. 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: .... S P:FniI- :26 ::: : :. .. : .... .. :.:.. ... :.:.:.:. ....:. .:..:.:.: ..:: .:. ..:..::.: . ..: .....::: ..: .:::::: ..............

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

.11.2603 pdf(13;..:-. ................ :,................................................................:- ::::-: a ey.. .. ................ ......... .................. .

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

~Please':fin'd :at'tach'ed:the :compleet'ed :Upda~ted :Fina&l:Safet.:dtyes:Rebr::±fl sUFSAReport ::::UFS :::::.:The

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

report::documients::the-.study.:to:-determine:-the-:simultaneou.s::Palo Verde: Transmiss ion :System::

*t-PVT Sj safe''operati'ng liimits.''The study.:i:ncludes th*P'aio:.e:d: Unt:2:u'prat'e:wit ':. :

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

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

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

i ):::::::.::::.: .......... ......:: :*::::::.: ..... ....:.:::.:: .. .:::.:' ........... ......':::.: ::...........

........ ..................... ...... .. . . . . . .. . ............................. . ....... . . .. .. .. . . . . . . .............. .. . . .. . . . . .. .. .. ................... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ....................... . ... . ... . ....

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

::«PV2 UFSAR -Final':112603 pdf : ::'':

,.- ,...-........... ... . .. . . ... .. ... .... .. . .... ..... .... .. . ... . . ... .... ..... ... ... .. .. .......... .... ... .. .. ... .. . ... ... .. ...... .. . . .. . .. .... ..... .... ... ..... ............

Digitally signed by~f-eake, Harvey C(Z60326)Date: 12/04/2003lReason: Received frorh¢PLocation: 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 TransmissionSystem (PVTS) safety operating limits due to an increase of Palo Verde generating Unit 2generation 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 inthe study are shown in Table A.

Table A

Power Plant Power Number Installed 2003-04 WinterOwners Plant Of

Name Units Generating GeneratingNet 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 besafely injected by Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station and the PVTS Interconnectors, asdetermined by either the transmission thermal capability, the Palo Verde plant stability limitand/or a transient voltage dip. The total net generation is defined as the sum of the netgeneration at Palo Verde, Arlington, Red Hawk, Mesquite, Harquahala and Panda Gila Rivergeneration. 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 anddisconnect switches associated with the Hassayampa-Jojoba-Kyrene 500 kV line. Withrespect to the transient voltage stability constraint, the limit is the first swing voltage dip atthe Palo Verde 500 kV bus (30%) and/or the Devers 230 kV bus (25%) for a three-phasefault 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 widerange of reactive boosting and bucking (up to 800 MVARs) conditions at the PaloVerde/Hassayampa 500 kV Common Bus. The voltage at the Palo Verde 500 kV bus wasrepresented at 530 kV, which was based on realistic operating conditions. A sensitivity of525 kV operating voltage was evaluated and the results were also documented in thereference report entitled "The 2003-04 Winter and 2004 Summer Palo Verde TransmissionSystem Operating Study Report".

A remedial action scheme (RAS) was not included in the study since the unit tripping wasnot required for any critical outage conditions with all lines initially in-service whendetermining the maximum generation limits. The requirements for generation curtailmentwere 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 systemwith the Palo Verde total net generation increased to 3982 MW from 3,861 MW. The resultsshowed that all selected N-1 contingencies met the WECC criteria and were in conformancewith 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 conditionsstudy 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 PaloVerde plant stability problem for any N-I outage with a 7% generation margin added to the PaloVerde units.

III. System Representation

The study was performed using the recently approved WECC 2003-04 heavy winter (WECC2003-04 NW 1A) base case. This case was further reviewed and updated by both the CAISO andWATS technical study group. Auxiliary loads for each Palo Verde unit were modeled at 65 MWand 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 increaseof 121 MW after a steam turbine rotor replacement/power uprate in December 2003. Themaximum boosting modeled for Palo Verde Unit 1 and Unit 3 was 600 MVARs. The maximumboosting modeled for Palo Verde Unit 2 was 510 MVARs.

3

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

Transmission Line Compensation Level (%)

Four Comers-Moenkopi 500 kV 0.0Four Corners-Cholla 345 kV 25 eachCholla-Pinnacle Peak345 kV 0.0 eachSan Juan-McKinley 345 kV 30 eachCholla-Saguaro 500 kV 36Four Corners-West Mesa 345 kV 34San Juan-BA 345 kV 34Springerville-Greenlee 345 kV 37Springerville-Luna 345 kV 26Springerville-Vail 2 345 kV 38Greenlee-Vail 345 kV 28Navajo-Crystal-McCullough 500 kV 72Navajo-Moenkopi 500 kV 70Navajo-Westwing 500 kV 40Moenkopi-Yavapai 500 kV 43Yavapai-Westwing 500 kV 28Moenkopi-Eldorado 500 kV 72McCullough-Victorville 500 kV 35 eachEldorado-Lugo 500 kV 35Mohave-Lugo 500 kV 26Mead-Liberty 345 kV 70Eldorado-McCullough 500 kV 0.0Palo Verde-Devers 500 kV 50Palo Verde-Miguel 500 kV 50Perkins-Mead 500 kV 70

The following were the maximum generation levels represented in the study for the PVNGSand the PVTS Interconnectors:

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

Arlington (1 unit) = 558 MWRed Hawk (2 units) = 998 MWMesquite (2 units) =1,256 MWHarquahala (3 units) = 1,144 MWGila 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 representedthe realistic operating conditions. A sensitivity of operating Palo Verde switchyardvoltage at 525 kV was also evaluated.

* The Palo Verde plant stability limit and transient voltage dip is a function of the PaloVerde 500 kV bus net reactive power flows (either generators boosting or bucking)conditions. These reactive power flows in MVARs were measured at the Palo VerdeHassayampa 500 kV Common Bus. A maximum absorption of 800 MVARs by thePalo Verde units and the generators of the PVTS interconnectors measured at the 500Palo Verde/Hassayampa 500kV Common Bus was considered for the worst-casescenario.

B. New Generation Dispatching Assumptions

1. The first step, whenever possible, was for new generation to be dispatched to servethe 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-casescenario.

2. The second step was for the remaining new generation to be dispatched to Californiauntil 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 itsemergency rating.

3. Bus voltage deviation from the base case shall not exceed established operatinglimits (see the following monitored buses).

Monitored Bus Voltages:The following bus voltages should be monitored for maximum allowable deviationsas 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 theirrelative rotor angles.

2. System stability is evaluated based on the damping of the relative rotor angles andthe damping of the voltage magnitude swings.

3. Transient voltage dips at Palo Verde 500 kV bus and other major critical buses shallnot exceed 30% following major disturbances. For N-1 single contingency, theDevers 230 kV bus (the load bus) shall not exceed 25% voltage dip. However, someother bus voltage dips in excess of this criteria value can be considered acceptable ifthey are acceptable to the affected system or fall within the affected system's internaldesign criteria.

4. The frequency decay rate should be within 3 hertzlsecond at the Palo Verde 500 kVbus for any critical outages.

E. Study Methodology

1. The first step is to determine the maximum amount of generation that can beaccommodated by the Palo Verde Transmission System thermal capability. The nextstep is to determine the stability limit with respect to the Palo Verde/Hassayampa 500kV Common Bus reactive power flow restrictions. The requirements for generationcurtailment 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, existbased on the maximum generation schedules at the transmission thermal limits. Ifthe stability limits exist, the requirements for either generation curtailment or unittripping (RAS) shall be also determined if necessary.

The last step is to develop the appropriate operating nomogram limitsaccording to the most critical limiting conditions with respect to the rangesof reactive power flows up to 800 MVARs bucking measured at the PaloVerde/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 10,018MWincluding Palo Verde net generation of 3982 MW and the PVTS Interconnectors'generation up to approximately 6,036 MW, which includes one Arlington unit (558MW), two Red Hawk units (998 MW), two Mesquite units (1,256 MW), threeHarquahala units (1,144 MW) and four Gila River units (2,080 MW). The thermallimits 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 breakersand 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 anycritical N-1 contingency outages. The worst contingency outage was a loss of onePalo Verde-Rudd 500 kV line, which resulted in 99.1% loading of the emergencyrating of the remaining Palo Verde-Westwing 500 kV line. No severe voltagedeviations 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 PVTSconfiguration change is required in order to respond to the mandate of the NuclearRegulatory Commission (NRC). According to the criteria, it is necessary to add a7% generation margin to the Palo Verde nuclear units to evaluate the PVTS stabilityperformance. There are certain N-I contingencies that need to be evaluated based onthe maximum Palo Verde generation output of 4,263 MW (adding a.7% generation tothe 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 at530 kV for the most critical and the second critical outages are summarized inExhibit 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 VoltageVar Restriction Net Generation Results Dip

VarBoosting-+330 MVARs Total-10,299 MW Stabt IlmutPVNG=+173 MVAR PVNG=4,263 MW St abiety Lat Palo Verde 500: 19.0%HAA- +157 MVA.R HAA- 6,036 MW CuNo aulmt Devers 230:30.0%

Total= 9,256 MWVar 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 VoltageVar Restriction Net Generation Results Dip

Var Boosting=+330 MVARs Total=10,299 MW Stabilityion Palo Verde 500: 20.0%iiPVNG-+173 WVAR PVNG-4,263 MW No Generation PaoVre50200HAA- +157 MVAR HAA- 6,036 MW Curtailment Dryers 230:10.0%

Var Bucking-800 MVARs Total=9,256 MV Stability limitPVNG--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 theHassayampa 500 kV bus and loss of the Hassayampa-North Gila 500 kVline. However, the results showed the system was stable.

* No generation curtailment is required if the Palo VerdelHassayampa500 kV common bus was boosting at a net of 330 MVAR. The lowestvoltage dips were at 19.0% and 30.0% at the Palo Verde 500 kV and Devers230 kV buses, respectively.

* A curtailment of 1,043 MW of the PVTS generation is required if thePalo Verde/Hassayampa was bucking at a maximum net of 800 MVARsdue to a severe voltage limit at the Devers 230 kV bus. . The lowest voltagedips were at 21.0% and 31.0% at the Palo Verde 500 kV and Devers 230 kVbuses, respectively.

2. The next critical N-1 contingency was a three-phase fault on the Palo Verde500 kV bus and loss of one Palo Verde-Westwing 500 kV line. This caseresulted 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 PaloVerde/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 andloss of the Hassayampa-Jojoba 500 kV line caused a minimum 1.05 Hz/secrate of change of frequency decay on the Palo Verde 500 kV bus, whichmeets the Palo Verde criterion of • 3 Hz/sec.

4. All other N-1 contingencies including a loss of the largest load (Edmontonpump load of 840MW) or a loss of the largest generating unit (Palo VerdeUnit 2 of 1,576MW) in WECC showed stable and well damped and theresultant 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 at525 kV for the most critical outages are summarized in Exhibit 3 thru Exhibit 4below-

Exhibit 3: Critical Outage of the Hassayampa -North Gila 500 kV line(WithO % Palo Verde Generation Margin)

Palo Verde/Hassayampa Palo Verdefflassayampa Stability Transient VoltageVar Restriction Net Generation Results Dip

Var Boosting-=1495 MVARs Total-10,018 MW Voltage L.titPVNG-+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 VoltageVar Restriction Net Generation Results Dip

Var Boosting=+1498 MVARs Total-10,299 MWPVNG=+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{WVar Bucking-800 MVARs PVNG=4,263 MW Stability LimitPVNG---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 theHassayampa 500 kV bus and loss of the Hassayampa-North Gila 500 kVline. However, the results showed the system was stable.

* No generation curtailment is required if the Palo VerdefHassayampa500 kV common bus was boosting at a net of 1,495 MVAR. The lowestvoltage dips were at 16 % and 26% at the Palo Verde 500 kV and Devers230 kV buses, respectively.

* A curtailment of 1,474 MW of the PVTS generation is required if thePalo VerdelHassayampa was bucking at a maximum net of 800 MVARsdue to a severe voltage limit at the Devers 230 kV bus. . The lowest voltagedips were at 19% and 25% at the Palo Verde 500 kV and Devers 230 kVbuses, respectively.

2. No significant Palo Verde plant stability problem for this critical outagewhen adding a 7% generation margin to the Palo Verde units.

* More severe voltage depressions in the southern California area wereindicated as'expected. However, no critical voltage dips were experiencedin the Palo VerdefHassayampa area.

* Palo Verde generator rotor angle swings were well damped andindicated 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 COMMENTSNO. 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 FLOWCONTINUOUSRATING(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 MAXWINTER-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:, i2/* :51sa i *:~::*:*: :o4~ *::*................ 40Z¢>2:: :*::::*:*:*:. :*:: : :< ..

.N. tLOADINtOIN AMtP)

ALT I ............. .........G.L.UT . .. :.:.. :... . ...2 7 ... 227 ... 21.1 .. 51 . .. .. .2 8 . ~J 9 9 :;0 :::1b .. ... N L M

:.::: : :Y .'.Of.EMERGENCY R . . . . . . .. . .... .... .. .. .. . .30% . 74.30% 84:40.. .. .4... :.::.:.::.:. :..: ::::: : :: : : :....%~ .-. .. **::.:.:' :... ..... ..... ....... .. ..... .... ' :':,::..:: ::: ::::*:*: :.: ::::::: .

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

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

A ... .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. .. . .........B~ u .:::*:***::.*:::::~: -: 1945. .. .... :....... 1..48.... E ME. .dE.... . ...... ....... ........ .......... ......... ..... ...9 . ... .................

ALT 6 .... . ...... o eA R N ... .... ........... ........... ........... 28 :.:.2.. :....... .... 2200..%OFEEROENYRAT1O::*:... .. ..... ..... 1..........::**~ 730

*..1872--"1489- 1.00 0.99 1.03 1.02

:'.177: ' '1414:5 1.00 0.99 1.03 1.02

:7 50%Y: 88.40%

NO'PROBLEM:'

NO:PROBL.EM:.

Shleel I

03W-TS.TABLE IUPDATED 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 POWER FLOW PYNG Py GEN HAA PVIHAA PV PV PV EOR SCT POWERFLOW RESMLTSCONDmIONS 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%PVGENMARGINADDED T%;.:.: f PVNG " 1 7 MVARRtHAA* 1S TIVA n)PV GENFMAR.

.......... ..... , TRANSHENTSTAiiUTY:.: ::::::::: 0- -AANSOKV PV44AA RAS GeN TRANSIEHTSTABLITYRESULTSCASE NO. CASE 0IESClPTICIN NETVAR NETVAR VAR SCIIFME TRIP SPECIFICINITS PVOSO PVSOO OV2O0 COMMENTS

IWS.cli. ....... ...... ...... OPY 0V232ST*WiNTER-IAMiR-1 3?IIPVVO.T.AA.N.431AOUT... :*:*:* 173 157 43 NO NONE 41T7 8.70 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 0 73 ttiT 43 NO NOSE 0.94 0.92 STABLE12 .% .10%

ST WINTIER IiAMR0 iPHPVFtT OSEPV WESTINGOtiT 173 137 43 No NONE 0.09 0.04 STABLE

00.0% 10.0%

STiiiNTERO4AMRS iPiiFVFLT. PV. OtUT1712 13T 42 NOi NONE 0.00 0.00 STABElt

ST.WSTER~0;AMiRT LOSS OPA LRGEST WASOIN WEC 172 157 43 NO NONE NSP NSP VERYSTAeitE

'.. . . ... . .. -: :: : .... . . . .. .. - .-71 o

...... ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ................

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ST.WERieA: hO.soONEAtO,6fifi OUNT lOT ::IT I 42 NO NONE NW20.1 NW9 WRSTABLE

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

t~.IrJWikEkN.k:.: :. 3:IiVjO~oaA.08PVBVCJ84.000A. 42.. 83 7%T 4003 26 52 18 85 N120N1O4400.00 1.01 SABLEOGEAR

.. :stA..u................ PVS.O.. H AAN0KV rvHAA RAS GEt .. TROsENTsTABILIYRsEBTsCASFNO. cASoEsel4PrnoN NETVAR NETVAR VAR SChEM~E TRIP SPEQIFKC tlOS PVSOO eDv22 COWENTS

N t ODTAGES $ ^

ST.WNTER OI9MR t3Ii PIT 77lAAN G!LA 011s::::::. :;: :. .. . . . . . . . . ...: ...

ST-W0iTER-418MR 2 2111 tPVFI. T,1VOVR't OUT

5T-V NTt~IO R~t btiMR f HA n, H A.OJSA oIJ t 5 @::::::::::::::. :::. :. :...............:: :: :: : : .

ST.Wl4TER.IBOAR4 3IJOJORLT, JOoA4IR JT 775

. . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................ .. .. . .

-. . . . . ..... ' :: ' :: ' :

si wooTce~t.01lR SJP9 iri tiV t1 ONE PV WVtiTNI1 (it .775

..................................... .

5T wW4TER-41110RR SlrHPVY lT, PV.RLIDDOUT S ., n

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

ST WINTER OIRMR. 7toss OP A LARIGFT LOAD IH W!~ 0n(EDMONTON PUMPNG LOAD-140FM

..... . ... : . .. ::::: :::-. ::::.:.:

ST WINTER 01IRMR- t oss OP ONE rALo V!RUnI ~T 3s* * -** ' gPVIustn GROS GEO.1 07tMwz

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.25 2t NO NONE

.22 23 NO NONE

.20 25 NO

*25 25 NO

NONE

NONE

PVOO 0V200.05 9.70 STAtLE

21.0% 31.0%

8.00 0.00 STABLEIt.o% 6.%

.3 0. 0.00 STAhLE21.0% 12.0%

0.03 012 STAB3LE12.8% 0.0%

0.03 *.n2 STABLE72.6% 10.0%

0.04 *. -STABLE22.0% 1.0%

NSr NSP VERY STABLE

NSP NSr VWRY STAKLE

.25 25 NO NONE

.25 25 NO

.20 20 No

NONE

NONE

.25 25 NO NONE

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 KVPRE-DISTURBANCEECAS CASE DESCRIPTION

PVNG NEW PVMAA PV PV PV EOR SCITGEN GEN TOT EAST WEST TRF FLOW TOTAL Psroo DV230 COMMENTS

PV/ttAA VAR RESTRICTION AT THE KNEE POINTPF-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 FORjADDED i* rv MiRGIN j:-:-.-.- *.-.-. C (PVNG9,0 4MVARa 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 .*.*-.*.*-.*-... 1474 MW FO R DEVER S V O LTAG E UM IT

P0iwt 0FR PiAN EUKGooV j- 4263 4562 3325 5524 2)09 3423 62335 12502 1.c5 1.00 ADDED7%PVGENERATIoNFOR(AOOEDT%PFV MARGINI.:- :.-:-.: * |PVNoG-e.4PVARb HAA-.1ooMVAR )::...:::-.-K .:- .*. :.:.: PV PLANT STABLTnY TEST

PVrHIA PV4HAA RAS GENSTAILTnY CASE N.1 CONTINGENCY NET VAR VAR SCHEME tRIP SPECIFIC UNnTS PVS00 DY210 COMMENTS

PVtHAA VAR RESTRICTtON AT THE KNEE POINT.TS403t04WINTER.01ER.1 .-.- .--. PHAAFL?. NAA-N.GILA 50KV LNE OUT.+ -14)3 40 NO NONE 159% -<~PpA~~iL * * * ***** - * *

iTS- Y03/ W INTER - 1IEMR I F1 ........... * * **.3P AA FLT, HAA N NGILA 500KV LINE O UIT 1.... .... ... ...... .. .4993 . 262 NO NONE oBR .£. f j6< < V PLANT sTABLE

* : : : ::: ::....... .... ....................... ... .... . ................ , .......... ! °% .. < > ft a>$ M ,

P'IONAA VAR AT TH4E M I U U KNTS 03/04 WINTER-0IFR I $.- -- P-N NU A YA S FL .. A..I A 0 K L N U 3 002 4120 NO4 NONE CURT ILE NASSAYAN621.0 .0 ED C D A SPA G EN.0 6 BVPL NYS~ L

14744WMW.R190%ERS VOLTAGE SIMI

.ADDED 7 PV GE NMARGINFOR RP PLNT ST ABtn Y------.-(TS D3/04MWINTER-GIFMR~t .3PH AAFLT HAANGILASOKVINE)aUT .00 14a NO NONE 03*40 ; -0 PV PLANT STABLE*-----*-**----------- . . . . . : c , i . . . . . . . . . , '.. . . , . . . . . . . .0.i.: :'