Page - 1
WESTERN ELECTRICITY COORDINATING COUNCIL
RELIABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING
April 10, 2014: 8:30 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Mountain Time
WECC Office
155 North 400 West, Suite 200
Salt Lake City, UT 84103
Meeting Notes
I.
Introductions, arrangements, and changes to the agenda – Vishal Patel
II. Approve February 5-6, 2014 Meeting Notes – Marco Rios
Postponing approval of the last meeting's minutes to the next meeting
• Approved by consensus
III. Inclusion of non-BES elements as part of the BES – Discussion
The main question: How will [WECC] handle BES Exception Requests
Revised BES Definition
Revised NERC Rules of Procedure
 The Exception Request process
Also, note that the Southwest Blackout report (recommendation 17) is a driver for identifying
BES facilities.
How do we, as an industry, evaluate which non-BES facilities get incorporated?
 Pulls up 2-20-14 version of BES Inclusion Guideline
List of potential identifiers and flow indicators (no studies so far) from the document were
reviewed as well as the additional criteria or information you would need to discuss.
Vishal presented this document to the PCC for informational purposes.
 Vishal notes that WECC has the authority to include elements as it determines are
necessary.
o No industry vote needed but WECC is seeking industry consensus.
Ken also mentioned the instances where non-BES elements are the limiting component to a
rating or path.
The gray area is for generators directly connected to a non-BES facility that controls the
BES system voltage.
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918
Page - 2


additionally, if this generator is required for balancing or reserve
"using a non-BES facility as if it is BES"
Chuck asked about leveraging a former TSS study trying to determine material impact.
 The study was looking for protection system failure impacts.
o He selected major system buses and designated those as candidates for material
impact.
 The second was fault duty.
o A threshold on fault duty as an indicator as how "tightly" connected with the BES.
 Likewise, a higher voltage but remote (115 in Alberta) may not have an impact to
overall fault duty.
 Ken refers to this as a screening tool.
o Ex. BES outage and transfer trip non-BES
 Probably designed as such to get higher transfer capability on the BES
element
 The argument is now the significance of that non-BES element to the
BES
 e.g., protection system failure
o Ex. A radial generator that may not be as important
 Ken advocates other aspects needed for reliability that entities need to
consider.
If WECC identifies a low voltage facility that they feel may need to be in the BES, what is the
process?
 In some instances, WECC will notify the entity in advance and prepare studies to
advocate for the inclusion on July 1.
 Alternatively, WECC prefers that the entity identify these facilities first.
o Perhaps, notify the WECC RS
 The need is for WECC to show that they are being responsive to the Outage
Recommendation.
o Including potentially noting this in the TSS Annual Study Program
The RC has identified 10 non-BES N-1 outages that shifted power flow greater than 30
MVA.
Reliability First performed a study for the Eastern Interconnection and identified specifically
which protection devices should be BES.
 This aspect may not have adequately been covered in the current WECC document.
Idaho references the significance and role of modeling the lower voltage facilities.
 TSS Chair mentioned at PCC the same concern
 Should the RS be addressing modeling guidelines with respect to the sub-100 kV?
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918
Page - 3
Modeling
 In the northwest, the system is limited based on what is modeled
o If a 69 kV is overloaded (due to parallel operation), it is how they define the
operating limits
 Some entities present general equivalents for WECC cases and use detailed modeling
for internal studies.
o Therefore, Ken emphasizes the significance of the entity identifying forthright
which non-BES elements may be needed to be included in the BES.
 Also notes the insignificance of an element in a 2020 assessment as
compared to a 2018
 The goal is not for staff to find out what entities failed to identify
State Estimator
 Ken shows the list of N-1 changes in flow that warranted monitoring in the RC EMS
system.
Coordination between Planning and Operations
 Can't identify in planning if not monitored in operations
 Can't monitor if not modeled in EMS case
 Suggestion to take charge
 Additionally, has there been a study?
o The RC did a change in flow study (with a 30 MW threshold)
 The real question for RS is whether 30 MW
o Suggestion to include RC monitored elements as a screen for potential inclusion
Lists:
1. Monitored
2. BES
3. Modeled

Does the RC have to monitor all BES? Not necessarily if that part of the system is not
loaded heavily
If BES, someone should monitor, maybe not RC necessarily but at least someone.
It doesn’t need to be BES to be modeled or monitored.
Does the suggested addition of RC monitored facilities duplicate the above requirement to
screen all sub-100 kV elements?
 Suggested that it does
 However, whether 10% from the guideline or 30 MVA from the RC, should be fine for
Ken
o Would hope that we are capturing the same list as the RC but not necessarily
required.
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918
Page - 4
Ken needs to show on an annual basis that there is activity addressing Rec 17.
We are looking for something [methodology] that incorporates planning assessments,
operating assessments, and rating studies.
Ken also would like to know what kind of follow-up should be conducted.
What is the objective of this document?
 To guide utilities how to identify non-BES elements for inclusion in the BES
Is the intent to take a non-BES outage and identify non-BES elements for further study?
 No.
 Three Screening categories
1. BES Outage causing flow change on non-BES
2. Non-BES Generator causing flow change on BES
3. Non-BES outage causing flow change on BES
Intent to take this July PCC
 Leave it to the group
 Target is July 1 but even if it spills over to October is okay as long as we can show
progress
Are the screens recursive?
i.e. if a screen identifies a candidate and further evaluation determines BES, does the
process start over?
 No. First pass only.
 Later, a process for periodic review will be discussed later
Should the 20 MW threshold be removed from the last two?
 More stringent and simpler by removing
Are BES "compliance islands" okay or do intermediate non-BES facilities need to be called
into BES as well?
 Are okay. No need to call in intermediate facilities.
Should a base case assumption be indicated in the document?
 Idea that it should be the same as what cases are used for planning and seasonal
operational assessments (i.e. stressed)
"Further Evaluation" Bullets
Are the first two sub-bullets superfluous? Perhaps. Removed
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918
Page - 5
What are unique characteristics? Removed
Do we want to be prescriptive on how to demonstrate that there is no impact?
Separating all of the "further evaluation" bullets into its own section for clarity
 All of the screens trigger further evaluation; not just the technical screens
Clarified time horizon to be Near Term Planning Horizon
Removing "Major Transfer Path" from impact to SOL and IROL
What does the generator section aggregate impact mean?
 e.g., several lower voltage connected generators that together regulate or provide
reserve
 We should clarify the "multiple resources"
Does the newly added aggregate plant screen conflict with the BES definition?
 No. BES Definition limits point of connection as 100 kV.
 Removed in end due to essence captured by change in flow screen
The IROL and SOL generator bullet captures the transfer capability concern.
The further evaluation can be combined and boiled down to the need of the element for the
reliable operation and the impact to SOL and IROL.
The goal is to capture those elements which do not meet the NERC BES definition but are
needed for the reliable operation of the BES.
IV. Project WECC-0100 System Performance Update – Chuck Mathews
Driver is the TPL-001-4 R5 & R6
A straw poll was developed addressing:
1. Voltage instability
2. Steady voltage limit
3. Post-contingency voltage deviation
4. Transient Voltage Response
5. Cascading, uncontrolled Islanding
Document Classification Discussion
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918
Page - 6

Supposed to develop a white paper to discuss for next PCC

Assigned to Vishal, Ken, and Steve Rueckert
o
Draft circulating
Next Webinars are 4/17 & 5/8 8-10am PST
V. BES Inclusion Document Resumed
Preamble
Process
 Discussion of assumptions for study
o Stressed?
o Or, Operational Seasonal Cases
 More realistic - Ken agrees
 More interested in what it is and not what it might be
 Planning case with underlying models (detailed system modeling)
 Also, NERC Exception Guideline references Operating
o Leaving out the specification of stressed or operational to allow flexibility
Ken will add some more background and send out another draft.
VI. Next Meetings
May 14-15
PG&E Office in San Francisco
A tour will be offered
Register by May 9 for the meeting for PG&E security clearance
RAWG and RS will both meet
No special rates yet
Vishal will notify RS about PPE and agenda by next week
VII. Adjourn
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918