Presentation 1. GridEx III. Reliability Coordinator Participation Brief. Operating Reliability Subcommittee meeting. May 5-6, 2015

Transcription

1 Presentation 1 GridEx III Reliability Coordinator Participation Brief Operating Reliability Subcommittee meeting May 5-6, 2015

2 Agenda Objectives Timeline and status of GridEx III planning Active and Observing organizations GridEx III expected participation growth RC involvement in planning and playing Inject development process Inject delivery RC conference calls Mid-Term Planning Conference 2 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

3 GridEx III Objectives 1 2 Exercise crisis response and recovery Improve communication 3 Identify lessons learned 4 Engage senior leadership 3 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

4 Jax Atlanta DC Timeline 2015 Conference Dates December January 23 March June Sept 3 Nov Q GridEx Working Group GEWG Reform Initial Planning Phase Mid-term Planning Phase Final Planning Phase GridEx III After Action Establish Working Group Members Establish Mail list GridEx Awareness Confirm objectives Establish boundaries Confirm tools Confirm exercise infrastructure Finalize attack vectors and impacts Work on scenario narrative Finalize baseline MSEL Develop Controller and Player materials Draft After Action Survey Finalize custom injects with RCs Distribute materials Conduct training Set up venue and logistics Send injects and oversee player actions Capture player actions and findings Facilitate Executive Tabletop Distribute survey Analyze findings and lessons learned Draft Final Report Reliability Coordinator Planning Activities 4 RCs identify Active Organizations in their control area RCs establish and participate in RCto-RC and RC-to- Entity coordination calls RCs and entities understand and develop customized injects RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

5 5 Organizations and Participants Designation Expectations Return on Investment Active Organization Observing Organization Planner Player Your Organization Participate in NERC planning conferences and training sessions Engage in dynamic internal exercise play and external information sharing and coordination Tailor/adapt scenario to suit organization objectives and play Communicate externally to other exercise participants Limited resources/support from NERC Receive baseline scenario injects Tabletop or discuss scenario events internally No interaction with Active organizations Participate in planning conferences Your Organization s Participants Designate and orient players and controllers Customize injects for more realism Provide after action feedback Participate in orientation and training Engage in 2 days of live exercise play and provide after action feedback to planners Close interaction with other BPS entities and relevant law enforcement and government agencies Incident response training opportunity Provide input to develop scenario and identify after action findings Use exercise for requirements evidence Valuable internal training opportunity Gain experience to participate in future exercises as an Active organization Opportunity to provide input on all planning materials Provide input to develop scenario and identify after action findings Observe Player response and activities Realistic training opportunity with broad set of BPS entities RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY Build and strengthen relationships

6 GridEx Participation Growth GridEx Participating Organizations 115 GridEx II (2013) 234 organizations 2,000+ individuals 97 Utilities GridEx III (2015)? 80 Government/Academia/Other GridEx I (2011) 76 organizations 420 individuals GridEx 2011 (76) GridEx II (234) Reliability Coordinator/ Independent System Operator NERC Regional Entity 6 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

7 16 Reliability Coordinators Code ERCOT FRCC HQT ISNE MISO NBPC NYIS ONT PJM SPC SOCO SPP TVA VACS PEAK AESO Name ERCOT ISO Florida Reliability Coordinating Council HydroQuebec TransEnergie ISO New England Inc. Midcontinent Independent System Operator New Brunswick Power Corporation New York Independent System Operator Ontario - Independent Electricity System Operator PJM Interconnection SaskPower Southern Company Services, Inc. Southwest Power Pool Tennessee Valley Authority VACAR-South Peak Reliability Alberta Electric System Operator The GEWG has SMEs from 12 RCs across the BES to support GridEx planning and conduct 7 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

8 Inject Development Process Planning Time Frame 8 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

9 Inject Delivery Process Exercise Time Frame 9 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

10 RC conference calls RC-to-RC Starting May 21 at 2 p.m. Eastern (every 3 rd Thursday) o Best practices for the exercise o Coordination of impacts with neighboring control areas o Call details will be promulgated to RC Lead Planners Other breakout calls may be established as well RC-to-Entities (Active organizations) Organized by RC with Active organizations Lead Planners Discuss local objectives and customized injects Coordinate expected impacts within control area Feed back into RC-to-RC calls 10 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

11 Mid-Term Planning Conference June 10, :00 5:00 p.m. Eastern June 11, :00 a.m. 1:00 p.m. Eastern (Following NERC s technical committee meetings) Primary objective: Finalize master scenario event list Discuss after-action survey with respect to exercise metrics Determine Controller/Evaluator and Player documentation requirements (Still seats available! Conference call details to follow) Final Planning Conference September 3 in McLean, VA 11 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

12 Bill Lawrence 12 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

13 SPP Reliability: Presentation 2 Proxy/EEA Report May 5, 2015 CJ Brown cbrown@spp.org

14 EEA s: SPP did not have any EEA-3 s during the reporting period. 2

15 Proxy Flowgates for this Period: Statistics from February 1, 2015 April 30, 2015 Flowgate (5221): RedWillow-Mingo 345kV 3

16 FG 5521 RedWillow-Mingo 345kV TLR_DATE ReturnToZero TLR_Level 02/17/ :30 02/17/ : /17/ :30 02/18/ : /18/ :00 02/18/ : /01/ :00 03/01/ :00 3

17 FG 5221 RedWillow-Mingo 345kV Temporary Proxy for Controlling North South flows across system Maintaining voltage on the 115kV system around Mingo Controlling RTCA constraint Knoll-Redline 115kV FTLO Redwillow-Mingo Outages in area 5

18 FG 5221 RedWillow Mingo 345kV RedWillow- Mingo 345kV PTDF Knoll Redline 115 kv Post Rock- Spearville 345 kv OOS Mingo 115 kv system 6

19 Presentation 3 NERC Seasonal Assessments Operational Guidance for NERC s Seasonal Assessments ORS May 5-6, 2015

20 Seasonal Assessments Background NERC in coordination with the RAS conducts two seasonal assessments in a year: Summer Reliability Assessment (SRA) Winter Reliability Assessment (WRA) RAS evaluates various Assessment Areas in the eight Regions Traditionally, the focus is on planning areas; resource adequacy, reserve margins and transmission adequacy Good for planning for the season, however short-term nature of these assessments merit an operational perspective 2015 SRA included a pilot for operational analysis 2 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

21 2015 SRA Operational Analysis Pilot Two scenarios were analyzed: Normal load with forced and planned outages Extreme load with forced and planned outages Outage data collected from GADS and Regions FRCC Example 3 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

22 Severe Demand Example In some instances, like PJM, it was observed that for severe load scenario forced and planned outages may cause tight operational flexibility Regions and entities have plans to mitigate these conditions by means of Demand Response, public appeals, etc. 4 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

23 Future Seasonal Assessments NERC would like to incorporate more operational/short-term scenarios and analysis into the seasonal assessments Operational Readiness Reliability Assessment staff currently attends various Region s working groups and task force meetings for seasonal assessments, for e.g. NPCC s CO-12 working group ORS agenda item - Operations Review Notes extremely helpful Looking for input from ORS on: Content/Insights from operations (What are you worried about?) Review assessments Timeline for review 5 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

24 Future of Seasonal Assessments Currently working on transitioning seasonal assessments to Short-Term Assessment The new product could be completed with an 18 month outlook, incorporate operational aspects of the system, and provide additional analytical information (e.g., ERS measures) Provides opportunity to develop and provide insights and analytics on shoulder months 6 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

25 7 RELIABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

26 Presentation 4 MISO Market Flow Calculation

27 MISO Market Flows: The calculated energy flows on a specified flow gate as a result of dispatch of generating resources serving market load within a market-based operating entity s market (excluding tagged transactions). 2

28 MISO Market Flow Calculation (MFC) Logic: Scale down generation across the footprint for total RTO exports on a pro-rata basis. Scale down load across the footprint for total RTO imports on a pro-rata basis. Determine native generation serving for each Control Zone (CZ) or LBA native load. 3

29 MISO Market Flow Calculation (MFC) Logic: Calculate CZ Generation serving load in other CZs within RTO (Transfer MW with in the MISO from one LBA to another). Calculate generation shortage weighted load shift factor for all CZs with generation shortage. Calculate distribution factor (GLDF) for each unit in the exporting control zone. Calculate impact from generation serving native load for each control zone or LBA. (Native Generation to Load Impacts) 4

30 MISO Market Flow Calculation (MFC) Logic: Calculate transfer impact of generators serving nonnative RTO load and sum them up to get CZ transfer impacts. (Transfer Generation to Load impacts) Sum native and CZ transfer impacts directionally to determine market flows in forward and reverse directions. 5

31 MFC Example: 6

32 MFC Input Data Source UDS (Market Solution) Generation; by units Load plus Losses Total RTO Exports and Imports State Estimator Topology for Shift Factor Calculation 7

33 Calculation Frequency and IDC Data Exchange Calculated Frequency: Every 5 minutes for Real-time calculation (Current Hour) Every 15 minutes for Next Hour calculation Data Exchange: Every 5/15 minutes to IDC for TLR purposes For all MISO CFs and RCFs Down to 0% Market Flows and down to 5% Market Flows 8

34 Market Flows reported to IDC Directional Market Flows are reported to IDC in 3 buckets 7FN (Priority 7-FN); ED6 (Priority 6-NN); and ED2 (Priority 2-NH) (only for RCFs; for CFs ED2 = 0) 9

35 Market Flows and TLR Process IDC calculates Relief Required from the markets using 5% Forward Market Flows Pro-rata share with respect to the Tag Impacts with same priority IDC sends Target Market Flow to the markets using 0% Net Market Flows MISO UDS uses Target Market Flow value from IDC to bind and provide relief 10

36 Questions? 11

37 Presentation 5 Discussion of IDC PFV Test Metrics NERC ORS May 5, 2015 Chattanooga

38 Proposed Measures Data Availability measure performance of data supply against requirements Generator outputs line flows for branches modeled as flowgates in the IDC tie-lines system loads net actual interchange dynamic schedules block dispatch data next hour dispatch

39 Proposed Measures Input Data Accuracy measure accuracy of reported data against actual value unit output flowgate and tie-line flow BA load

40 Proposed Measures Validate Calculation Logic Measure and track actual flowgate flow against calculated flowgate flow in 15 minute increments Test three Seams Agreement Methodologies to ensure consistent results POR/POD methodology Marginal zone methodology Slice of system methodology Can we test with known data? Can we test against a study powerflow case with identical system setup?

41 Proposed Measures Pseudo Ties Test different pseudo tie modelling methodologies to ensure consistent results Alarming Confirm alarming for loss of data input, etc. works as required

42 Questions for Input from ORS Is the priority of the ORS to minimize the difference of Flowgate Actual Flow and Calculated Flow (i.e. keep unaccounted for flow minimized) Are all of the Actual Flows (Gens, Flowgates, etc.) captured at the same time (i.e. Data latency issues) What if some of the data when captured for submittal has suspect quality (stale)? Are outages that impact flows captured and sent at the same time as the flows in the GTL calculations?