Gordon Comegys SRWG Chair

1. Gordon ComegysSRWG Chair SRWG Status Report January 24, 2013 Las Vegas, NV

2. SRWG Products For TSS Approval • DPM Revisions • Study Program Procedure document • 2012 Study Program Report

3. DPM Revisions • Add guidance for including sub 100kV elements • Clarified generator netting threshold • Link to Area Coordinator list in definition • Clarified Planned Facilities definition • Assigned bus number range for BCCS multi-section line dummy buses • Alternative version adds Line Long Identifier field requirement for data to simulate Category B’s (withdrawn by MSRATF) • Confirmed DPM satisfies standards • Except this uncertainty in MOD 11: R1.1. Bus (substation): name, nominal voltage, electrical demand supplied (consistent with the aggregated and dispersed substation demand data supplied per Reliability Standards MOD-016-0, MOD-017-0, and MOD-020-0), and location.

4. Study Program Procedure document • Instructions from TSS for SRWG to finish drafting for TSS January approval • Web conference on Oct 9 revised draft • Incorporate PCC member comments • Final document approved at Nov SRWG meeting Motion To Approve

5. 2012 Study Program Report • Focus area- Idaho/Montana/Northwest • Colstrip ATR model • COLATR model couldn’t find elements directed to trip • Manually identified and included in switching sequences • Trip times from contingency data owners • Recommend process to develop approved model

6. 2012 Study Program Report (continued) • Data errors for 12 gen units • Units swing out when adjacent units stable

7. 2012 Study Program Report (continued) • Gen unit issues forwarded to MVWG Power Plant Modeling Task Force • No Performance Log Items • Change to Posted Report (suggest by Tom Green) I have a minor comment to the first bullet in the Executive Summary. If possible, could we consider changing the language from: “Assess system performance by simulating probable high-impact disturbances” to something like: “Assess system performance by simulating disturbances with a potentially high impact to the system” I think the way it’s written implies that the disturbances are probable. Thanks, Tom

8. TSS Action Item to SRWG for Gen Baseload Flag • 13HS2 Approved Case with Baseload Flag=2 • 47% of Pmax in case have BL flag=2 regardless of status • 124326 MW out of 264665 MW Pmax • 47.5% of Pmax in case have BL flag=2 for status on • 100203 MW out of 210857 MW Pmax • 45% of Pmax with status off and BL flag=2 • 24123 MW out of 53807 MW

9. SRWG Actions • Added to Representation Log • Use of dynamic models not on approved list (replace “Generator w/o dyn model” column with “dyn model not approved”) • Missing or invalid Load Long_ID’s • NEW> Create Table of Case Metrics • Intent: give feedback to data submitters • Count of unknown generator turbine types (type 0 in required turbine type field) • Use of non-conforming load flag compared with Load Long_ID’s identifying industrial and station service • Use of generator Q-Table (reactive capability curves)

10. SRWG Actions (continued) • Case Supplemental Material issued with each case • Removed the following due to lack of use • Series compensation list • Supplemental Line Flow Summary • Phase Shifting Transformers • Area Reserve Factor • Remove detailed PSS list, only retain summary • User practice is to examine the case directly and not rely on supplemental info

11. SRWG Actions (continued) • Meeting format change • Two sub-groups remain (Compliance and Study Program) • Previous Planning Tools sub-group activity is now a separate BCCS Assurance Team • No simultaneous sub group break out sessions tried out • Sequential sub-group discussions led by sub group chair • All participated • Future use of separate, task specific sub group web meetings • Consensus to discontinue break out sessions at SRWG meetings

12. Other Discussions with no action • Operating base case loads compared to actual (presented by Zach Zornes, Chelan PUD) • aggregate actuals 10% lower than base case • Production Cost Model (presented by Rich Bayless, Ron Schellberg, Gil Coulam, Steve Wallace) • Potential use of PCM generation pattern for future cases

13. Other Discussions with no action (continued) • Base case signoff sheet • Discussed signoff option doesn’t include disagreement with other system’s model • Problem origin: interpretation of criteria for what is to be represented in planning cases • Expected to be resolved by BCCS project classifications

14. Other Discussions with no action (continued) • Modeling and Validation Work Group • Summarized approved MVWG documents • Reminders to use approved dynamics models that supercede old models now not approved (SVC’s, GENTPJ, wind gen models) • Reminder to provide data for new power flow required fields for dynamic simulations (load Long_ID, Turbine Type, Baseload flag integer)

15. Rep Log Trend

16. Data Request from PCC Study Program Task Force • Submittals for critical contingencies • APS 500kV Category B • Avista- eastern Washington Category B’s and C’s • Chelan- 230kV Category B • El Paso- 345kV Category B • Idaho Power- 230kV Category B • Northwestern- Colstrip generator unit tripping • Nevada- 500kV and 345kV Category B’s • PACE- 345kV Category C • PG&E- 500kV Category D’s • PNM- 345kV Category B • SCE- 500kV Category B • Tri-State/PSCO/WAPARM – 345 & 230kV Category B’s and C’s • WAPAUW- 161kV Category C

17. 2013 SRWG Meeting and Workshops • April 10-12 - WECC Salt Lake City • July 15-16 – Bellevue, WA (PSE Hosting) • July 17 – SRWG Workshop, Bellevue,WA • July 18-19 MVWG Workshop, Bellevue,WA • Nov 12-14 – WECC Salt Lake City

18. SRWG Leadership Team • Gordon Comegys, present Chair • Retiring from ColumbiaGrid next week • Pamela Mclean, Vice Chair and Secretary • Will be serving as Chair effective Feb 1 until end of term in August • Don Streebel, Chair of Compliance Sub Group • John Gross, Chair of Study Program Sub Group

19. Gordon Comegys Email gcomegys@ieee.org Questions?