Source: http://technodocbox.com/Network_Security/73323957-Prc-coordination-of-protection-systems-for-performance-during-faults.html
Timestamp: 2018-10-18 02:48:38
Document Index: 434409699

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'arts 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'ART 1']

PRC Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults - PDF
Download "PRC Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults"
1 PRC Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults A. Introduction 1. Title: Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults 2. Number: PRC Purpose: To maintain the coordination of Protection Systems installed to detect and isolate Faults on Bulk Electric System (BES) Elements, such that those Protection Systems operate in the intended sequence during Faults. 4. Applicability: 4.1. Functional Entities: Transmission Owner Generator Owner Distribution Provider (that owns Protection Systems identified in the Facilities section 4.2 below) 4.2. Facilities: Protection Systems installed to detect and isolate Faults on BES Elements. 5. Effective Date: See the Implementation Plan for PRC-027-1, Project System Protection Coordination. B. Requirements and Measures R1. Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider shall establish a process for developing new and revised Protection System settings for BES Elements, such that the Protection Systems operate in the intended sequence during Faults. The process shall include: [Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Long-term Planning] 1.1. A review and update of short-circuit model data for the BES Elements under study A review of the developed Protection System settings For Protection System settings applied on BES Elements that electrically join Facilities owned by separate functional entities (Transmission Owners, Generator Owners, and Distribution Providers), provisions to: Provide the proposed Protection System settings to the owner(s) of the electrically joined Facilities Respond to any owner(s) that provided its proposed Protection System settings pursuant to Requirement R1, Part by identifying any coordination issue(s) or affirming that no coordination issue(s) were identified. Page 1 of 17
2 PRC Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults Verify that identified coordination issue(s) associated with the proposed Protection System settings for the associated BES Elements are addressed prior to implementation Communicate with the other owner(s) of the electrically joined Facilities regarding revised Protection System settings resulting from unforeseen circumstances that arise during implementation or commissioning, Misoperation investigations, maintenance activities, or emergency replacements required as a result of Protection System component failure. M1. Acceptable evidence may include, but is not limited to, dated electronic or hard copy documentation to demonstrate that the responsible entity established a process to develop settings for its Protection Systems, in accordance with Requirement R1. R2. Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider shall, for each BES Element with Protection System functions identified in Attachment A: [Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Long-term Planning] Option 1: Perform a Protection System Coordination Study in a time interval not to exceed six-calendar years; or Option 2: Compare present Fault current values to an established Fault current baseline and perform a Protection System Coordination Study when the comparison identifies a 15 percent or greater deviation in Fault current values (either three phase or phase to ground) at a bus to which the BES Element is connected, all in a time interval not to exceed six-calendar years; 1 or, Option 3: Use a combination of the above. M2. Acceptable evidence may include, but is not limited to, dated electronic or hard copy documentation to demonstrate that the responsible entity performed Protection System Coordination Study(ies) and/or Fault current comparisons in accordance with Requirement R2. R3. Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider shall utilize its process established in Requirement R1 to develop new and revised Protection System settings for BES Elements. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning] 1 The initial Fault current baseline(s) shall be established by the effective date of this Reliability Standard and updated each time a Protection System Coordination Study is performed. The Fault current baseline for BES generating resources may be established at the generator, the generator step-up (GSU) transformer(s), or at the common point of connection at 100 kv or above. For dispersed power producing resources, the Fault current baseline may also be established at the BES aggregation point (total capacity greater than 75 MVA). If an initial baseline was not established by the effective date of this Reliability Standard because of the previous use of an alternate option or the installation of a new BES Element, the entity may establish the baseline by performing a Protection System Coordination Study. Page 2 of 17
3 PRC Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults M3. Acceptable evidence may include, but is not limited to, dated electronic or hard copy documentation to demonstrate that the responsible entity utilized its settings development process established in Requirement R1, as specified in Requirement R3. C. Compliance 1. Compliance Monitoring Process 1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority: As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, Compliance Enforcement Authority means NERC or the Regional Entity in their respective roles of monitoring and enforcing compliance with the NERC Reliability Standards Evidence Retention: The following evidence retention period(s) identify the period of time an entity is required to retain specific evidence to demonstrate compliance. For instances where the evidence retention period specified below is shorter than the time since the last audit, the Compliance Enforcement Authority may ask an entity to provide other evidence to show that it was compliant for the full time period since the last audit. The applicable entity shall keep data or evidence to show compliance, as identified below, unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain specific evidence for a longer period of time as part of an investigation. The Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider shall each keep data or evidence to show compliance with Requirements R1, R2, and R3, and Measures M1, M2, and M3 since the last audit, unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain specific evidence for a longer period of time as part of an investigation. If a Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, or Distribution Provider is found non-compliant, it shall keep information related to the non-compliance until mitigation is completed and approved, or for the time specified above, whichever is longer. The Compliance Enforcement Authority shall keep the last audit records and all requested and submitted subsequent audit records Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program refers to the identification of the processes that will be used to evaluate data or information for the purpose of assessing performance or outcomes with the associated Reliability Standard. Page 3 of 17
4 PRC Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults Violation Severity Levels R # Violation Severity Levels Lower VSL Moderate VSL High VSL Severe VSL R1. N/A The responsible entity established a process in accordance with Requirement R1, but failed to include Requirement R1, Part 1.1 or Part 1.2. The responsible entity established a process in accordance with Requirement R1, but failed to include Requirement R1, Part 1.1 and Part 1.2. The responsible entity established a process in accordance with Requirement R1, but failed to include Requirement R1, Part 1.3. OR The responsible entity failed to establish any process in accordance with Requirement R1. R2. The responsible entity performed a Protection System Coordination Study for each BES Element, in accordance with Requirement R2, Option 1, Option 2, or Option 3 but was late by less than or equal to 30 calendar days. The responsible entity performed a Protection System Coordination Study for each BES Element, in accordance with Requirement R2, Option 1, Option 2, or Option 3, but was late by more than 30 calendar days but less than or equal to 60 calendar days. The responsible entity performed a Protection System Coordination Study for each BES Element, in accordance with Requirement R2, Option 1, Option 2, or Option 3, but was late by more than 60 calendar days but less than or equal to 90 calendar days. The responsible entity performed a Protection System Coordination Study for each BES Element, in accordance with Requirement R2, Option 1, Option 2, or Option 3, but was late by more than 90 calendar days. OR The responsible entity failed to perform Option 1, Option Page 4 of 17
5 PRC Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults R3. N/A N/A N/A 2, or Option 3, in accordance with Requirement R2. The responsible entity failed to utilize the process established in accordance with Requirement R1. D. Regional Variances None. E. Associated Documents NERC System Protection and Control Subcommittee Power Plant and Transmission System Protection Coordination. NERC System Protection and Control Task Force, December 7, 2006, Assessment of Standard PRC System Protection Coordination. NERC System Protection and Control Task Force, September 2006, The Complexity of Protecting Three-Terminal Transmission Lines. Version History Version Date Action Change Tracking 1 November 5, 2015 Adopted by NERC Board of Trustees New standard developed under Project Page 5 of 17
6 PRC Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults Attachment A The following Protection System functions 2 are applicable to Requirement R2 if: (1) available Fault current levels are used to develop the settings for those Protection System functions; and (2) those Protection System functions require coordination with other Protection Systems. 21 Distance if: infeed is used in determining reach (phase and ground distance), or zero-sequence mutual coupling is used in determining reach (ground distance). 50 Instantaneous overcurrent 51 AC inverse time overcurrent 67 AC directional overcurrent if used in a non-communication-aided protection scheme Notes: 1. The above Protection System functions utilize current in their measurement to initiate tripping of circuit breakers. Changes in the magnitude of available Fault current can impact the coordination of these functions. 2. See the PRC Supplemental Material section for additional information. 2 ANSI/IEEE Standard C37.2 Standard for Electrical Power System Device Function Numbers, Acronyms, and Contact Designations. Page 6 of 17
7 Purpose The Purpose states: To maintain the coordination of Protection Systems installed to detect and isolate Faults on Bulk Electric System (BES) Elements, such that those Protection Systems operate in the intended sequence during Faults. Coordinated Protection Systems enhance reliability by isolating faulted equipment, reducing the risk of BES instability or Cascading, and leaving the remainder of the BES operational and more capable of withstanding the next Contingency. When Faults occur, properly coordinated Protection Systems minimize the number of BES Elements that are removed from service and protect equipment from damage. This standard requires that entities establish and implement a process to coordinate their Protection Systems to operate in the intended sequence during Faults. Applicability Transmission Owners, Generator Owners, and Distribution Providers are included in the Applicability of PRC because they may own Protection Systems that are installed for the purpose of detecting Faults on the Bulk Electric System (BES). It is only those Protection Systems that are under the purview of this standard. Transmission Owners are included in the Applicability of PRC because they own the largest number of Protection Systems installed for the purpose of detecting Faults on the BES. Generator Owners have Protection Systems installed for the purpose of detecting Faults on the BES. It is important that those Protection Systems are coordinated with Protection Systems owned by Transmission Owners to ensure that generation Facilities do not become disconnected from the BES unnecessarily. Functions such as impedance reaches, overcurrent pickups, and time delays need to be evaluated for coordination. A Distribution Provider may provide an electrical interconnection and path to the BES for generators that will contribute current to Faults that occur on the BES. If the Distribution Provider owns Protection Systems that operate for those Faults, it is important that those Protection Systems are coordinated with other Protection Systems that can be impacted by the current contribution to the Fault of Distribution Provider. After the Protection Systems of Distribution Providers and Generator Owners are shown to be coordinated with other Protection Systems on the BES, there will be little future impact on the entities unless there are significant changes at or near the bus that interconnects with the Transmission Owner. The Transmission Owner, which is typically the entity maintaining the system model for Fault studies, will provide the Fault current data upon request by the Distribution Provider or Generator Owner. The Distribution Provider and Generator Owner will determine whether a change in Fault current from the baseline has occurred such that a review of coordination is necessary. Requirement R1 The requirement states: Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider shall establish a process for developing new and revised Protection System settings for BES Elements, such that the Protection Systems operate in the intended sequence during Faults. Page 7 of 17
8 The reliability objective of this requirement is to have applicable entities establish a process to develop settings for coordinating their Protection Systems, such that they operate in the intended sequence during Faults. The parts that are included as elements of the process ensure the development of accurate settings, as well as providing internal and external checks to minimize the possibility of errors that could be introduced in the development of settings. This standard references various publications that discuss protective relaying theory and application. The description of coordination of protection is from the pending revision of IEEE Standard C (Reaffirmed: 2004), Guide for Protective Relay Applications to Transmission Lines, which reads: The process of choosing current or voltage settings, or time delay characteristics of protective relays such that their operation occurs in a specified sequence so that interruption to customers is minimized and least number of power system elements are isolated following a system fault. Entities may have differing technical criteria for the development of Protection System settings based on their own philosophies. These philosophies can vary based on system topology, protection technology utilized, as well as historical knowledge; as such, a single definition or criterion for Protection System coordination is not practical. The coordination of some Protection Systems may seem unnecessary, such as for a line that is protected solely by dual current differential relays. However, backup Protection Systems that are enabled to operate based on current or apparent impedance with some definite or inverse time delay must be coordinated with other Protection Systems of the BES Element such that tripping does not unnecessarily occur for Faults outside of the differential zone. Part 1.1 A review and update of short-circuit model data for the BES Elements under study. The short-circuit study provides the necessary Fault currents used by protection engineers to develop Protection System settings for Transmission Owners, Generator Owners, and Distribution Providers. Generator Owners and Distribution Providers may not have or maintain short-circuit models; consequently, these entities would obtain the short-circuit model data from the Transmission Planners, Planning Coordinators, or Transmission Owners. Including a review and, if necessary, an update of short-circuit study information is necessary to ensure that information accurately reflects the physical power system that will form the basis of the Protection System Coordination Study and development of Protection System relay settings. The results of a short-circuit study are only as accurate as the information that its calculations are based on. A short-circuit study is an analysis of an electrical network that determines the magnitude of the currents flowing in the network during an electrical Fault. Because the results of shortcircuit studies are used as the basis for protective device coordination studies, the short-circuit model should accurately reflect the physical power system. Reviews could include: 1. A review of applicable BES line, transformer, and generator impedances and Fault currents. Page 8 of 17
9 2. A review of the network model to confirm the network in the study accurately reflects the configuration of the actual System, or how the System will be configured when the proposed relay settings are installed. 3. A review, where applicable, of interconnected Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider information. Part 1.2 A review of the developed Protection System settings. A review of the Protection System settings prior to implementation reduces the possibility of introducing human error. A review is any systematic process of verifying the developed settings meet the technical criteria of the entity. Examples of reviews include peer reviews, automated checking programs, and entity-developed review procedures. Part 1.3 For Protection System settings applied on BES Elements that electrically join Facilities owned by separate functional entities (Transmission Owners, Generator Owners, and Distribution Providers), provisions to: Requirement R1, Part 1.3 addresses the coordination of Protection System settings applied on BES Elements that electrically join Facilities owned by separate functional entities. Communication among these entities is essential so potential Protection System coordination issues can be identified and addressed prior to implementation of any proposed Protection System changes. Part Provide the proposed Protection System settings to the owners of the electrically joined Facilities. Requirement R1, Part requires the entity to include in its process a provision to provide proposed Protection System settings to other entities. This communication ensures that the other entities have the necessary information to review the settings and determine if there are any Protection System coordination issues. Part Respond to any owner(s) that provided its proposed Protection System settings pursuant to Requirement R1, Part by identifying any coordination issue(s) or affirming that no coordination issue(s) were identified. Requirement R1, Part requires the entity receiving proposed Protection System settings to include in its process a provision to respond to the entity that initiated the proposed changes. This ensures that the proposed settings are reviewed and that the initiating entity receives a response indicating Protection System coordination issues were identified, or affirmation that no issues were identified. Part Verify that identified coordination issue(s) associated with the proposed Protection System settings for the associated BES Elements are addressed prior to implementation. Requirement R1, Part requires the entity to include in their process a provision to verify that any identified coordination issue(s) associated with the proposed Protection System settings are addressed prior to implementation. This ensures that any potential impact to BES reliability is minimized. Page 9 of 17
10 The exclusion in PRC (ii), Requirement R3, R3.1 for dispersed power producing resources applies only to interconnections between different functional entities. As such, the exclusion only maps to Requirement R1, Part 1.3 in PRC Due to the design of dispersed generation sites, the Protection Systems applied on the individual dispersed generation resources are not electrically joined Facilities owned by separate functional entities as specified in Requirement R1, Part 1.3 nor are they connected by BES Elements. Therefore Requirement R1, Part 1.3 does not apply to the Protection Systems applied on the individual dispersed generation resources. Requirement R1, Part 1.3 applies only to the Protection Systems applied on the BES Elements that electrically join Facilities owned by separate functional entities. Note: There could be instances where coordination issues are identified and the entities agree not to mitigate all of the issues based on engineering judgment. It is also recognized that coordination issues identified during a project may not be immediately resolved if the resolution involves additional system modifications not identified in the initial project scope. Further, there could be situations where protection philosophies differ between entities, but the entities can agree that these differences do not create coordination issues. Part Communicate with the other owner(s) of the electrically joined Facilities regarding revised Protection System settings resulting from unforeseen circumstances that arise during implementation or commissioning, Misoperation investigations, maintenance activities, or emergency replacements required as a result of Protection System component failure. Requirement R1, Part requires the entity to communicate revisions to Protection System settings that occur due to unforeseen circumstances and differ from those developed during the planning stages of projects. Requirement R2 This requirement states: Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider shall, for each BES Element with Protection System functions identified in Attachment A: Option 1: Perform a Protection System Coordination Study in a time interval not to exceed six-calendar years; or Option 2: Compare present Fault current values to an established Fault current baseline and perform a Protection System Coordination Study when the comparison identifies a 15 percent or greater deviation in Fault current values (either three phase or phase to ground) at a bus to which the BES Element is connected, all in a time interval not to exceed six-calendar years; 3 or, 3 The initial Fault current baseline(s) shall be established by the effective date of this Reliability Standard and updated each time a Protection System Coordination Study is performed. The Fault current baseline for BES generating resources may be established at the generator, the generator step-up (GSU) transformer(s), or at the common point of connection at 100 kv or above. For dispersed power producing resources, the Fault current baseline may also be established at the BES aggregation point (total capacity greater than 75 MVA). If an initial baseline was not established by the effective date of this Reliability Standard because of the previous use of an alternate option or the installation of a new BES Element, the entity may establish the baseline by performing a Protection System Coordination Study. Page 10 of 17
11 Option 3: Use a combination of the above. Over time, incremental changes in Fault current can accumulate enough to impact the coordination of Protection System functions affected by Fault current. To minimize this risk, Requirement R2 requires responsible entities to periodically (1) perform Protection System Coordination Studies and/or (2) review available Fault currents for those Protection System functions listed in Attachment A. Two triggers were established for initiating a review of existing Protection System settings to allow for industry flexibility. In the first option, an entity may choose a time-based methodology to review Protection System settings, thus eliminating the necessity of establishing a Fault current baseline and periodically performing Fault current comparisons. This option provides the entity the flexibility to choose an interval of up to six-calendar years for performing the Protection System Coordination Studies for those Protection System functions in Attachment A. The six-calendaryear time interval was selected as a balance between the manpower required to perform the studies and the potential reliability impacts created by incremental changes of Fault current over time. The second option allows the entity to periodically check for a 15 percent or greater deviation in Fault current (either three-phase or phase-to-ground) from an established Fault current baseline for Protection Systems at each bus to which a BES Element is connected. Fault current baseline values can be obtained from the short-circuit studies performed by the Transmission Planners, Planning Coordinators, or Transmission Owners. This option allows the entity to choose an interval of up to six-calendar years to perform the Fault current comparisons and Protection System Coordination Studies. The six-calendar-year time interval was selected as a balance between the manpower required to perform the studies and the potential reliability impacts created by incremental changes of Fault current over time. The accumulation of these incremental changes could affect the performance of Protection Systems during Fault conditions. A maximum Fault current deviation of 15 percent (when compared to the entity-established baseline) was established based on generally-accepted margins for setting Protection Systems in which incremental Fault current changes would not interfere with coordination. The 15 percent maximum deviation provides an entity with latitude to choose a Fault current threshold that best matches its protection philosophy, or other business considerations. The Fault current based option requires an entity to first establish a Fault current baseline to be used as a point of reference for future Fault current studies. The Fault current values used in the percent change calculation, whether three-phase or phase-toground Fault currents, are typically determined with all generation in service and all transmission BES Elements in their normal operating state. As described in the footnote for Requirement R2, Option 2, an entity that elects to initially use Option 2 must establish its baseline prior to the effective date of the standard. If an initial baseline was not established by the effective date of this Reliability Standard because of the previous use of an alternate option or the installation of a new BES Element, the entity may establish the baseline upon performing a Protection System Coordination Study. The Fault current baseline values can be updated or established when a Protection System Coordination Study is performed. The baseline values at each bus to which a BES Element is connected are updated whenever a new Protection System Coordination Study is performed for the subject Page 11 of 17
12 Protection System. The footnote also states that the Fault current baselines may be established for BES generating resources at the generator, the BES aggregation point for dispersed power producing resources, or at the common point of connection at 100 kv or above. Example: Prior to the effective date of PRC-027-1, an entity intending to use Option 2 of Requirement R2 establishes an initial baseline; e.g., 10,000 amps at the bus to which the BES Element under study is connected. A short-circuit review performed on March 1, 2024, for example, identifies that the Fault current has increased to 11,250 amps (12.5 percent deviation); consequently, no Protection System Coordination Study is required since the increase is below the maximum 15 percent deviation. The baseline value for the next comparison (to be performed no later than December 31, 2030) remains at 10,000 amps because no study was required as a result of the initial comparison. During the next six-year interval, Fault current comparison identifies that the Fault current has increased to 11,500 (15 percent deviation); therefore, a Protection System Coordination Study is required (and must also be completed no later than December 31, 2030), and a new baseline of 11,500 amps would be established. Note: In the first review described above, if the entity decides to perform a Protection System Coordination Study at the 12.5 percent deviation and the results of the study indicate that the settings still meet the setting criteria of the entity, then no settings changes are required and the baseline Fault current(s) would be updated. As a third option, an entity has the flexibility to apply a combination of the two methodologies. For example, an entity may choose the periodic Protection System review (Option 1) and review its Facilities operated above 300 kv on a six-calendar-year interval, while choosing to use the Fault current comparison (Option 2) for its Facilities operated below 300 kv. The Protection System functions listed in Attachment A utilize AC current in their measurement to initiate tripping of circuit breakers and the coordination of these functions is susceptible to changes in the magnitude of available short-circuit Fault current. These functions are included in Attachment A based on meeting the following criteria: (1) available Fault current levels are used to develop settings, and (2) the functions require coordination with other Protection Systems. Examples of functions not included in Attachment A because they do not meet both of the criteria are differential relays and Fault detectors. The numerical identifiers in Attachment A represent general device functions according to ANSI/IEEE Standard C37.2 Standard for Electrical Power System Device Function Numbers, Acronyms, and Contact Designations. The following provide additional information regarding the Protection System functions in Attachment A. A 51 AC inverse time overcurrent relay connected to a CT on the neutral of a generator step-up transformer, referred to as 51N AC Inverse Time Earth Overcurrent Relay (Neutral CT Method) in ANSI/IEEE Standard C37.2, would be included in a Protection System Coordination Study. Also applicable, are 51 AC Inverse time overcurrent relays connected to CTs on the phases of an autotransformer for through-fault protection. Overcurrent functions used in conjunction with other functions are to be reviewed as well. An example is a definite-time overcurrent function, which is a 50 Instantaneous overcurrent function used in conjunction with a 62 Time-delay function. Page 12 of 17
13 If the functions listed in Attachment A are used in conjunction with other functions, they would be included in a Protection System Coordination Study provided they require coordination with other Protection Systems. An example of this is a time-delayed 21 Distance function, which is a 21 Distance function with a 62 Time-delay function. Another example would be a definite-time overcurrent function, which is a 50 Instantaneous overcurrent function with a 62 Time-delay function. A 50 Instantaneous overcurrent function used for supervising a 21 Distance function would not be included in a Protection System Coordination Study as it does not require coordination with other Protection Systems. Reviewing 21 Distance functions is limited to those applied for phase and ground distance where infeed is used in determining the phase or ground distance setting when zero-sequence mutual coupling is used in determining the setting. Where infeed is not used in determining the setting, 21 Distance functions would not be included in a Protection System Coordination Study, as the reach is not susceptible to changes in the magnitude of available short-circuit Fault current. Where infeed is used in determining the reach, coordination can be affected by changes in the magnitude of available short-circuit Fault current. Two examples where infeed may be used in determining the reach, are protection for a transmission line with a long tap and a three-terminal transmission line. Ground distance functions are influenced by zero-sequence mutual coupling. The ground distance measurement can appear to be greater than or less than the true distance to a Fault when there is zero-sequence mutual coupling. The influence of zero-sequence mutual coupling changes with the magnitude of available short-circuit current. Therefore, 21 Distance functions would be included in a Protection System Coordination Study, when zero-sequence mutual coupling is used in determining the setting. The 67 AC directional overcurrent function utilized in Protection Systems for Transmission lines can be instantaneous overcurrent, inverse time overcurrent, or both instantaneous overcurrent and inverse time overcurrent. For example, in a communication-aided directional comparison blocking (DCB) scheme, the instantaneous overcurrent function is set very sensitive. When a single line-to-ground Fault occurs on a Transmission line, the Fault is detected by a number of Protection Systems for other Transmission lines. Signals from communication equipment are transmitted and received to block the other Protection Systems for the non-faulted Transmission lines from operating, thereby providing the coordination. A 67 AC directional overcurrent function used in a permissive overreaching transfer trip scheme (POTT) relies on a signal from the remote end to operate and, therefore, does not require coordination with other Protection Systems. Instantaneous overcurrent and/or inverse time overcurrent for a 67 AC directional overcurrent function are utilized in a non-communication-aided Protection System for Transmission lines. As communication is not used to prevent operation for Faults outside a Protection System s zone of protection, coordination is necessary with other Protection Systems for buses, transformers, and other Transmission lines. The instantaneous overcurrent function should be set to not overreach the end of the Transmission line. The inverse time overcurrent function should be set to coordinate with the inverse time overcurrent function of other Protection Systems. Changes in the magnitude of available Fault current can affect the coordination. Page 13 of 17
14 Requirement R3 The requirement states: Each Transmission Owner, Generator Owner, and Distribution Provider shall utilize its process established in Requirement R1 to develop new and revised Protection System settings for BES Elements. The reliability objective of this requirement is for applicable entities to utilize the process established in Requirement R1. Utilizing each of the elements of the process ensures a consistent approach to the development of accurate Protection System settings, decreases the possibility of introducing errors, and increases the likelihood of maintaining a coordinated Protection System. Page 14 of 17
15 Rationale During development of this standard, text boxes were embedded within the standard to explain the rationale for various parts of the standard. Upon BOT adoption, the text from the rationale text boxes will be moved to this section. Rationale for Requirement R1: Coordinated Protection Systems enhance reliability by isolating faulted equipment, thus reducing the risk of BES instability or Cascading, and leaving the remainder of the BES operational and more capable of withstanding the next Contingency. When Faults occur, properly coordinated Protection Systems minimize the number of BES Elements that are removed from service and protect equipment from damage. The stated purpose of this standard is: To maintain the coordination of Protection Systems installed to detect and isolate Faults on Bulk Electric System (BES) Elements, such that those Protection Systems operate in the intended sequence during Faults. Requirement R1 captures this intent by requiring responsible entities establish a process that, when followed, allows for their Protection Systems to operate in the intended sequence during Faults. Requirement R1, Parts 1.1 through 1.3 are key elements to the process for developing Protection System settings. Part 1.1 Reviewing and updating the short-circuit model data used to develop new or revised Protection System settings helps to assure that settings are developed using accurate, up-todate information. Generator Owners and Distribution Providers may not have or maintain short-circuit models; consequently, these entities would obtain the short-circuit model data from the Transmission Planners, Planning Coordinators, or Transmission Owners. Part 1.2 A review of the developed Protection System settings reduces the likelihood of introducing human error and verifies that the settings produced meet the technical criteria of the entity. Peer reviews, automated checking programs, and entity-developed review procedures are all examples of reviews. Part 1.3 The coordination of Protection Systems associated with BES Elements that electrically join Facilities owned by separate functional entities (Transmission Owners, Generator Owners, and Distribution Providers) is essential to the reliability of the BES. Communication and review of proposed settings among these entities are necessary to identify potential coordination issues and address the issues prior to implementation of any proposed Protection System changes. The exclusion in PRC (ii), Requirement R3, R3.1 for dispersed power producing resources applies only to interconnections between different functional entities. As such, the exclusion only maps to Requirement R1, Part 1.3 in PRC Due to the design of dispersed generation sites, the Protection Systems applied on the individual dispersed generation resources are not electrically joined Facilities owned by separate functional entities as specified in Requirement R1, Part 1.3 nor are they connected by BES Elements. Therefore Requirement R1, Part 1.3 does not apply to the Protection Systems applied on the individual dispersed generation resources. Requirement R1, Part 1.3 applies only to the Protection Systems applied on the BES Elements that electrically join Facilities owned by separate functional entities. Unforeseen circumstances could require immediate changes to Protection System settings. Requirement R1, Part requires owners to include provisions to communicate those Page 15 of 17
16 unplanned settings changes after-the-fact to the other owner(s) of the electrically joined Facilities. Note: In cases where a single protective relaying group performs coordination work for separate functional entities within an organization, the communication aspects of Requirement R1, Part 1.3 can be demonstrated by internal documentation. Rationale for Requirement R2: Over time, incremental changes in Fault current can accumulate enough to impact the coordination of Protection System functions affected by Fault current. To minimize this risk, Requirement R2 requires Transmission Owners, Generator Owners, and Distribution Providers to periodically (1) perform Protection System Coordination Studies and/or (2) review available Fault currents for those Protection System functions listed in Attachment A. The numerical identifiers in Attachment A represent general protective device functions per ANSI/IEEE Standard C37.2 Standard for Electrical Power System Device Function Numbers, Acronyms, and Contact Designations. Requirement R2 provides entities with options to assess the state of their Protection System coordination. Option 1 is a time-based methodology. The entity may choose to perform, at least once every six-calendar years, a Protection System Coordination Study for each of its Protection Systems identified in Attachment A. The six-calendar-year time interval was selected as a balance between the resources required to perform the studies and the potential reliability impacts created by incremental changes of Fault current over time. Option 2 is a Fault current-based methodology. If Option 2 is initially selected, Fault current baseline(s) must be established prior to the effective date of this Reliability Standard. A baseline may be established when a new BES Element is installed or after a Protection System Coordination Study has been performed. The baseline(s) will be used as control point(s) for future Fault current comparisons. The Fault current baseline values can be obtained from the short-circuit studies performed by the Transmission Planners, Planning Coordinators, or Transmission Owners. In a time interval not to exceed six-calendar years following the effective date of this standard, an entity must perform a Fault current comparison. If the comparison identifies a deviation less than 15 percent, no further action is required for that six-year interval; however, if the comparison identifies a 15 percent or greater deviation in Fault current values (either three-phase or phase-to-ground) at each bus to which the BES Element is connected, the entity must also perform a Protection System Coordination Study during the same six-year interval. The baseline Fault current value(s) will be re-established whenever a new Protection System Coordination Study is performed. Fault current changes on the System not directly associated with BES modifications are usually small and occur gradually over time. The accumulation of these incremental changes could affect the performance of Protection System functions (identified in Attachment A of this standard) during Fault conditions. A Fault current deviation threshold of 15 percent or greater (as compared to the established baseline) and a maximum time interval of six calendar years were chosen for these evaluations. These parameters provide an entity with latitude to choose a Fault current threshold and time interval that best match its protection philosophy, Protection System maintenance schedule, or other Page 16 of 17
17 business considerations, without creating risk to reliability (See the Supplemental Material section for more detailed discussion). The footnote in Option 2 describes how an entity may change from a time-based option to a Fault current-based option for existing BES Elements as well as establishing baselines for new BES Elements by performing Protection System Coordination Studies. The footnote also states that Fault current baselines for BES generating resources may be established at the generator, the generator step-up (GSU) transformer(s), or at the common point of connection at 100 kv or above. For dispersed power producing resources, the Fault current baseline may also be established at the BES aggregation point (total capacity greater than 75 MVA). Option 3 provides the entity the choice of using both the time-based and Fault current-based methodologies. For example, the entity may choose to utilize the time-based methodology for Protection Systems at more critical Facilities and use the Fault current-based methodology for Protection Systems at other Facilities. Rationale for Requirement R3: Utilizing the processes established in Requirement R1 to develop new and revised Protection System settings provides a consistent approach to the development of Protection System settings and will minimize the potential for errors. Page 17 of 17
5. Effective Date: The first day of the first calendar quarter after applicable regulatory approval.
Introduction 1. Title: IROL and SOL Mitigation in the ERCOT Region 2. Number: IRO-006-TRE-1 3. Purpose: To provide and execute transmission loading relief procedures that can be used to mitigate SOL or
Standard COM Communication and Coordination
A. Introduction 1. Title: Communication and Coordination 2. Number: COM-002-3 3. Purpose: To ensure Emergency communications between operating personnel are effective. 4. Applicability 4.1. Reliability
CIP Cyber Security Physical Security of BES Cyber Systems
A. Introduction 1. Title: Cyber Security Physical Security of BES Cyber Systems 2. Number: CIP-006-5 3. Purpose: To manage physical access to BES Cyber Systems by specifying a physical security plan in
CIP Cyber Security Information Protection
A. Introduction 1. Title: Cyber Security Information Protection 2. Number: CIP-011-2 3. Purpose: To prevent unauthorized access to BES Cyber System Information by specifying information protection requirements
A. Introduction 1. Title: Cyber Security Information Protection 2. Number: CIP 011 1 3. Purpose: To prevent unauthorized access to BES Cyber System Information by specifying information protection requirements
Consideration of Comments on FRCC Standard for Regional Generator Performance During Frequency and Voltage Excursions (FRCC-S-PRC-024) Version 2
1. In response to comments received, the Drafting Team has modified the Applicability section and now includes applicability of the standard to sites > 75 MVA (gross aggregate nameplate). Do you agree
CIP Cyber Security Electronic Security Perimeter(s)
A. Introduction 1. Title: Cyber Security Physical Security of BES Cyber Systems 2. Number: CIP-006-6 3. Purpose: To manage physical access to Bulk Electric System (BES) Cyber Systems by specifying a physical
Standard CIP 004 3a Cyber Security Personnel and Training
A. Introduction 1. Title: Cyber Security Personnel & Training 2. Number: CIP-004-3a 3. Purpose: Standard CIP-004-3 requires that personnel having authorized cyber or authorized unescorted physical access
Standard CIP Cyber Security Electronic Security Perimeter(s)
A. Introduction 1. Title: Cyber Security Electronic Security Perimeter(s) 2. Number: CIP-005-1 3. Purpose: Standard CIP-005 requires the identification and protection of the Electronic Security Perimeter(s)
CIP Cyber Security Systems Security Management
A. Introduction 1. Title: Cyber Security System Security Management 2. Number: CIP-007-6 3. Purpose: To manage system security by specifying select technical, operational, and procedural requirements in
CIP Cyber Security Security Management Controls
A. Introduction 1. Title: Cyber Security Security Management Controls 2. Number: CIP-003-6 3. Purpose: To specify consistent and sustainable security management controls that establish responsibility and
Impacts and Implementation: NERC Reliability Standards, Compliance Initiatives, and Regulatory Activities
Impacts and Implementation: NERC Reliability Standards, Compliance Initiatives, and Regulatory Activities NRECA TechAdvantage March 2014 Patti Metro Manager, Transmission & Reliability Standards NRECA
EPRI Protection Settings Evaluation Tool (PSET)
EPRI Protection Settings Evaluation Tool (PSET) Mahendra Patel & Sean McGuinness Grid Operations & Planning EPRI Protection Settings Evaluation Tool (PSET) Software Intended use: Automatically assess the
ASPEN Software - Introduction
ASPEN Software - Introduction ASPEN is a very user-friendly software package that is capable of doing load-flow and shortcircuit studies, as well as relay application and coordination. Its simple graphical
Common Departures Interconnecting Facilities Requirements
Welcome to our e-rew Express. In our last issue, we discussed the common departures on metering installation requirements. This time, we would like to discuss the common departures on the customer low
Guidelines for Submitting NERC Reliability Standards Required Documents to the SPP Reliability Coordinator and the SPP Balancing Authority Version 1
Guidelines for Submitting NERC Reliability Standards Required Documents to the SPP Reliability Coordinator and the SPP Balancing Authority Version 1 Revision History Version Effective Date Summary of Revisions
CIP V5 Updates Midwest Energy Association Electrical Operations Conference
CIP V5 Updates Midwest Energy Association Electrical Operations Conference May 2015 Bob Yates, CISSP, MBA Principal Technical Auditor ReliabilityFirst Corporation Agenda Cyber Security Standards Version
Cyber Security Standards Drafting Team Update
Cyber Security Standards Drafting Team Update Michael Assante, VP & Chief Security Officer North American Electric Reliability Corp. February 3, 2008 Overview About NERC Project Background Proposed Modifications
SENTRON. Protective devices Selectivity for 3VA molded case circuit breakers. Introduction. Selectivity - terms and definitions
Introduction 1 Selectivity - terms and definitions 2 SENTRON Methods of implementing selectivity using circuit breakers 3 Protective devices Selectivity for 3VA molded case circuit breakers Configuration
MISO Transmission Planning BPM 020 Updates February 16, 2016
MISO Transmission Planning BPM 020 Updates February 16, 2016 Purpose Present final updated BPM 20 language Objectives for Today Purpose and Objectives Briefly discuss posted stakeholder comments and MISO
2014 Annual Compliance Assessment
2014 Annual Compliance Assessment 3/5/2015 Nevada Irrigation District Report on Compliance with the NERC and WECC Reliability Standards NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT 2014 ANNUAL REPORT ON COMPLIANCE Introduction
Utility Implements Communications- Assisted Special Protection and Control Schemes for Distribution Substations
Utility Implements Communications- Assisted Special Protection and Control Schemes for Distribution Substations Michael. Duff City of College Station Payal Gupta, Dharmendra Prajapati, and Alex Langseth
AUTOMATED TESTING OF BUSBAR DIFFERENTIAL PROTECTION USING A SYSTEM-BASED APPROACH. Christopher Pritchard, Florian Fink
AUTOMATED TESTING OF BUSBAR DIFFERENTIAL PROTECTION USING A SYSTEM-BASED APPROACH Christopher Pritchard, Florian Fink OMICRON electronics GmbH, Klaus, Austria; Christopher.Pritchard@omicronenergy.com ABSTRACT
NPCC Regional Reliability Reference Directory # 4 Bulk Power System Protection Criteria
NPCC Regional Reliability Reference Directory # 4 Task Force on System Protection Revision Review Record: December 1 st, 2009 September 30 th, 2015 Adopted by the Members of the Northeast Power Coordinating
Protection Redundancy Main I and Main II Security and Reliability
Protection Redundancy Main I and Main II Security and Reliability Roy Moxley, Siemens Abstract - Protection history and practice has long had two relays applied for protection of one line or piece of primary
NERC CIP Information Protection
NERC CIP Information Protection Eric Ruskamp Manager, Regulatory Compliance September 13, 2017 1 Agenda NERC History NERC Compliance Overview of Reliability Standards Compliance with Reliability Standards
Memorandum. Created by: EML CAISO LST UPDT: 4/21/ Blue Ravine Road Folsom, California Page 1 (916)
California Independent System Operator Memorandum To: ISO Operations (MRTU) Committee From: Eric Leuze, Director of Compliance cc: ISO Board of Governors, ISO Officers Date: April 29, 2005 Re: Deferral
We will discuss two types of loss-of-potential (LOP) logic during this presentation:
1 We will discuss two types of loss-of-potential (LOP) logic during this presentation: Traditional LOP, which uses traditional voltage and current elements to detect an LOP condition. Advanced LOP, which
Achilles System Certification (ASC) from GE Digital
Achilles System Certification (ASC) from GE Digital Frequently Asked Questions GE Digital Achilles System Certification FAQ Sheet 1 Safeguard your devices and meet industry benchmarks for industrial cyber
Eaton s Innovative Technology Surge Suppression Guideform Specification High Exposure DIVISION 16 SECTION 16289
PART 1 - GENERAL DIVISION 16 SECTION 16289 TRANSIENT VOLTAGE SURGE SUPPRESSION (TVSS) 1 RELATED DOCUMENTS General: Drawings and general provisions of the Contract, including General and Supplementary Conditions
PUBLIC SERVICE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. Technical Requirements for Non Utility Generation Interconnecting to the PSNH Distribution System
PUBLIC SERVICE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Technical Requirements for Non Utility Generation Interconnecting to the PSNH Distribution System September 2013 1.0 Purpose of this document Public Service of New Hampshire
NERC CIP Compliance Matrix of RUGGEDCOM CROSSBOW Operating System
Application description 04/2017 NERC CIP Compliance Matrix of RUGGEDCOM RUGGEDCOM https://support.industry.siemens.com/cs/ww/en/view/109747098 Warranty and Liability Warranty and Liability Note The Application
NZQF NQ Ref 1195 Version 3 Page 1 of 11 National Certificate in Electrical Engineering (Electrician for Registration) (Level 4) Level 4 Credits 249 This qualification has been revised. The last date to
Internal Controls Evaluation (ICE) Processing
Internal Controls Evaluation (ICE) September 28, 2017 RAM-102 3000 Bayport Drive, Suite 600 Tampa, Florida 33607-8411 (813) 289-5644 - Phone (813) 289-5646 Fax www.frcc.com Table of Contents Page 3 of
Provider Monitoring Process This statewide provider monitoring process is applicable for all providers including direct vendors, Agency with Choice (AWC) Financial Management Services (FMS) providers and
An Entity Using a Service Organization 355 AU-C Section 402 Audit Considerations Relating to an Entity Using a Service Organization Source: SAS No. 122; SAS No. 128; SAS No. 130. Effective for audits of
Automated real-time simulator testing of protection relays
Automated real-time simulator testing of protection relays by B S Rigby, School of Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering, University of KwaZulu-Natal This paper describes the results of a project
PRIVATE MOBILE CONNECTION (formerly COMMERCIAL CONNECTIVITY SERVICES (CCS)) PERMANENT VIRTUAL CIRCUIT ATTACHMENT
PRIVATE MOBILE CONNECTION (formerly COMMERCIAL CONNECTIVITY SERVICES (CCS)) PERMANENT VIRTUAL CIRCUIT ATTACHMENT Last Revised 12/20/17 1. Private Mobile Connection Permanent Virtual Circuit. Pursuant to
Technical Requirements for High-voltage DC Power Feeding Interfaces of ICT equipment
Technical Requirements for High-voltage DC Power Feeding Interfaces of ICT equipment TR No. 176002 1.1.EDITION April 1st, 2015 Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation Introduction This document describes
PRIVATE MOBILE CONNECTION (formerly COMMERCIAL CONNECTIVITY SERVICE (CCS)) FRAME RELAY ATTACHMENT
PRIVATE MOBILE CONNECTION (formerly COMMERCIAL CONNECTIVITY SERVICE (CCS)) FRAME RELAY ATTACHMENT Last Revised 2/1/2017 1. Private Mobile Connection Frame Relay. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of
Multifunction Relays and Protection Logic Processors in Distribution Substation Applications
Multifunction s and Protection Logic Processors in Distribution Substation Applications David Sánchez Escobedo, Eliseo Alcázar Ramírez, Oscar A. Márquez Villanueva, and Héctor J. Altuve Ferrer Schweitzer
Cyber Security Supply Chain Risk Management JoAnn Murphy, SDT Vice Chair, PJM Interconnection May 31, 2017 FERC Order No. 829 [the Commission directs] that NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA,
PRIVATE MOBILE CONNECTION (formerly COMMERCIAL CONNECTIVITY SERVICES (CCS)) -- IP ENABLED PVC ATTACHMENT Last Revised 2/1/2017
PRIVATE MOBILE CONNECTION (formerly COMMERCIAL CONNECTIVITY SERVICES (CCS)) -- IP ENABLED PVC ATTACHMENT Last Revised 2/1/2017 1. Private Mobile Connection IP Enabled PVC. Pursuant to the terms and conditions
Oracle PaaS and IaaS Public Cloud Services P I L L A R D O C U M E N T M A R C H
Oracle PaaS and IaaS Public Cloud Services P I L L A R D O C U M E N T M A R C H 2 0 1 8 Table of Contents Scope 1 Oracle Cloud Objective Policy: Target Service Uptime 1 Category 1 1 Category 2 2 Category
Industrial Control Panels Tested product combinations to meet NEC Article 409 and UL 508A Standard
Industrial Control Panels Tested product combinations to meet NEC Article 409 and UL 508A Standard Short circuit current ratings and the new NEC Article 409 The 2005 Edition of the National Electrical
CABLETROLL 3 CABLETROLL CABLETROLL CABLETROLL CABLETROLL LED-2 5 CABLETROLL CABLETROLL REMOTE INDICATION 7
CABLETROLL 3 CABLETROLL 2310 4 CABLETROLL 2320 4 CABLETROLL 2330 5 CABLETROLL 2350 5 LED-2 5 CABLETROLL 2410 6 CABLETROLL 2440 6 REMOTE INDICATION 7 The CableTroll indicators are fault current detectors
PG&E 500 kv Protection Standard Design and Development
PG&E 500 kv Protection Standard Design and Development Davis Erwin, Rafael Pineda, and Monica Anderson Pacific Gas and Electric Company Eric Udren Quanta Technology, LLC Jordan Bell and Neal Jones Schweitzer
Application of overvoltage protection to the Peruvian Power System
Application of overvoltage protection to the Peruvian Power System Presented to Western Protective Relay Conference 2008 Spokane, Washington, USA Prepared by Yofre Jacome, and Francisco Torres, COES SINAC
PRS Phase II Misoperations White Paper
PRS Phase II Misoperations White Paper Prepared by: MRO Protective Relay Subcommittee June 26, 2017 MIDWEST RELIABILITY ORGANIZATION 380 St. Peter Street, Ste.800 St. Paul, MN 55102 P: 651.855.1760 F:
INSTRUCTION MANUAL FOR OVERCURRENT RELAY BE1-50/51B Publication: 9 2520 00 991 Revision: M 11/2000 BE1-50/51B - Introduction INTRODUCTION This manual provides information concerning the operation and installation
2008 Many Changes in IEEE C37.2. IEEE Standard Electrical Power System Device Function Numbers, Acronyms and Contact Designations
2008 Many Changes in IEEE C37.2 IEEE Standard Electrical Power System Device Function Numbers, Acronyms and Contact Designations Major revisions first since 1995 Substantial additions 1 - New ten more