ML042960278

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Email from James C. Hsu to Harvey Leake, Subject: PV2 UFSAR Final 112603
ML042960278
Person / Time
Site: Palo Verde Arizona Public Service icon.png
Issue date: 12/04/2003
From: Hsu J
- No Known Affiliation
To: Leake H
- No Known Affiliation, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
FOIA/PA-2004-0307
Download: ML042960278 (15)
v • d • e


Text

. I ... /I Leak'e, Ha'rvey C(Z60326)

Fromn- HSU.JAMES:C(JIM ch@.et.com  ::::::::.::.................

Sent: Wednes'day Noveer, r 26t 2003 6 18 A  :.

To: LeakeHarvey(Z60326)... . . .. .

Subject:

i.V2 .UFSAN rFinal 1:12603'.pdf ' ': :::.' :": :"::::. .. . ......  ::':':::  ::':':::: ':: ::.

......... . ...... ~~~.... .............. .... ... .......

  • _ . A. ...... - ............. ... ...

Subec:

.... :26:::

S....P:FniI- .: .. ........

.PV2:UESAR~in. .. . :::. :::::.:. .. ... . :... .... .......... .::::..: :......

pdf(13;..:-. . . .:. .: ................

. :.:-:.:.. .. . . . . . . .. . . .11.2603 . . . :,................................................................

. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . ;. . . . . I . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . ..

- ..  ::::-: a ey.. ................ ......... .................. .
compleet'ed:Upda~ted  :-.::.:..-. :..:-:...-:..::: .::::: .:::'.-:: .:: ::::.: .::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::

sUFSAReport  ::::UFS  :::::.:The

~Please':fin'd :at'tach'ed:the :Fina&l:Safet.:dtyes:Rebr::+/-fl report::documients::the-.study.:to:-determine:-the-:simultaneou.s::Palo Verde: Transmiss ion :System::

.. ~~~.... . ..... .. ....liimits.The ... ..... .....

study.:i:ncludes th*P'aio:.e:d:

Unt:2:u'prat'e:wit

  • t-PVTSj safeoperati'ng i ):::::::.::::.: .......... :: ......

generation:increase::to: meet:.th e:requirements of.:th&e: S  ::::::::::::::::':::::S:::

A's-:note'd:'in:.the UFSAR,.th'e study' 'in'ia'tea d:'reliable tr ns~ ibs onsyste mwith th~e

... . .. .. ... .. ... .... .. . .....requi.ed'..:.PaioI.:Verd

,.- ..... .. . ... . . ... ....increase

.... ..... ... ... .. ..:The .......... ... .. .. ... .. . ... ... .. ...... .. ..generation re 1t.... s:.X.l.:.selectedN- . .. . .. .... ......

cofringencis:stiudied irtet.:WECC.:cri.teria.a nd :coiiforitea C6 -Nuclea.6Rgltr:Cmissjion::

Jamwes Hsu:-:::::::.::.:.::'::::,::: . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .:. . .-. . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .

<<PV2 UFSAR -Final':112603 pdf :  :::

Digitally signed by~f-eake, Harvey C(Z60326)

Date: 12/04/2003l Reason: . . .....

.... .... Received........... .. .. . .frorh¢P .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . .

Location: ........... . .. ..... PVNGS ....... . ... .. . .. . . .... . .. . . ... . . . ... . ... . . .. . . . ... ..

2003-04 Winter Palo Verde Unit 2 Uprating Net Generating Capacity of 1408MW For Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR)

By James C. Hsu Transmission System Planning Salt River Project November 2003 1

2003-04 Winter Palo Verde Unit 2 Uprating Generation Study For Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR)

Introduction This report documents a study to determine the simultaneous Palo Verde Transmission System (PVTS) safety operating limits due to an increase of Palo Verde generating Unit 2 generation capacity to 1408 MW in December, 2003 from the existing 1,287 MW.

The generation capacity and the scheduled output of these PVTS Interconnectors modeled in the study are shown in Table A.

Table A Power Plant Power Number Installed 2003-04 Winter Owners Plant Of Name Units Generating Generating Net Capacity Net Output ANPP Palo Verde Unit.l 1.287 MW 1,287 MW

_ Unit 2 1408 MW 1408MW Unit 3 1,287 MW' 1,287 MW Subtotal 3 3,982 MW 3,982 MW Duke Arlington- I 600MW _ 55 MIA, Pinnacle West Red Hawk 2 1,000 MW 998 MU' PG&E Haruahala 3 ,148 MW 1,144 MW Sernpra Mesquite . 2 1,250 MW 1,256 MW TECO/PANDA Gila Rive 4 2,080 MfW 2.080 MW Subtotal 12 6,078 MfW 6,036 MW Total 15 10,060 MW 10,018 MW In the study, the operating limit is defined as the maximum total net generation that can be safely injected by Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station and the PVTS Interconnectors, as determined by either the transmission thermal capability, the Palo Verde plant stability limit and/or a transient voltage dip. The total net generation is defined as the sum of the net generation at Palo Verde, Arlington, Red Hawk, Mesquite, Harquahala and Panda Gila River generation. For the thermal limits, the limiting elements are typically both the Hassayampa-North Gila 500 kV line series capacitors and the Kyrene 500 kV station breakers and disconnect switches associated with the Hassayampa-Jojoba-Kyrene 500 kV line. With respect to the transient voltage stability constraint, the limit is the first swing voltage dip at the Palo Verde 500 kV bus (30%) and/or the Devers 230 kV bus (25%) for a three-phase fault at Palo Verde with a Hassayampa-North Gila 500 kV line outage.

2

The major part of the study is focused on the Palo Verde stability limit based on a wide range of reactive boosting and bucking (up to 800 MVARs) conditions at the Palo Verde/Hassayampa 500 kV Common Bus. The voltage at the Palo Verde 500 kV bus was represented at 530 kV, which was based on realistic operating conditions. A sensitivity of 525 kV operating voltage was evaluated and the results were also documented in the reference report entitled "The 2003-04 Winter and 2004 Summer Palo Verde Transmission System Operating Study Report".

A remedial action scheme (RAS) was not included in the study since the unit tripping was not required for any critical outage conditions with all lines initially in-service when determining the maximum generation limits. The requirements for generation curtailment were also determined if the existing RAS is assumed not available or applicable.

II. Conclusions The Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) indicated a reliable transmission system with the Palo Verde total net generation increased to 3982 MW from 3,861 MW. The results showed that all selected N-1 contingencies met the WECC criteria and were in conformance with the requirements set forth by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

The frequency decay rate at the Palo Verde 500 kV bus for the most critical outage conditions study was in the vicinity of 1 hertz/second, which was within the criterion of 3 hertz/second.

A sensitivity of operating Palo Verde switchyard voltage at 525 kV showed no significant Palo Verde plant stability problem for any N-I outage with a 7% generation margin added to the Palo Verde units.

III. System Representation The study was performed using the recently approved WECC 2003-04 heavy winter (WECC 2003-04 NW 1A) base case. This case was further reviewed and updated by both the CAISO and WATS technical study group. Auxiliary loads for each Palo Verde unit were modeled at 65 MW and 48.8 MVARs each. The net generation for the Palo Verde Unit 1 and Unit 3 was 1,287 MW.

The Palo Verde Unit 2 will have a new net generating capacity of 1408 MW with a net increase of 121 MW after a steam turbine rotor replacement/power uprate in December 2003. The maximum boosting modeled for Palo Verde Unit 1 and Unit 3 was 600 MVARs. The maximum boosting modeled for Palo Verde Unit 2 was 510 MVARs.

3

The following are the series compensation in the major EHV transmission lines in the Arizona/New Mexico sub-region.

Transmission Line Compensation Level (%)

Four Comers-Moenkopi 500 kV 0.0 Four Corners-Cholla 345 kV 25 each Cholla-Pinnacle Peak345 kV 0.0 each San Juan-McKinley 345 kV 30 each Cholla-Saguaro 500 kV 36 Four Corners-West Mesa 345 kV 34 San Juan-BA 345 kV 34 Springerville-Greenlee 345 kV 37 Springerville-Luna 345 kV 26 Springerville-Vail 2 345 kV 38 Greenlee-Vail 345 kV 28 Navajo-Crystal-McCullough 500 kV 72 Navajo-Moenkopi 500 kV 70 Navajo-Westwing 500 kV 40 Moenkopi-Yavapai 500 kV 43 Yavapai-Westwing 500 kV 28 Moenkopi-Eldorado 500 kV 72 McCullough-Victorville 500 kV 35 each Eldorado-Lugo 500 kV 35 Mohave-Lugo 500 kV 26 Mead-Liberty 345 kV 70 Eldorado-McCullough 500 kV 0.0 Palo Verde-Devers 500 kV 50 Palo Verde-Miguel 500 kV 50 Perkins-Mead 500 kV 70 The following were the maximum generation levels represented in the study for the PVNGS and the PVTS Interconnectors:

Palo Verde (3 units) = 3982 MW Hassayarnpa (12 units)=6,036 MW, which consists of the following:

Arlington (1 unit) = 558 MW Red Hawk (2 units) = 998 MW Mesquite (2 units) =1,256 MW Harquahala (3 units) = 1,144 MW Gila River (4 units) = 2,080 MW 4

IV. Study Assumptions/Criteria and Methodology A. Palo Verde 500 kV Operating Voltage and Reactive Power (Var)

  • The voltage at the Palo Verde 500 kV bus was assumed at 530 kV, which represented the realistic operating conditions. A sensitivity of operating Palo Verde switchyard voltage at 525 kV was also evaluated.
  • The Palo Verde plant stability limit and transient voltage dip is a function of the Palo Verde 500 kV bus net reactive power flows (either generators boosting or bucking) conditions. These reactive power flows in MVARs were measured at the Palo Verde Hassayampa 500 kV Common Bus. A maximum absorption of 800 MVARs by the Palo Verde units and the generators of the PVTS interconnectors measured at the 500 Palo Verde/Hassayampa 500kV Common Bus was considered for the worst-case scenario.

B. New Generation Dispatching Assumptions

1. The first step, whenever possible, was for new generation to be dispatched to serve the Phoenix area loads, and to stress the Palo Verde Transmission System (PVTS) until either the thermal limit or the stability limit was reached for the worst-case scenario.
2. The second step was for the remaining new generation to be dispatched to California until either the thermal limit or the stability limit was reached.

C. Power Flow Study Criteria

1. All transmission facility loadings must be below normal continuous ratings.
2. For a single contingency, no transmission element will be loaded above its emergency rating.
3. Bus voltage deviation from the base case shall not exceed established operating limits (see the following monitored buses).

Monitored Bus Voltages:

The following bus voltages should be monitored for maximum allowable deviations as follows:

Pinnacle Peak 230 kV: 0.05 P.U. deviations from base case.

Kyrene 230 kV: 0.05 P.U. deviations from base case.

Devers 230 kV: 0.05 P.U. deviations from base case.

5

D. Transient Stability Study Criteria

1. All machines in the system shall maintain synchronism as demonstrated by their relative rotor angles.
2. System stability is evaluated based on the damping of the relative rotor angles and the damping of the voltage magnitude swings.
3. Transient voltage dips at Palo Verde 500 kV bus and other major critical buses shall not exceed 30% following major disturbances. For N-1 single contingency, the Devers 230 kV bus (the load bus) shall not exceed 25% voltage dip. However, some other bus voltage dips in excess of this criteria value can be considered acceptable if they are acceptable to the affected system or fall within the affected system's internal design criteria.
4. The frequency decay rate should be within 3 hertzlsecond at the Palo Verde 500 kV bus for any critical outages.

E. Study Methodology

1. The first step is to determine the maximum amount of generation that can be accommodated by the Palo Verde Transmission System thermal capability. The next step is to determine the stability limit with respect to the Palo Verde/Hassayampa 500 kV Common Bus reactive power flow restrictions. The requirements for generation curtailment and/or unit tripping shall be also developed if necessary.
2. The second step is to determine if the stability limits, other than those in step 1, exist based on the maximum generation schedules at the transmission thermal limits. If the stability limits exist, the requirements for either generation curtailment or unit tripping (RAS) shall be also determined if necessary.

The last step is to develop the appropriate operating nomogram limits according to the most critical limiting conditions with respect to the ranges of reactive power flows up to 800 MVARs bucking measured at the Palo Verde/Hassayampa 500 kV Common Bus.

VT. Discussion of Study Results A. Power Flow Limits With Maximum Generation On-Line:

(See 03W-PF-Table I for detailed power flow study results) 6

(1) N-0 Base Case Conditions The power flow base case was modeled with a total net generation of 10,018MW including Palo Verde net generation of 3982 MW and the PVTS Interconnectors' generation up to approximately 6,036 MW, which includes one Arlington unit (558 MW), two Red Hawk units (998 MW), two Mesquite units (1,256 MW), three Harquahala units (1,144 MW) and four Gila River units (2,080 MW). The thermal limits were at both the Palo Verde-North Gila line (100.1% of the line series

- capacitors continuous rating), and the Jojoba-Kyrene line (100.3% of the breakers and disconnect switches continuous rating) under the base case conditions.

(2) N-1 Single Contingency Outage Conditions No significant emergency overload or excessive voltage deviation problems for any critical N-1 contingency outages. The worst contingency outage was a loss of one Palo Verde-Rudd 500 kV line, which resulted in 99.1% loading of the emergency rating of the remaining Palo Verde-Westwing 500 kV line. No severe voltage deviations were detected for any critical N-1 contingency outages.

B. Transient Stability Limits With Maximum Generation On-Line:

Addressing the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) due to the PVTS configuration change is required in order to respond to the mandate of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). According to the criteria, it is necessary to add a 7% generation margin to the Palo Verde nuclear units to evaluate the PVTS stability performance. There are certain N-I contingencies that need to be evaluated based on the maximum Palo Verde generation output of 4,263 MW (adding a.7% generation to the Palo Verde units). These N-1 contingencies are listed below:

1. Loss of the most significant transmission line.
2. Loss of the largest single load in WECC (Edmonton pump load=840 MW).
3. Loss of the largest generating unit in WECC (Palo Verde unitI1576 MW).

(1) Palo Verde Switchyard Operating Voltage At 530 kV (See 03W-TS-Table 1 for detailed transient stability study results)

The significant results based on the Palo Verde switchyard operating voltage at 530 kV for the most critical and the second critical outages are summarized in Exhibit 1 thru Exhibit 2 belowv 7

Exhibit 1: Critical Outage of the Hassayampa -North Gila 500 kV line Palo Verde/Hassayampa Palo VerdelHassayampa Stability Transient Voltage Var Restriction Net Generation Results Dip VarBoosting-+330 MVARs Total-10,299 MW Stabt Ilmut PVNG=+173 MVAR PVNG=4,263 MW Stabiety Lat Palo Verde 500: 19.0%

HAA- +157 MVA.R HAA- 6,036 MW CuNo aulmt Devers 230:30.0%

Total= 9,256 MW Var Bucking=-800 MVA~s PVNG--4,263 MW Stability rnLiit PVa iNG-75MVARs HtAA-99 MW Reduced 1043MW Palo Verde 500: 2 1.0%

HAAP-25VAR of HAAGeneration Deers 230:31.0 %

Exhibit 2: Critical Outage of One Palo Verde -Westwing 500 kV line Palo Verdelflassayampa Palo Verdefllassayampa Stability Transient Voltage Var Restriction Net Generation Results Dip Var Boosting=+330 MVARs Total=10,299 MW Stabilityion Palo Verde 500: 20.0%ii PVNG-+173 WVAR PVNG-4,263 MW No Generation PaoVre50200 HAA- +157 MVAR HAA- 6,036 MW Curtailment Dryers 230:10.0%

Var Bucking-800 MVARs Total=9,256 MV Stability limit PVNG--725 MWAR PVNG-4,263 MW Reduced 1043NM Palo Verde 500: 23.0%

HAA-25 MVAR HAA= 4,993 MW orfUA Generation Drvyes 230: 19.0%

The highlights of these study results are described as follows:

1. The most severe N-1 contingency was a three-phase fault on the Hassayampa 500 kV bus and loss of the Hassayampa-North Gila 500 kV line. However, the results showed the system was stable.
  • No generation curtailment is required if the Palo VerdelHassayampa 500 kV common bus was boosting at a net of 330 MVAR. The lowest voltage dips were at 19.0% and 30.0% at the Palo Verde 500 kV and Devers 230 kV buses, respectively.
  • A curtailment of 1,043 MW of the PVTS generation is required if the Palo Verde/Hassayampa was bucking at a maximum net of 800 MVARs due to a severe voltage limit at the Devers 230 kV bus. . The lowest voltage dips were at 21.0% and 31.0% at the Palo Verde 500 kV and Devers 230 kV buses, respectively.
2. The next critical N-1 contingency was a three-phase fault on the Palo Verde 500 kV bus and loss of one Palo Verde-Westwing 500 kV line. This case resulted in a stable case. The lowest voltage dips were at 23.0% and 19.0%

8

at the Palo Verde and Devers 230 kV buses, respectively if the Palo Verde/Hassayampa was bucking at a maximum net of 800 MVARs.

3. For the worst case, a three-phase fault on the Hassayampa 500 kV bus and loss of the Hassayampa-Jojoba 500 kV line caused a minimum 1.05 Hz/sec rate of change of frequency decay on the Palo Verde 500 kV bus, which meets the Palo Verde criterion of
  • 3 Hz/sec.
4. All other N-1 contingencies including a loss of the largest load (Edmonton pump load of 840MW) or a loss of the largest generating unit (Palo Verde Unit 2 of 1,576MW) in WECC showed stable and well damped and the resultant transient voltage dips were within the WECC voltage dip criteria (2) A Sensitivity of Operating Palo Verde Switchyard Voltage at 525 kV (See 03W-TS-Table 2 for detailed transient stability study results)

The significant results based on the Palo Verde switchyard operating voltage at 525 kV for the most critical outages are summarized in Exhibit 3 thru Exhibit 4 below-Exhibit 3: Critical Outage of the Hassayampa -North Gila 500 kV line (WithO % Palo Verde Generation Margin)

Palo Verde/Hassayampa Palo Verdefflassayampa Stability Transient Voltage Var Restriction Net Generation Results Dip Var Boosting-=1495 MVARs Total-10,018 MW Voltage L.tit PVNG-+1072 MVAR PVNG=3,982 MW Palo Verdz 500: 16.0%

HAA- +423 MVAR HAA= 6,D36 MW No Generation D0:26.0%

Curtailmenlt Devers 23260 Va Bckng-80 VAsTotal" 8,244 NMI Stability Limit PVNG---694 0MVAR PVNG-3,982 SVW Reduced 1474M' Palo Verde 500: 19.0%

HAA=-1 06VAR HAA -4,562 M of HAAGeneration Devers 230: 25.0 %

9

Exhibit 4: Critical Outage of the HassayamIpa -North Gila 500 kV line (With A 7% Palo Verde Generation Margin)

Palo Verde/Hlassayampa Palo Verde/Hassayampa Stability Transient Voltage Var Restriction Net Generation Results Dip Var Boosting=+1498 MVARs Total-10,299 MW PVNG=+904 MVAR PVNG-4,263 MW Voltage Linmt Palo Verde 500: 19.0%

HAA- +594 MVAR HAA- 6,036 bI*V No Generation Devers 230:30.0 Curtilment D~ 3:00 Total= 8.825 M{W Var Bucking-800 MVARs PVNG=4,263 MW Stability Limit PVNG---694 WVAR PVAN-4,562 NM Reduced 1474MW Palo Verd 500: 21.0%

HAA=-106VAR HAA - 4,562 of HAAGeneraton Devers 230:31.0 %

HAA=-O6V .

The significant results of this sensitivity are described as follows:

1. The most severe N-1 contingency was a three-phase fault on the Hassayampa 500 kV bus and loss of the Hassayampa-North Gila 500 kV line. However, the results showed the system was stable.
  • No generation curtailment is required if the Palo VerdefHassayampa 500 kV common bus was boosting at a net of 1,495 MVAR. The lowest voltage dips were at 16 % and 26% at the Palo Verde 500 kV and Devers 230 kV buses, respectively.
  • A curtailment of 1,474 MW of the PVTS generation is required if the Palo VerdelHassayampa was bucking at a maximum net of 800 MVARs due to a severe voltage limit at the Devers 230 kV bus. . The lowest voltage dips were at 19% and 25% at the Palo Verde 500 kV and Devers 230 kV buses, respectively.
2. No significant Palo Verde plant stability problem for this critical outage when adding a 7% generation margin to the Palo Verde units.
  • More severe voltage depressions in the southern California area were indicated as'expected. However, no critical voltage dips were experienced in the Palo VerdefHassayampa area.
  • Palo Verde generator rotor angle swings were well damped and indicated that the Palo Verde plant would maintain in synchronism.

10

VI. Summary Tables 03W-PF-Table 1: Power flow Results Summary 03W-TS-Table 1: Transient Stability Results Summary (PV Operating Voltage At 530 kV) 03W-TS-Table 2: Transient Stability Sensitivity Results (PV Operating Voltage At 525 kV)

VII. Reference 2003-04 Winter and 2004 Summer Palo Verde Transmission System Operating Study Report 11

a 03W-PF-TABLE I UPDATED NRC FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT (UFSAR) 2003-04 WINTER PALO VERDE TRANSMISSION SYSTEM POWER FLOW LIMITS WITH A TOTAL NET OF10,018 MW OF PALO VERDE AND HASSAYAMPA GENERATION AT THE THERMAL LIMITS (PALO VERDE=3982MW, ARLINGTON=558MW, REDHAWK=998MW, MESQUITE=1256MW, HARQUAHALA=1144MW, GILA RIVER=2080MW)

CASE CASE DESCRIPTION - PV/IIAA GENERATION PVTS LINE LOADINGS VOLTAGE DEATIONS MAJOR PATH COMMENTS NO. PV NEW TOTAL PV tV. PV. J0JO8A PV.

  • PV PV. PV. . DEVER LUGO PPK KYR EOR SCIT MAJOR LIMmNG ELEMENT GEN GEN GEN EAST WWGUt WWGt2 KYR RUDD WEST DV N.G.  :: 230KV 230KV 230KV 230KV FLOW FLOW CONTINUOUSRATING(INAMP) (NET) (NET) (NET) 3000 3000 2000 3000. 1900 400 5% 5% 5Y. 5%

2003104 EMERGENCYRATING(NAMP):::: 3000 3000 2580 3000 2430 1890 MAX MAX MAX MAX WINTER-1 PV NORMAL BOOSTING ' ' :_'_' (PU) (PU)l fPU) (P)

BASE CASE (IN M 3982 e038 1001 . 6723 1714 1714 11637 1458 2878 1809 1209 1.00 0.99 1.03 1.02 6202 13454

.::O¢CONT1NUOS SRATNG ..
      • .:::2.40Y.:~:
::::6.::40X:,
.:.. :.... 2 ...7 ... 227 ... 21.1 i2/* :51sa i

51 .

  • ~::*:*:

.2 8 .

o4~

~J 9 9

0
::1b 40Z¢>2::  :< ..

N L M ALT I

............. G.L.UT ......... . .. .. .. ...

tLOADINtOIN

.N. AMtP)

Yi'::

.:. ASOfDE(I AM)  : ::' 'L ... 24 ' 24d 2rs M1a . M. a 1 f 3

.:::  ::Y .'.Of.EMERGENCY R . . . . . .. .. .... .... .. .. .. . ..30% 74.30% 84:40..

.. .4... :.::.:.::.:. :..:  ::::: : ::  : : :.

%~... ..... .-. ..

O...:::or:.244:*:> 1899:-:  :-A912: :14s3: 100 0.99 1.03 1.02 NOPROBLEM EMERGENCYrRATINt:.:::.::' ':.:.:.::::::::::::::.:::::::::::99.10%,::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...%.::53 30Y.: :78.7%  : eiE0Y ALT:4  :*:

ALOEROERUO oU:*::K: ..:*::::::.*::*:....* ............... 45...:232 *..1872--"1489- 1.00 0.99 1.03 1.02 NO'PROBLEM:'

A... .. . .. . .. . B~ . .. u .:::*:***::.*:::::~:.. . .. .. . ......... -: 1945. .. ....  :....... 1..48

.... .dE.... E ME.. ...... ....... ........ .......... ......... ..... 9 ... . ... .................  :'.177: ' '1414:5 1.00 0.99 1.03 1.02 ALT 6 .... o eA . ......

R N ... .... ........... ........... ........... 28  :.:.2..  :........... 2200.

.%OFEEROENYRAT1O::*:... .. ..... ..... 1..........::**~ 730 NO:PROBL.EM:.

7 50%Y:88.40%

Shleel I

03W-TS.TABLE I UPDATED NRC FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT (UFSAR)

TRANSIENT STAB LiTY

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS 2003-04WINTER PALOVERDE OPERATING CONDmONS WMI THEUPRATE OFTHE PALOVERDE UNIT 2 (ADDED 7%PALO VERDE GENERATION MARGIN WITI PALO VERDE NET GENERATION OF 4263 MW)

PRE-DSTLRBANCE POWERFLOW PYNG Py GEN HAA PVIHAA PV PV PV EOR SCT POWERFLOW RESMLTS CONDmIONS CASE DESCRPTFON ON" MARGIN GEN TOT EAST WEST TRf flOw TOTAL moo0 1V220 COMtENTS PF.SUMIOAM.... I'VfliAA350 YROOSIING9+l30MVAR 4261 7h 6036 10291 6941 2110 M831 6212 13453 1.08 0.00 ADDED2%PVGENMARGIN ADDEDT%;.:.: f PVNG 17 MVARRtHAA* 1S

" TIVA n)

PV GENFMAR.

............... TRANSHENTSTAiiUTY:.: ,  ::::::::: 0- -AANSOKV PV44AA RAS GeN TRANSIEHTSTABLITYRESULTS CASE NO. CASE 0IESClPTICIN NETVAR NETVAR VAR SCIIFME TRIP SPECIFICINITS PVOSO PVSOO OV2O0 COMMENTS IWS.c li. OPY ....... ...... ...... 0V232 ST*WiNTER-IAMiR-1 3?IIPVVO.T.AA.N.431AOUT...  :*:*:* 173 157 43 NO NONE 41T78.70 STABEe S n 1S7 43 NCO NONE 0.1l *04 STAEI.f 17.0% 6.8%

6Ti-WSN7R-6AMR-S PITHAAFLTS AAIOTAOUT 07 01 45 NO NONE 1.02 0.7 *.11 STABLE

: :1:0.8% 02.0%

STW,81ER41kA-t4 irH IJORARLT,. leA KYRoJiT 073 ttiT 43 NO NOSE 0.94 0.92 STABLE 12 .% .10%

ST WINTIER . .IiAMR0 '..... . ..

iPHPVFtT ....

OSEPV .WESTINGOtiT

-: . :: . : .. .. - .-71 173 137 43 No NONE 0.09 o 0.04 STABLE

. . . .. hO.soONEAtO,6fifi 00.0% 10.0%

. . . . . . . . . . . . . OUNT

... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .::IT

. . . . ST.WERieA: lOTI 42 NO NONE NW20.1 NW9 WRSTABLE STiiiNTERO4AMRS iPiiFVFLT. PV. OtUT1712 13T 42 NOi NONE 0.00 0.00 STABElt ST.WSTER~0;AMiRT t~.IrJWikEkN.k:.: LOSS OPA LRGEST WASOINWEC

. 3:IiVjO~oaA.08PVBVCJ84.000A. 172 42..

83 7%T 157 4003 43 26 52 N120N1O4400.00 NO NONE 18 85 NSP 1.01 NSP SABLEOGEAR VERYSTAeitE

. .. :. P NG.................................

stA..u................ H PVS.O.. rvHAA AAN0KV RAS GEt .. TROsENTsTABILIYRsEBTs CASFNO. cASoEsel4PrnoN NETVAR NETVAR VAR SChEM~E TRIP SPEQIFKCtlOS PVSOO eDv22 COWENTS N t ODTAGES $ ^ PVOO 0V20 ST.WNTER OI9MR t3Ii PIT G!LA011s 77lAAN .25 2t NO NONE 0.05 9.70 STAtLE
.  :;: :. ..: . . . . . . . . ... ... 21.0% 31.0%

ST-W0iTER-418MR 2 2111 tPVFI.T,1VOVR't OUT .22 23 NO NONE 8.00 0.00 STABLE

. :::. :. :...............::  ::  ::  :  : . It.o% 6.%

5T-V NTt~IO R~t btiMR HA H f .

n,A.OJSA oIJ ........................................

t 5 @ .20 25 NO NONE .3 0. 0.00 STAhLE 21.0% 12.0%

ST.Wl4TER.IBOAR4 3IJOJORLT, JOoA4IR JT 775 *25 25 NO NONE 0.03 012 STAB3LE 12.8% 0.0%

si wooTce~t.01lR SJP9 iri tiV.. t1  :::::

ONE PV WVtiTNI1 (it

.775 .25 25 NO NONE 0.03 *.n2 STABLE 72.6% 10.0%

5T wW4TER-41110RR SlrHPVY lT, PV.RLIDDOUT ., n S .25 25 NO NONE 0.04 22.0%

1.0%

-STABLE ST WINTER OIRMR. 7toss OP ALARIGFT LOAD IH W!~ 0n .20 20 No NONE NSr NSP VERY STABLE (EDMONTON PUMPNG LOAD-140FM ST WINTER01IRMR- t oss OP ONErALo V!RUnI ~T 3s .25 25 NO NONE NSP NSr VWRYSTAKLE

  • * -** ' gPVIustn GROS GEO.107tMwz

03W-TS-TABLE 2 UPDATED NRC FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT (UFSAR)

TRANSIENT STABIUTY

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS SENSITIVITY OF OPERATING PALO VERDE SWITCHYARD VOLTAGE AT 525 kV (PALO VERDE=3982MW, ARUNGTON =558MW, REDHAWK =998MW, MESQUITE=1256MW, HARQUAHALA =1144MW, GILA RIVER=2080MW)

PVINAA OPERATING VOLTAGE 525 KV PVNG NEW PVMAA PV PV PV EOR SCIT PRE-DISTURBANCEECAS CASE DESCRIPTION GEN GEN TOT EAST WEST TRF FLOW TOTAL Psroo DV230 COMMENTS PV/ttAA VAR RESTRICTION AT THE KNEE POINT PF-43/04-WINTER-01ER. ... YAAKNEEPOINT( 41415MVAR)-; . ..- 39: u 6036 10011 6696 2171 9567 616i 1231) 1.049 1.00 DETERMINEDVARRESTRICTION

. (NNG o10t2NMVAR HAAi423MVrRJv::::-:>:.>:: FOR DEVERS VOLTAGE UMIT P oKoNR.OtEMR2: .:: 4263 6036 1020) 6941 2S90 0339 6212 13453 1.046 0.9) ADDED 7% PV GENERATION FOR jADDED i* rv MiRGINj:-:-.-.-*.-.-. C(PVNG9,04MVARa NAAi+sMVARI.:.:. *. PV PLANT STABILTY TEST PF01F..*. PVrHAA MV &A .0MVAR.....-B 3992 4562 3244 5315 2545 3160 6357 13562 1.05 1.00 REDUCEO HASSAYAMPAGEN.EY

-- PVGMVRHA10MA 1474MW FOR DEVERS V OLTAGE UM IT P0iwt 0FRPiAN EUKGooV j- 4263 4562 3325 5524 2)09 3423 62335 12502 1.c5 1.00 ADDED7%PVGENERATIoNFOR (AOOEDT%PFV MARGINI.:- :.-:-.:

  • lPVNoG-e.4PVARb HAA-.1ooMVAR )::...:::-.-K .:- .*. :.:.: PV PLANT STABLTnY TEST PVrHIA PV4HAA RAS GEN STAILTnY CASE N.1 CONTINGENCY NET VAR VAR SCHEME tRIP SPECIFICUNnTS PVS00 DY210 COMMENTS P'IONAAVAR AT TH4EM I U U KN
  • TS03/04 VAR PVtHAA WINTER-0IFR AT THE-- KNEE

.... I .......................

RESTRICTtON POINT

$.- NUA FL P-N YA..S : A..I

::: A....0 ::.......

K . ................

LN U 3 002 4120 NO4 NONE CURT ILE NASSAYAN621.0

! °%6

.. G EN.0

.0

< > EDft a>$ M C NYS~

D A SPA L BVPL

.TS403t04WINTER.01ER.1 .-.- .--. PHAAFL?. NAA-N.GILA 50KV LNEOUT.+ -14)3 40 NO NONE 14744WMW.R190%ERS 159% -<~PpA~~iL SIMI * * * *****

VOLTAGE -*

  • iTS-Y03/ W INTER - 1IEMR I F1 ...........

AA FLT, HAA *

  • N**.3P NGILA 500KV LINEO UIT 1....

4993 . 262 NO ......

NONE ..

oBR .

.£. f j6<

< V PLANT sTABLE

.ADDED 7 PV GE PLNT STRP NMARGINFOR ABtn Y------.-

(TS D3/04MWINTER-GIFMR~t -0 .3PH HAANGILASOKVINE)aUT AAFLT .00 14a ; NO NONE 03*40 PV PLANT STABLE

. . . . . : c. ,. . i. . . . . . , '... . , . . . . . . . .0.i.:  :'

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML042960278&oldid=2678780"