West of McNary Generation Integration Project

B O N N E V I L L E P O W E R A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

Slide 1

West of McNary Generation Integration Project

Regional Planning Project Review Meeting

July 12 , 2007


Slide 2

Presentation Outline

1) Background

2) Objective

3) Study Assumptions

4) Study Methodology

5) Study Results

6) Next Steps


Slide 3

Background

– In 2001, natural gas generation additions were being proposed near Lower Monumental and McNary. These included Starbuck (1200MW) and Wallula (1300MW).

– Integration into the 500-kV grid

– Existing transfer capability across West of McNary was fully utilitized

– Identified McNary-John Day 500-kV project to provide firm transmission service to these generators.

– Identified a bottleneck West of John Day with the addition of the McNary-John Day 500-kV project.


Slide 4

Background

What’s Changed

– Generation type and location

• Wind instead of natural gas

• West of McNary Substation instead of east of McNary Substation

• Integrated not only to 500 kV, but also into the 69 kV, 115 kV and 230-kV system

– Numerous requests

• The amount of wind generation integration requests into Slatt and John Day are at a point where transmission reinforcement is needed.


Slide 5

McNarySlatt

John DayBig Eddy


Slide 6


Slide 7

Objective

This study investigates different infrastructure improvement options that will increase transmission capacity across West of McNary (WOM), West of Slatt (WOS) and West of John Day (WOJ) paths in order to provide transmission service to the proposed generation in the area, improve system performance and address reliability issues of the system.


Slide 8

Study Methodology

Task 1) Screening of Alternatives based on all lines in service

Task 2) Thermal screening of the better performing Alternatives

Task 3) Determine Total Transfer Capacity (TTC) across WOM, WOS and WOJ paths

Task 4) Voltage Stability Analysis

Task 5) Transient Stability Analysis


Slide 9

Study Assumptions

Task 1) Screening of Alternative Projects The starting basecase for the study was A08ATC_WOM with a generation

pattern consistent with ATC assumption prepared from a August 2008 case. It was conditioned by increasing generation at McNary, Upper Columbia, and Lower Snake plants.

In addition to existing 300 MW wind generation, 400 MW wind generation at Jones Canyon was added. Also, 316 MW Plymouth and 80 MW at Wallula was modeled at McNary 500-kV to further stress the WOM & WOS paths to 3583 MW & 4403 MW respectively (A08ATC_WOM3583_WOS4403). (The Plymouth & Wallula generation was chosen to model indicative stress not as an actual plant)

The flow on COI and PDCI was adjusted to 4505 MW and 2700 MW.


Slide 10

Study Assumptions

Task 2) Thermal screening of the better performing Alternatives Using A08ATC_WOM3583_WOS4403 basecase from Task 1) three

basecases were created to stress each path (WOM,WOS &WOJ) by simulating three different generation patterns.

– WOM path was stressed by increasing 720 MW additional generation at Wallula. (The Wallula generation was chosen to model indicative stress not as an actual plant)

– WOS path was stressed by adding 768 MW proposed wind generation at Slatt substation and an additional 150 MW proposed wind generation at Boardman.

– WOJ path was stressed by adding 700 MW proposed wind generation at John Day substation.


Slide 11

Study Assumptions

Task 3) Determine Total Transfer Capacity (TTC) across WOM, WOS and WOJ Paths

The starting basecase for determining the WOM TTC used a August 2010 (a10cy07r5b) budget case.

From the a10cy07r5b case two cases with the WOM path flow at 3500 MW and 4500 MW were created. The McNary – John Day project was modeled and included in the new definition of WOM.

– WOM3500_MCN-JD WOM4500_MCN-JD

From the two cases above, four additional cases modeling the John Day – Big Eddy 500 kV line #3 and the Big Eddy – Station Z 500 kV project were created.

– WOM3500_MCN-JD_JD –BE #3 WOM3500_MCN-JD_BE –Station Z

– WOM4500_MCN-JD_JD –BE #3 WOM4500_MCN-JD_BE –Station Z

The John Day – Big Eddy 500 kV line #3 and the Big Eddy – Station Z 500 kV projects are included in the new definition of WOJ.


Slide 12

Study Assumptions

Task 3) con’t The starting basecase for determining the WOS TTC used a August 2010 (a10cy07r5b)

budget case. From the a10cy07r5b case two cases with WOS path flow at 5000 MW and 5500 MW were

created. The McNary – John Day project is modeled and included in the new definition of WOS.

– WOS5000_MCN-JD WOS5500_MCN-JD

From the two cases above, four additional cases modeling the John Day – Big Eddy 500 kV line #3 and the Big Eddy – Station Z 500 kV project were created.

– WOS5000_MCN-JD_JD –BE #3 WOS5000_MCN-JD_BE –Station Z

– WOS5500_MCN-JD_JD –BE #3 WOS5500_MCN-JD_BE –Station Z

The John Day – Big Eddy 500 kV line #3 and the Big Eddy – Station Z 500 kV projects are included in the new definition of WOJ.


Slide 13

Study Assumptions

Task 3) con’t

The starting basecase for determining the WOJ TTC used a August 2010 (a10cy07r5b) budget case.

From the a10cy07r5b case the McNary – John Day was modeled. The Big Eddy – Station Z 500 kV project was also added and included in the new definition of WOJ. Two cases with WOJ flow at 3000 MW and 3378 MW were created.

– WOJ3000_MCN-JD_BE –Station Z WOJ3378_MCN-JD_BE –Station Z

From the a10cy07r5b case the McNary – John Day was modeled. The John Day -Big Eddy #3 500 kV project was also added and included in the new definition of WOJ. Two cases with WOJ flow at 3000 MW and 3500 MW were created.

– WOJ3000_MCN-JD_JD-BE #3 WOJ3500_MCN-JD_JD-BE #3


Slide 14

Study Results

Task 1) Screening of Study Alternatives

– An August 2008 case representing the critical season in the McNary area with high hydro plant output, high thermal output and high North of John Day flow.

– Each study Alternative was modeled

– Performance of each study Alternative was then ranked based on the following

• On higher loading of new transmission line.• Lower loading of existing critical transmission lines and paths.• Other system performance observations and issues.


Slide 15

Study Results Task 1) con’t

– Basecases containing the following nine Alternatives were prepared. The performance of each Alternative with all lines in service was assessed.

• 1) McNary – John Day • 2) McNary – Big Eddy• 3) McNary – Station Z• 4) McNary – John Day – Big Eddy • 5) McNary – John Day & Big Eddy – Station Z • 6) McNary – John Day, John Day – Big Eddy & Big Eddy – Station Z• 7) McNary – John Day, John Day – Station Z & Big Eddy – Station Z • 8) McNary – Station Z & Big Eddy – Station Z• 9) McNary – Big Eddy & Big Eddy – Station Z


Slide 16

ALTERNATIVE NEW LINES LOADING EXISTING PATHS and LINES LOADING

McN -JD McN - BE JD - BE McN - Z BE - Z WOM WOS WAUT-JD JD - BE#1 JD - BE#2

(MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW)

No Project 3583 4403 2075 994 1180

McN-JD 1552 2590 3535 1806 1114 1323

McN - JD - BE 1568 965 2582 3553 1842 723 858

McN - BE 1438 2676 3648 1879 525 623

BE - Z 1075 3498 4204 1812 707 839

McN - JD & BE - Z 1494 923 2564 3404 1615 862 1024

McN - JD, JD-Z & BE-Z 1494 922 2564 3404 1615 862 1024

McN-JD, JD –BE& BE-Z 1511 761 865 2559 3426 1645 569 676

McN - Z & BE - Z 1045 1658 2878 3742 1785 486 577

McN - BE & BE - Z 1312 846 2689 3557 1687 340 403


Slide 17

Task 1: con’t– The following were better performing Alternatives• McNary-John Day 500-kV:

• Unloading the WOM/WOS paths more and increasing the TTC• Providing better voltage support• Increased capability brought by McNary – John Day project will not be fully utilized until WOJ limitation is addressed

• McNary-John day 500-kV/Big Eddy-Station Z 500-kV • Increases WOM/WOS TTC.• Increases WOJ TTC• Flow across North of John Day are better balanced which reduces reactive losses and improves voltage stability

performance.• Provides support to Portland load service area. Fits into the long-range development plan of the system

• McNary-John Day 500-kV and John Day-Big Eddy #3 500-kV• Increases WOM/WOS path TTC• Increases WOJ TTC• Improved voltage support

Study Results


Slide 18

Study Results

Task 2: Thermal screening of the better performing Alternatives

– WOM - McNary – John Day & Big Eddy – Station Z 500 kV performs better on all lines West of McNary.

– WOS - McNary – John Day & Big Eddy – Station Z 500 kV performs better on all lines West of Slatt.

– WOJ - McNary – John Day – Big Eddy 500 kV project performs better for unloading John Day -Big Eddy line 1&2 but McNary – John Day & Big Eddy – Station Z 500 kV performs better on all lines West of John Day.

– No new overload as result of these projects.


Slide 19

Task 3) Determine Total Transfer Capacity (TTC) across WOM Path

• All single line contingencies in the area and credible double line contingencies with applicable RAS in the area were run.

• The transfer capacity of WOM was calculated and tabulated. WOS and WOJ path limits for this particular generation level and pattern were also tabulated and summarized for comparison.

Study Results


Slide 20

Study Results

• Task 3) con’t• The existing WOM path is limited by the Ashe–Slatt / Coyote–

Slatt 500 kV double line outage with applicable RAS. The most limiting element is the McNary – Horse Heaven 230 kV line followed by McNary – Ross 345 kV line and McNary – Santiam 230 kV line.

The WOM capability based on continuous limit is 2870 MW.


Slide 21

WOM TTC

WOM CASE

WO

M

3500

MW

WO

M45

00

MW

LIMITING OUTAGE LIMITING ELEMENT

PROJECT Flowgate TTC Flow MW

Flow MW

Limit MW

WOM 2,870.0 3,499.0 4,504.0 4,863.0 B/F 5211 Low Mon - McNary TX1

Big Eddy - Harvalum 230 kV LINE

WOS 4,100.0 4,606.0 5,297.0 6,292.0 L_Slatt - Buckley 500 kV

Slatt - John Day 500 kV LINE

MCN-JD

WOJ 2,650.0 2,379.0 2,907.0 2,584.0 John Day -Big Eddy #1 John Day -Big Eddy #2





MCN-JD & BE-STNZ


WOM 2,870.0 3,523.0 4,525.0 4,964.0 L_McNary-John Day 500 kV

Coyote-McNary 500 kV



MCN-JD & JD-BE#3

WOJ 2,650.0 2,466.0 3,050.0 2,941.0 L/D Big Eddy 500/230 kV ckt 2

Big Eddy 500/230 ckt 5


Slide 22

Study Results

Task 3) Determine Total Transfer Capacity (TTC) across WOS Path

All single line contingencies in the area and credible double line contingencies with applicable RAS in the area were run.

The transfer capacity of WOS was calculated and tabulated. WOM and WOJ paths limits for this particular generation level and pattern were also tabulated and summarized for comparison.


Slide 23

Study Results

Task 3) con’t

The existing WOS path is limited by Ashe–Marion / Slatt – Buckley 500 kV double line outage with applicable RAS. The most limiting element is Slatt – John Day 500 kV line.

The WOS capability is 4100 MW.


Slide 24

WOS CASE

WO

S 50

00

MW

WO

S 55

00

MW



Flow MW

Limit MW

WOM 2,870.0 2,929.0 3,448.0 4,365.0 L/D Ashe - Slatt - Coyote




MCN-JD






MCN-JD & BE-STNZ




WOS 4,100.0 5,061.0 5,564.0 5,650.0 (RAS) L/D Ashe - Marion / Slatt - Buckley


MCN-JD & JD-BE#3



WOS TTC


Slide 25

Study Results

Task 3) Determine Total Transfer Capacity (TTC) across WOJ Path

All single line contingencies in the area and credible double line contingencies with applicable RAS in the area were run.

The transfer capacity of WOJ was calculated and tabulated. WOM and WOS paths limits for this particular generation level and pattern were also tabulated and summarized for comparison.


Slide 26

Study Results

Task 3) con’t

WOJ Path is limited by John Day - Big Eddy 500 kV #1 single line outage. (No Applicable RAS). The limiting element is John Day – Big Eddy 500 kV # 2 line.

The path is limited to 2440 MW.


Slide 27

WOJ TTC

WOJ CASE

WO

J 30

00

MW

WO

J 33

78

MW


PROJECT Flowgate TTC Flow

MW Flow MW

Limit MW



WOS 4,100.0 5,330.0 5,371.0 5,535.0 L/D Ashe - Marion/ Slatt - Buckley 500 kV


MCN-JD


WOM 2,870.0 3,545.0 3,578.0 3,828.0 BE - StationZ/ Big Eddy 500/230 kV TX #5


WOS 4,100.0 5,164.0 5,194.0 5,574.0 L_Slatt - Buckley 500 kV Slatt - John Day 500 kV LINE

MCN-JD & BE-STNZ



Slide 28

WOJ TTC

WOJ CASE

WO

J 30

00

MW

WO

J 33

78

MW



Flow MW

Limit MW

WOM 2,870.0 3,693.0 3,744.0 4,044.0 BFR McNary - John Day / John Day - Big Eddy #3


WOS 4,100.0 5,356.0 5,367.0 5,512.0 L/D Slatt-Buckley 500 kV


MCN-JD & JD-BE#3




Slide 29

McNary-John Day 500-kV & Big Eddy-Station Z• Increases WOM/WOS TTC.• Increases WOJ TTC• Flow across North of John Day is better balanced which reduces reactive

losses and improves voltage stability performance.• Provides support to Portland load service area. Fits into the long-range

development plan of the system Depending on where new generation is integrated the following

approximate TTC increase results. WOM 2870 MW up to 4500 MW WOS 4100 MW up to 5500 MW WOJ 2440 MW up to 3400 MW

Recommended Alternative


Slide 30

Complete Task 4 and 5.

Complete Regional Planning Project Review.

Submit Regional Planning Project Review Report to WECC PCC and TSS.

Next Steps

Documents

West of McNary Generation Integration Project