| Electric Power Group Presents Maximizing Use of Synchrophasor Technology for Everyday Tasks Welcome! The meeting will begin at 2:00 p.m. EDT / 11:00 a.m. PDT Oct. 12, 2016 Today’s Topic: System Model Validation for NERC MOD-33 Requirements Registration URL: Webinar Teleconference Number: Access code: Please mute your phone during the presentation. We will encourage discussion at planned QA session. Thank you for your cooperation. For any technical issues with this webinar, please contact or call (626) 685–2015

| Maximizing Use of Synchrophasor Technology for Everyday Tasks Webinar Oct 12, 2016 Presented by Douglas Selin, Bajarang Agrawal, APS Prashant C. Palayam, Kevin Chen, EPG System Model Validation for NERC MOD-33 Requirements

| Outline  Background  NERC MOD-033-1: Steady-State and Dynamic System Model Validation > Standard, Requirements, Criteria & Metrics  Example of Model Validation Process – APS Experience > WECC Guidelines –Reliability Coordinator Level –Planning Coordinator Level > APS Demo using Microsoft Excel  Model Validation Using Phasor Grid Dynamics Analyzer (PGDA) > Data Collection Method – PMU and Simulated > PGDA Steps – time alignment, calculating missing metrics, mapping signals, recursive validation > Example – Unit Trip Event > Findings/Observations > Demo Using PGDA  Discussion > Your Practice, Use Cases, Suggestions  Summary 2 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| Background 3 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved  NERC MOD becomes enforceable 7/1/2017  WECC and Peak RC are developing a process to provide basecase for model validation  APS and EPG discussed use of EPG tools for model validation > August 11, EPG demonstrated model validation using PGDA and APS demonstrated model validation using Microsoft Excel > August 16, 2016 – EPG illustrated ability to load PSLF Channel file data into PGDA using a sample dataset > August 25, 2016 – EPG was provided with unit trip event from both PSLF and PMU to demonstrate the complete process of model validation using PGDA > September 6, 2016 – EPG illustrated methodology and demonstrated model validation process using PGDA for their event  APS adopting EPG methodology for model validation using PGDA  Today – APS and EPG will share our experience

| Example Of Model Validation Process 4 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| Steady-State and Dynamic System Model Validation - Standard  Number: MOD  Purpose: > To establish consistent validation requirements to facilitate the collection of accurate data and building of planning models to analyze the reliability of the interconnected transmission system  Applicability: > Planning Coordinator > Reliability Coordinator (RC) > Transmission Operator (TOP) 5 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| MOD Requirements  Planning Coordinator Shall: > Implement a documented a Data Validation Process that includes ‒Performance Comparison of power flow model to actual system behavior ‒Performance Comparison of dynamics model to actual system response ‒Guidelines to determine unacceptable discrepancies during comparison ‒Guidelines to resolve unacceptable differences in performance > Use a dynamic local event or wide area event having measurable transient response ‒Closing a transmission line near a generating plant (local event) ‒Oscillation event between a generator and the system (local event) ‒Local response to wide area event > Validate models at least once every 24 calendar months ‒More frequent validation is encouraged 6 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| MOD Specifications for Criteria and Metrics  Modify & Match Planning Simulation with State Estimator case or measured values prior to disturbance: > System Load > Transmission Topology and Parameters > Voltages at Major Buses > Flows on major transmission elements  Metrics for Dynamic Comparison: > Voltage oscillations at major buses > System frequency > Real and Reactive Power Oscillations on lines, ties, and generating units 7 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| WECC Guideline In Development for MOD Compliance 8 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved Selects a disturbance State Estimator (SE), SCADA, PMU data collection used to simulate event MVWG Peak RC Modify & Match WECC Planning case to SE prior to disturbance Validate Steady State Model Create or Select dynamic data file Create Comprehensive switching sequence Planning Coordinators Validate Dynamic Response Further Investigation with MVWG & TOPs TOPs Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Repeat At Least Once Every 24 Months, MVWG to provide 2 events per year WECC Staff PCs review and provide feedback (4 week time period). WECC issues final case.

| Examples of WECC Level Comparison 9 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| Validation Process at Planning Coordinator Level – MOD © Electric Power Group All rights reserved WECC Validated Dynamic Response case available to PCs Download case and make local adjustments as needed Validate local response or Identify unsatisfactory correlation Correct model or data PCs 2 PMU Data

| Examples of APS Model Validation 11 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| Conclusions and Summary of Steps  WECC/MVWG plays a big role in creating cases for model validation which PCs can use.  Peak RC state estimator and SCADA data used to initially create a case for a large system wide event (*WSM case). Initial comparison to PMU data is made.  WECC uses WSM case to create planning case and does an overall system validation  WECC provides validated planning case to individual PCs  Individual PCs contribute and refine the case  PCs then use the case to do model validation of their local system. 12 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved * West-wide System Model, also referred to as WWSM

| APS Demo Using Microsoft Excel 13 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| Model Validation Using PGDA Data Collection, Methodology, Demo, Findings/Observations 14 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| Data Collection 15 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved DisturbancePMU dataSimulated data Data SourceDatabase – PI, eDNA, SQL, Oracle, Phasor Archiver Dynamic Simulation ToolsData Extraction Tools e.g. ePDEPSLF, PSS/E, Power World, ePHASORSim, RTDS InputStart and End TimePlanning Power Flow Model, Dynamic Data File and Event Sequence Event Sequence for dynamic simulation N/AEvent Analysis Tools e.g. PGDA

| Model Validation Using PGDA – 8 Steps 16 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved Extract simulated data into CSV file Load into PGDA with an identifier *.csv Time Synchronize event start time using crosshair and GUI Calculate Generator and Line power flows using Pseudo signal calculator Map signals from simulated and PMU data using Plot analysis Generate Analysis Template for model validation PMU Voltage & Current Phasors PMU data *.chf *.txt *.p *.chf *.txt *.p MW & MVAR Identify unacceptable discrepancies by location and metric 6 *.out PSLF PSS/E Next iteration of same event after tuning models Repeat At Least Once Every 24 Months Generate Report 8

| Unit Trip – 345kV Bus Frequency Comparison Using Plot Analysis 17 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved 18 mHz 10 mHz 23 mHz Detrending by First Value Steady State Dynamic

| Unit Trip – 500kV Bus Voltage Comparison Using Plot Analysis 18 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved 7 kV Detrending by First Value 1 kV Steady State Dynamic

| Unit Trip – 345kV Bus Voltage Comparison Using Plot Analysis 19 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved 11 kV Detrending by First Value 1 kV Steady State Dynamic

| Unit Trip – 345kV Line Real Power (MW) Comparison Using Plot Analysis 20 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved 125 MW 63 MW Steady State Dynamic

| Unit Trip – 345kV Line Reactive Power (MVAR) Comparison Using Plot Analysis 21 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved 16.5 MVAR 1.2 s 16.5 MVAR 1.2 s 13 MVAR 1.4 s 13 MVAR 1.4 s

| Findings/Observations 22 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved Steady-StateDynamicMatchUnit Trip BadGoodAcceptableVoltages Good Best FitFrequency, Reactive Power Bad UnacceptableReal Power ** MetricsSteady StateDynamic (Diff in Rate of Change during First Transient Response) Dynamic (First Transient Rise Time of Simulation Response is within x% of Actual Response) Dynamic (Oscillatory Behavior – Diff in Frequency of Oscillation & Damping %) Frequency< 20mHz (vary based on interconnection) < 20% < 0.1Hz, < 1% for not well damped conditions Voltage< 1 % of base kV Power Flows < 5% of Line Ratings < 10 MW < 10 MVAR ** Criteria used here may not reflect in your interconnection.

| EPG Demo Using PGDA 23 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| Q&A, Discussion Your Practice, Use Cases, Suggestions 24 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| Q&A, Discussion  Q&A  Model Validation − Your Practices − Use Cases − Pain Points − Suggestions  Next Webinar Focus − Priority − Other topics 25 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| EPG Webinar Series  Configuring alarms and validate parameters to provide meaningful results for operators. (Nov 16)  Mining large data archives for events of different types, e.g. oscillations, generator trips, etc.  Using alarms & events for proactive actions.  Providing secure remote access to users in real-time for monitoring and diagnostics during normal times and emergencies.  Sending data & alarms to EMS.  Leveraging existing one-line diagrams to map synchrophasor data.  Extending grid synchrophasor observability with Linear State Estimation technology.  Other topics?  Extracting large amounts of synchrophasor data efficiently for offline analysis. (August 2016)  Quickly creating an event report that could be distributed to operators, engineers and managers. (Sept. 2016)  System Model Validation for MOD-33 Requirement (Oct. 12) 26 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| Summary  NERC MOD-033-1: Steady-State and Dynamic System Model Validation  Example of Model Validation Process – APS Experience > WECC Guidelines > APS Demo using Microsoft Excel  Model Validation Using PGDA > Data Collection Method – PMU and Simulated > PGDA Steps – time alignment, calculating missing metrics, mapping signals, recursive validation 27 © Electric Power Group All rights reserved

| Thank you for participating ! If you have any questions regarding any part of the course, please contact us at 201 S. Lake Ave., Ste. 400 Pasadena, CA