Proposed Drafting Team Schedule *Monthly meetings with conference calls every two weeks

    Post 3rd Draft in December 2008

    Post 4th Draft in April or May 2009

    Ballot in June or July 2009

  • Discussion of PC Involvement *Next steps - to be discussed at PC meeting

  • Wrap-up *Thank you for your participation

    ***Added Short Circuit & Proxy Requirements and separated modeling into individual requirements and re-numbered*Added Short Circuit & Proxy Requirements and separated modeling into individual requirements and re-numbered**Added Short Circuit & Proxy Requirements and separated modeling into individual requirements and re-numbered

    **********************Questions?