WECC Joint Synchronized Information Subcommittee Report Planning Coordination Committee Meeting March 22,

Synchrophasor Institutional Landscape North American Synchrophasor Initiative – – Established in 2007, successor of EIPP (2003) – Supported by US DOE and EPRI (and NERC until 2013) – Goals: promote synchrophasor technology and its application, share success stories and lesson’s learned NERC Synchronized Measurement Subcommittee – Established in 2015 – Reports to NERC Planning Committee – Goals: develop technical guidelines on how the synchrophasor technology can be used to enhance the bulk electric system reliability WECC Joint Synchronized Information Subcommittee – Established in 2009, successor to WECC DMWG – Reports to WECC Planning Coordination Committee – Goals: provide support to WECC operating entities with the synchrophasor technology deployment and application implementation, perform interconnection-wide assessment of power system dynamic performance 2

Western Interconnection Synchrophasor Program Western utilities and US DOE invested over $140M since 2009 Infrastructure Deployment WISP Wide-Area Network for inter-utility data exchange Interconnection-wide PMU deployment 239 PMUs reporting to Peak RC, 1,219 signals Control center networking, cyber security Control Room Applications Real-Time Voltage Stability (Peak RC, CISO) Oscillation Detection (BPA) Mode Meter (under evaluation at Peak RC, CISO, BPA) Frequency Disturbance Detection and Location (BPA) Engineering Applications Oscillation Analysis Power Plant Model Validation Frequency Response Analysis Data Mining, Event/Abnormality Detection Synchrophasor-Based Controls BPA response-based wide-area reactive switching 3 Map provided by NASPI

Synchrophasor Success Wide-area visibility is a strong business case for RCs, ISOs and TOs with a large footprint: – Peak RC’s WISP is viewed as a major Smart Grid success story nationally – BPA synchrophasor project received 2013 Platt’s Global Energy Award for Grid Optimization, 2014 NASPI utility of the year – SCE leading the nation in integrated transmission and distribution monitoring – PG&E pioneered innovative designs for inter-operability and adaptive relaying – …. What is the value proposition for mid-size TOs / TPs in using synchrophasor data: – Will they do anything more beyond compliance with RC requirement to install disturbance monitoring equipment per NERC PRC-002 ? NASPI published a value proposition paper in October

Value Proposition – Power Plant Monitoring and Model Validation Near Term Value Power plant model validation per NERC MOD-026/27 Wealth of material is available on the subject from NASPI, WECC JSIS, WECC MVWG, NERC Reliability Guideline is coming Ultimate Vision TODAY: GOs perform testing and model validation, TPs use dynamic models in power system performance studies VISION: TPs and GOs perform system studies and equipment assessment to optimize the equipment setting. Then, model becomes a statement of the desired performance. Equipment is tuned according the model. Disturbance monitoring is used for performance validation and finding control issues. 5

Power Plant Model Validation Power plant model validation is required by NERC MOD-026/27 WECC practiced model validation since 1996 Formal WECC Policy was in place since 2006 Disturbance-based model validation is: -A cost-effective and safe alternative for compliance with the MOD Standards -Does not require a scheduled outage/ test – Western Interconnection has plenty of system events each year -Enables more frequent model validation, early detection of abnormalities Disturbance-based model validation is mature: -Disturbance play-in functions are available in GE PSLF, PowerWorld, and Siemens PTI PSS®E -BPA practiced disturbance-based model validation since Several mature tools are available and in use: -EPRI Power Plant Parameter Derivation -BPA/PNNL Power Plant Model Validation -Other applications are developed: -MATLAB, EPG, universities, national labs 6

Power Plant Model Validation Efforts at BPA BPA has PMU installed at power plants for their performance monitoring and model validation: -Conventional – -12 plants, -130 generators, -21,145 MW of generation -Wind – -11 plants -1,200 MW of generation -Review model performance annually BPA requires new power plants to have PMUs installed as a part of their interconnection 7

Example 2. Detecting Power Plant Oscillations 8 OSI-Soft PI overview display: -shows whether an oscillation is local or wide-area -Oscillation frequency band indicates type of oscillation Drill down to see the oscillation alarm details

9 Example 2. Detecting Bad Operating Conditions Real-Time Operational Problem: Software revision was implemented in a plant MW controller. The controller dispatched a hydro-power generator into a “rough zone” (surging water vortex), causing undesirable mechanical stress on equipment. PMU-based application detected a sustained oscillation with a 3 second period in both active and reactive power. Power plant operator was notified, units were re-dispatched, software was fixed.

Example 3A. Detecting Instability Events Real-Time Operational Problem: Transmission line outages can lead to local oscillation instability. Because of their large amplitude, the oscillation can propagate through the system. Such oscillations usually self- corrected by generator tripping within several minutes, but may also persist for hours. Generator instability in Seattle – Portland area in March

Example 3B. Detecting (another) Instability Event Real-Time Operational Problem: This event occurred in 2004, streaming PMU data was not available at that time to plant or system operators, the oscillation lasted for more than an hour, incorrect decisions were made on the cause of the oscillation because of lack of high resolution information. Two 230-kV lines were out of service in the area. Plant started ramping generation for load pick-up. Sustained oscillation developed at 0.7 Hz, suggesting local generator instability. Operator rebooted plant AGC, it did not help. Oscillations persisted for more than one hour. Local generator instability in Pacific Northwest in September

12 Example 4: Diagnostics of Control Interactions 15-minute overview 10-second detail Control Engineering Problem: Multiple instances of sustained active and reactive oscillations were detected at a hydro power plant in fall 2015 PMU data was provided to the plant operator. The oscillation was traced to interactions between Power System Stabilizers and Under-Excitation Limiters. UEL was retuned, the problem was resolved in January 2016.

Example 5: Detection of Erratic Frequency Response 13 Actual Expected Control Engineering Problem: BPA has requirements for droop and frequency response time of its hydro- power generators. PMU data is routinely used to compare the “expected” response with the “actual” An abnormal governor response has been identified due to the secondary plant controller, which counteracted the primary frequency response in several events The problem is being addressed

Example 6: Abnormal Reactive Power Runback 14 Control Engineering Problem: A power plant just got brand new state-of-the-art exciters and voltage regulators. The actual plant response matched the model for commissioning tests and several initial events. However, unexpected large reactive runbacks were detected during several large system frequency events. Power plant operator was notified about the abnormal response and is looking into the problem. Response “As Expected” Abnormal Response Actual Expected V X

Example 7: Detection of PSS Failure Control Engineering Problem: A significant difference was observed between actual and expected generator responses during Chief Joseph braking resistor tests. Actual response was much more oscillatory. Sensitivity studies done by BPA staff suggested that generator PSS was out of service. PSS status indicator was ON. Follow- up analysis by the plant engineering confirmed the internal PSS failure. PSS was fixed since. 15

Example 8: Wind Power Plant Oscillations Operational and Control Engineering Problem: Multiple instances of sustained 14-Hz oscillations were detected when a wind power plant output exceeded about 350 MW. BPA was concerned about the risk of sub-synchronous control interactions with series caps, similarly to 2009 Texas event. Plant operator and WTG manufacturer were notified, firmware upgrades were made, the oscillation magnitude is reduced significantly. January 2014 April

Example 9: Frequency Event Detection and Location 17 Frequency event detection algorithm runs in real time. Event location algorithm is used to estimate an origin of frequency disturbance. Event plots include system frequency and power pick-up on transmission paths FRAT application is available for NERC BAL-003 compliance analysis as well for frequency response assessment of individual power plants

Interested ? There are many resources available to help your company effectively implement and use synchrophasor technology NASPI assembled a collection of technical papers, reports and workshop materials, meetings are held twice per year – NERC Synchronized Measurements Subcommittee is now active and in process of developing Reliability Guidelines on PMU applications WECC JSIS has several utilities that already succeeded, there is a variety of diverse implementations and actual deployment experience, someone else already paid the price of being the first Next WECC JSIS meeting is April 26-29, 2016 in Salt Lake City, UT 18

How to Set-Up Your Synchrophasor Network PMU Router Relay PMU Router Relay PMU Substation PDC Router Phasor Data Concentrator Substation BSubstation P SP Historian Application Server Router WISP WAN SCADA Client Visualization Control Center 19

Thank You 20