Operational Aspects of PJM/NYISO Wheel Replacement Protocol

Transcription

1 Operational Aspects of PJM/NYISO Wheel Replacement Protocol Aaron Markham Manager, Grid Operations (NYISO) Phil D Antonio Manager, Reliability Engineering (PJM) NYISO/PJM Joint Meeting August 15, 2016

2 Agenda Background Guidelines for New Protocol PAR Technical Considerations Current Protocol Preliminary Analysis Definitions Examples NYISO Whitepaper Future Meetings 2

3 Background ConEd notified involved parties of intention to terminate nonconforming wheeling service on April 28, Current wheeling service will end on April 30, New protocol must be in place for use on May 1,

4 Communication Plan PJM and NYISO are working on a replacement protocol. PJM Stakeholder approach: Operational topics will be addressed in Operating Committee Markets topics will be addressed in the Market Implementation Committee Planning topics will be addressed in the Planning Committee NYISO Stakeholder approach: Design changes will be addressed through Market Issues Working Group (MIWG), followed by a vote by the Business Issues Committee (BIC) and the Management Committee (MC) 4

5 PSE&G/ConEd seam: 5018: Hopatcong Ramapo 500 kv line J & K: Waldwick South Mahwah Ramapo 345 kv lines ABC: A: Linden Goethals 230 kv line B: Hudson Farragut 345 kv line C: Marion Farragut 345 kv line Background Hopatcong Branchburg Linden Linden VFT Ramapo HTP HVDC O66 Hudson Goethals South Mahwah Waldwick 49 th Street Farragut 5

6 Guidelines for New Protocol Supports reliable operation of the transmission system Effectively manages congestion across the region Provides for open access and utilization of the facilities to serve the public interest and provide benefit to consumers Does not hinder use of the facilities to respond to emergencies in real-time Preserves competitive market behaviors Minimize impacts to PJM and NYISO load * The guidelines above will be evaluated with equal consideration. 6

7 Guidelines for New Protocol Can be facilitated with the Phase Angle Regulator (PAR) technology at the ABC, JK, and 5018 interfaces (current equipment for May 1, 2017 implementation) Can be implemented in both PJM and NYISO market models * The guidelines above will be evaluated with equal consideration. 7

8 PAR Technical Considerations Each PAR has tap ranges for adjustments PSE&G and ConEd owned PARs have tap adjustment limitations: 20 tap adjustments per day, per PAR 400 tap adjustments per month, per PAR Taps are left in reserve to allow adjustment options for actual overloads: As an example, a PAR with a +/- 16 Tap range will not be adjusted beyond +/

9 Current Protocol 61% of AC interchange and 80% of RECO load applied to the 5018 desired flow calculation 1,000 MW non-conforming wheel service Imported on the J & K Exported on the A, B, & C 9

10 Current Protocol - Example Example Assumptions: Net AC Interchange schedule 1,000 MW to NYISO RECO load 300 MW 5018 = 850 MW 61% of AC Interchange + 80% RECO load JK = 1,000 MW to PS ABC = 1,000 MW to ConEd Hopatcong Branchburg 850 MW Ramapo To Rockland (RECO) 1000 MW Waldwick HTP HVDC O66 Hudson Goethals Linden Linden VFT 49 th Street Farragut 1000 MW 10

11 Preliminary Analysis PJM and NYISO continue to discuss RECO load treatment. One option proposed by PJM and being considered by NYISO is to leave RECO load treatment in the 5018 desired flow calculation PJM and NYISO are performing power flow analysis to determine appropriate percentage allocation of AC interchange on the 5018, JK, and ABC interfaces. 11

12 Preliminary PJM Analysis Case Snapshot PJM Summer 2016 OATF June 20, 2016 July 25, 2016 High Level Results Unable to solve in all cases Cases solve but heavy congestion observed Cases solve but heavy congestion observed August 3, MW to PJM on JK and 500 MW to NYISO on the ABC 12

13 Preliminary Analysis Power flow results have identified delivery limitations to NYISO on the JK interface Forcing flow from 230 kv system to 345 kv system PAR tap adjustments exhausted prior to achieving desired flow Available tap adjustments exhausted prior to achieving target High voltage during light load periods and low interface flows will also be a concern/consideration. Power flow results have identified delivery limitations to PJM on the ABC interface using N-1-1 analysis on the NYISO system 13

14 Preliminary Analysis Considering a combination of two concepts: Account for an Operational Base Flow as a starting point Apply an Interchange percentage distribution: 5018: 32% JK: 15% ABC: 21% 14

15 Definitions Operational Base Flow: natural system flows determined using EMS & PSS/e study applications Interchange Percentage: percentage of net scheduled interchange applied to each interface (5108, JK, and ABC) Interface Target Flow: target flow PJM and NYISO System Operators will meet during real-time operations 15

16 Operational Base Flow Operational Base Flow determined by performing studies using the following assumptions: Zero net interchange between PJM and NYISO PARs set to neutral tap setting PJM and NYISO will compare analysis results and come to agreement on Operational Base Flow value Operational Base Flow value will be applied to the JK and ABC interfaces as a starting point for determination of Interface Target Flow Apply Interchage Percentage values on top of Operational Base Flow to determine Interchange Target Flow value. 16

17 Interchange Target Flow Example Assumptions: Net AC interchange to NYISO = 1,000 MW RECO load = 300 MW RECO load treatment: 80% applied to % flows over western PJM/NYISO ties Operational Base Flow: 500 MW Applied Interface percentages: % JK 15% ABC 21% Western Ties: 32% of net AC Interchange 17

18 Interchange Target Flow Example 5018 = 560 MW to NYISO 32% of AC Interchange + 80% RECO load JK = 350 MW to PJM ABC = 710 MW to NYISO Western Ties = 380 MW 32% of AC Interchange + 20% RECO load Hopatcong Branchburg 560 MW Ramapo To Rockland (RECO) 350 MW Waldwick HTP HVDC O66 Hudson Goethals Linden Linden VFT 49 th Street Farragut 710 MW 18

19 Interchange Target Flow Example Assumptions: Net AC interchange to PJM = 1,000 MW RECO load = 300 MW RECO load treatment: 80% applied to % flows over western PJM/NYISO ties Operational Base Flow: 500 MW Applied Interface percentages: % JK 15% ABC 21% Western Ties: 32% of net AC Interchange 19

20 Interchange Target Flow Example 5018 = 80 MW to PJM 32% of AC Interchange + 80% RECO load JK = 650 MW to PJM ABC = 290 MW to NYISO Western Ties = 300 MW to PJM 32% of AC Interchange + 20% RECO load Hopatcong Branchburg 80 MW Ramapo To Rockland (RECO) 650 MW Waldwick HTP HVDC O66 Hudson Goethals Linden Linden VFT 49 th Street Farragut 290 MW 20

21 Future Studies Operations: Compare PJM and NYISO study analysis to determine appropriate Operational Base Flow value Identify any high voltage issues Develop scenarios for outage conditions Planning: Finalize assumptions for future Planning cases Study light load cases to determine impacts More details to be provided in Planning presentation 21

22 Whitepaper NYISO created and posted a Whitepaper for the Wheel Replacement effort on their website. The concepts in this paper were based discussions between PJM and NYISO over the past four months: ittees/bic_miwg/meeting_materials/ /Paper%20on%20ConEd%20PSEG%20Wheel%20Replacem ent%20proposal_v_1_final.pdf PJM reviewed the whitepaper and offered edits Second version of the whitepaper will be posted jointly in September with NYISO and will include PJM specific concepts and additional proposal details 22

23 Future Meetings Joint PJM/NYISO Stakeholder meeting August 15, 2016 at PJM NYISO MIWG August 25, 2016 September OC, MIC, and PC Second joint PJM/NYISO Stakeholder meeting on September 16, 2016 at NYISO 23

24 Questions? 24