European Network of For Electricity Market Modelling ... 809 - Investigation on... · This Request...

Restricted

Market Modelling Database Business Product Description [MMD_BPD-L0]

Functional Description

<PRJ00080> - <NMD2> | Version <1_0_1> | Date <19-07-2013>

of 23

ENTSO-E Investigation on approximation steady-state criteria for assessing the dynamic performance without detailed dynamic studies

This document is confidential and intended for the sole use of the individuals to whom it has been issued, exclusively for the purpose of developing a proposal for submission to ENTSO-E.

Reproduction or distribution for any other purpose is not authorised. ENTSO-E accepts no responsibility for the completeness of any information contained in this document. This document is not intended to form part of any binding legal contract.

European Network of Transmission System Operators

For Electricity

Restricted




of 23

Version 1.0

Release NA

Valid through

Classification Request for Proposal

Author Dante Powell, Joao Moreira

Document Number

Document Location

Template Version 1.0

Purpose of this document

This document is an RFP (Request For Proposal) for an ENTSO-E Project. This document is intended to provide guidance and specifications to suppliers to submit a proposal to ENTSO-E for the implementation of ENTSO-E Investigation on approximation steady-state criteria for assessing the dynamic performance without detailed dynamic studies

For Approval

Role Name Version Date Signature

Distribution List

Version Date Target Audience

Universities

Revision History

Version Date Author Summary of Changes Changed chapters

Restricted




of 23

Contents

1 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................... 5

2 PROPOSAL GUIDELINES ............................................................................................................................................ 5

3 PROJECT PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................... 5

3.1 SCOPE AND TECHNICAL REQUIREMENT ............................................................................................................................ 5 3.2 SELECTION CRITERIA APPLIED BY ENTSO-E ...................................................................................................................... 6

4 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND PROJECT TIMELINE................................................................................................... 7

5 PARTICIPANT QUALIFICATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 7

5.1 DESCRIPTION OF METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................... 7 5.2 REFERENCE LIST ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 5.3 PRICING ..................................................................................................................................................................... 7

6 PROCEDURE ............................................................................................................................................................. 7

7 INSTRUCTIONS TO PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................................................................. 8

7.1 COMPLIANCE .............................................................................................................................................................. 8 7.2 INTERPRETATION AND CLARIFICATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 8 7.3 AMENDMENTS TO THE RFP DOCUMENTS AND/OR PROCESS ............................................................................................... 8 7.4 FORMAT OF PROPOSALS ................................................................................................................................................ 9 7.5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF RFP DOCUMENTATION .............................................................................................. 9 7.6 COST OF PREPARATION OF TENDER ................................................................................................................................. 9 7.7 FORWARDING OF RFP .................................................................................................................................................. 9 7.8 CONFIDENTIALITY ........................................................................................................................................................ 9 7.9 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST .............................................................................................................................................. 10 7.10 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS ........................................................................................................................................ 10 7.11 INTERFERENCE ........................................................................................................................................................... 10 7.12 NON-COLLUSION ....................................................................................................................................................... 11 7.13 JOINT SUBMISSIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 11 7.14 CONDITIONS PRECEDENT ............................................................................................................................................ 11 7.15 NOTIFICATION OF OUTCOME ....................................................................................................................................... 12 7.16 AWARD TO RUNNER-UP ............................................................................................................................................. 12

8. EVALUATION PROCESS ........................................................................................................................................... 13

8.1. AWARD CRITERIA ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 8.2. EVALUATION ............................................................................................................................................................. 14 8.3. CLARIFICATIONS ........................................................................................................................................................ 14

9. COSTS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 14

9.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................... 14 9.2 GENERAL ........................................................................................................................................................................ 14

10. CONTRACTS ............................................................................................................................................................ 15

ANNEX 1 ..................................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

1 DOCUMENT HISTORY ............................................................................................................................................. 16

2. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATION FOR INVESTIGATION ON APPROXIMATION STEADY-STATE CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING THE DYNAMIC PERFORMANCE WITHOUT DETAILED DYNAMIC STUDIES .............................................. 17

2.1. MAIN SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................... 17

2.2. GENERAL PRINCIPLES ............................................................................................................................................. 18

2.3. SOFTWARE USE ...................................................................................................................................................... 18

3. IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................................................................. 18

3.1. STAGE 1 – THEORETICAL ANALYSIS AND COLLECTION OF DATA ............................................................................. 18

3.1.1. KEY TASKS....................................................................................................................................................... 18

Restricted




of 23

3.1.2. ADDITIONAL NOTES ........................................................................................................................................ 18

3.2. STAGE 2 – DEFINITION OF METHODOLOGIES AND STUDY SET-UP .......................................................................... 19

3.2.1. KEY TASKS....................................................................................................................................................... 19

3.2.2. BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................ 19

3.3. STAGE 3 – TESTING AND VALIDATION .................................................................................................................... 19

3.3.1. KEY TASKS....................................................................................................................................................... 19

4. ORGANISATIONAL ASPECTS ................................................................................................................................... 19

4.1. INTERACTION WITH ENTSO-E ................................................................................................................................. 19

4.2. ESTIMATED TIMELINE............................................................................................................................................. 20

4.3. DELIVERABLES AND PROJECT OUTPUTS ................................................................................................................. 20

5. COMPLETION OF THE INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................................... 20

PART 2 - RESPONSE ........................................................................................................................................................ 21

FORM 1 ............................................................................................................................................................................... 21 FORM 2 ............................................................................................................................................................................... 22 FORM 3 ............................................................................................................................................................................... 23

Restricted




of 23

1 Background and Overview

This Request for Proposal (RFP) has been prepared by ENTSO-E Drafting Team Planning Standards, working under the supervision of Working Group System Design Strategy, in the framework of the activities related to the evolution of ENTSO-E cooperation for coordinated planning and continuous improvement of the Ten Year Network Development Plan methodologies. The investigation aims to explore the dynamic properties of the European power system regions, based on approximation steady state indicators to facilitate the identification and assessment of relevant stability challenges. The purpose of this RFP is to solicit offers from various candidate vendors, conduct a fair evaluation and selection process based on the requirements specified in this document, and select the vendor who can best deliver the results which ENTSO-E needs.

2 Proposal Guidelines

This Request for Proposal represents the requirements for an open and competitive evaluation and selection process. Proposals will be accepted until 5pm C.E.T on 6th October 2017.

If the organization submitting a proposal must outsource or contract any work to meet the requirements contained herein, this must be clearly stated in the proposal. Additionally, all costs included in proposals must be all-inclusive to include any outsourced or contracted work. Any proposals which call for outsourcing or contracting work must include a name and description of the organizations being used for sub-contracting.

All costs must be itemized to include a clear explanation of all fees and costs.

3 Project Purpose and Description

Dynamic studies require a very detailed representation of the power system’s components resulting in high modelling effort. The calculations needed for these studies include time domain simulations, which are extremely time-consuming when compared to calculations in steady state, e.g. load flow calculations. For this reason, criteria based on steady-state information can be useful to assess power system design and generation cases. This may include methodologies suitable to use with load flow calculations, short circuit calculations and assessment of market model results (e.g. amount of synchronous machines). Steady-state indicators cannot replace the need for detailed dynamic analysis. However, for some issues, such as voltage and rotor angle stability, steady-state indicators can be useful as a filter function to identify and screen potential critical scenarios, which would need to be further analysed by dynamic simulation. Several challenges must be taken into account in developing methodologies to assess dynamic phenomena without the effort of dynamic (mainly time-domain):

1. Current practices on steady state indicators are based on TSOs past experience and are much related to the

specific system characteristics and needs. System future needs are different from what we know today.

2. Having in mind the energy transition it is reasonable to expect that the criteria and experience we have obtained

so far on steady state indicators may not be sufficient to correctly reflect the new system stability issues. The

challenge today is to act in anticipation of foreseen situations.

3. Considering the increase of interdependency between systems and resulting needs for coordinated assessment,

TSOs need to identify and agree on relevant indicators and filters to trigger detailed analysis if relevant. It is the

TSOs responsibility to know if there is system security.

4. This is a topic for which there are no full answers today and which requires investigation with theoretical research

and validation procedures. New ideas and approaches are key.

Project Scope & Technical Requirements

8.1. Scope and Technical Requirement

The Project Scope and Technical Requirements are outlined in Annex 1.

Restricted




of 23

8.2. Selection criteria applied by ENTSO-E

Selection criteria include the following:

• Technical criteria: See Annex 1

• Pricing;

• Legal eligibility;

• References.

Restricted




of 23

4 Request for Proposal and Project Timeline

All proposals in response to this RFP are due no later than 5 pm C.E.T on 6th October 2017. Evaluation of proposals will be conducted from the 9th October 2017 Notifications to participants who were not selected will be completed by 10th October 2017 The selection decision for the winning participant will be made no later than 5pm C.E.T on 10th November 2017 Upon notification, the contract negotiation with the winning participant will begin on 17th November 2017

Event Date

Issue date for RFP 11th September 2017

Latest date for receipt of queries 29nd September 2017

Latest date for receipt of proposals 6th October 2017

Evaluation of proposals 9th October 2017

Notification of selected proposal 10th November 2017

Contract commencement - anticipated 17th November 2017

Note: The above timetable is indicative only (with the exception of the deadline for the submission of proposals). Whilst ENTSO-E will make every effort to maintain this timetable, it reserves the right at its full discretion to amend or extend the timetable as it deems appropriate. Changes to deadlines will be notified to all participants.

5 Participant Qualifications

8.3. Description of methodology

The bidding documentation shall include a description of the methodology to be applied throughout the several topics of the investigation. The general principles are outlined in Annex 1

8.4. Reference list

Bidding documentation should include a reference list focusing on previous experience in working on dynamic studies, steady-state approximation methods, past cooperation with TSOs, ENTSO-E or other companies of the electricity industry.

8.5. Pricing

Prices per investigation stage (for the stages listed in Annex 1 ‘Implementation’) are requested.

6 Procedure

Equal treatment of all Participants will be maintained at all times during the process and all information provided in a transparent manner. ENTSO-E reserves the right to award the contract on the basis of the original proposal offers or to enter into negotiations with one, some or all of the participants regarding the price and terms of their offers. Participants may be invited to submit a Best and Final Offer at ENTSO-E sole discretion.

Any negotiations will be conducted with due regard to the principles of equal treatment and transparency. ENTSO-E reserves the right to verify any of the information submitted at selection stage or to seek confirmation of participants’ financial and economic prior to contract award.

Restricted




of 23

7 Instructions to Participants

8.6. Compliance

Participants are required to comply fully with the instructions contained in present RFP document when preparing their proposal and participating in this process. Particular attention is drawn to the fact that non-compliance with these instructions may, at the sole discretion of ENTSO-E, invalidate their proposal/offer. If a proposal/offer fails to comply in any respect with the requirements set out in these instructions, ENTSO-E will be entitled, but will not be obliged, to:

• reject the relevant proposal/offer as non-compliant; • without prejudice to the ENTSO-E right to reject the proposal:

a) meet with, raise issues and/or seek clarification from the Participant in respect of the relevant proposal/offer;

b) request the Participant to provide ENTSO-E with information or items which have not been provided or have been provided in an incorrect form;

c) negotiate an amendment and/or change to the relevant proposal/offer with the Participant; and/or

d) Waive a requirement which, in the opinion of ENTSO-E, is minor, procedural or non-material.

8.7. Interpretation and Clarifications

Participants shall ensure that they have all the information required for the preparation of their proposals and shall satisfy themselves about the correct interpretation of terminology used in the RFP Documents. Participants shall also ensure that they are fully conversant with the nature and extent of the obligations to be accepted by them if their proposal is accepted. Should the Participant become aware of any ambiguity, discrepancy, error or omission in the RFP Documents, it shall immediately notify ENTSO-E. ENTSO-E upon receipt of such notification shall notify all Participants of its ruling in respect of any such ambiguity, discrepancy, error or omission. Such ruling shall be issued in writing by ENTSO-E by post or e-mail and shall form part of the RFP Documents. Every effort has been made to ensure this documentation contains all the necessary information for completion of proposals. If however, clarification on the content of this document is required; all queries should be sent by email. Any responses provided by ENTSO-E will be made available to all participating Participants without disclosing the identity of the party submitting the query. Any questions, queries or requests for further information regarding the RFP Documents should be submitted by email, not later than at 5.00pm (CET Time) on 29th September 2017, clearly stating the proposal reference “RFP 809” and addressed to: [email protected]

Except in so far as may be directed in writing by ENTSO-E, no agent or servant in its employ has any authority to make any representation or give any explanation to Participants as to the meaning of the RFP Documents or to any other matter so as to bind or fetter the discretion of ENTSO-E. Participants shall not communicate with any servant, employee or agent of ENTSO-E except as to the extent and in the manner provided in this RFP.

8.8. Amendments to the RFP Documents and/or process

ENTSO-E reserves the right to update or alter the RFP Documents and the information contained herein at any time by notice in writing to all participating Participants. These will be issued to all Participants simultaneously and proposals will be assumed to take account of any such modifications and amendments.

Restricted




of 23

ENTSO-E reserves the right without advance notice to amend or otherwise change the process or to terminate the process. Nothing in the RFP Documents is, or should be relied upon as a promise or representation as to ENTSO-E’s ultimate decision in relation to the award of the Contract. ENTSO-E reserves the right (in its absolute discretion):

• to change the basis of, or the procedures (including the timetable) relating to, the process;

• to reject any, or all, of the proposals;

• not to furnish Participants with additional information; or

• To abandon this private procurement procedure.

8.9. Format of proposals

Proposals should be detailed and focused on the capacity of the Participant to fulfil the role as set out in the Scope of Services and the Requirements. Participants are required to submit the information forming their proposal in as much detail as possible and in clear and unequivocal language. All proposals must provide the required details as per the following forms:

1. Form 1 : Details of Participant – duly completed

2. Form 2 : Pricing Schedules – duly completed

3. Form 3 : Contract Acceptance Declaration, duly completed and signed

4. Form 4: Project Proposal - Participants shall provide a full and complete response to each of the criteria listed, and submit all required information in accordance with Form 4.

For further details see above point 6.

8.10. Acknowledgement of Receipt of RFP Documentation

Participants should acknowledge via email to [email protected], within 3 days, receipt of the proposal documentation and confirm whether or not they intend to submit a completed proposal.

8.11. Cost of Preparation of Tender

ENTSO-E will not be liable in respect of any costs incurred by Participants in the preparation of proposals or any associated work effort, including costs occurred for presentation of proposals

8.12. Forwarding of RFP

RFP documents and proposal documents shall not be forwarded to any other company without the prior written permission of ENTSO-E.

8.13. Confidentiality

Participants are required to treat as confidential the Scope of Services and all other information whether in written, visual or oral form supplied to them by, or on behalf of, ENTSO-E, or acquired in the course of visits to ENTSO-E’s premises. Reproduction of any such information, whether in whole or in part, other than for the purpose of the process, is strictly

Restricted




of 23

forbidden without prior written permission. Participants are responsible for ensuring the compliance with these requirements by any third party involved with the proposal.

8.14. Conflicts of Interest

Any conflicts of interest involving a Participant must be fully disclosed to ENTSO-E particularly where there is a conflict of interest in relation to any recommendations or proposals put forward by the Participant. Any registrable interest involving the Participant and ENTSO-E or their relatives must be fully disclosed in the response to this RFP, or should be communicated to ENTSO-E immediately upon such information becoming known to the Participant, in the event of this information only coming to their notice after proposal submission.

8.15. Submission of proposals

The completed proposal shall be sent by email following label and shall be delivered not later than 5:00pm hrs (five) CET time on 6th October 2017.

RFP Reference: 809

Description: Investigation on approximation steady-state criteria for assessing the dynamic performance without detailed dynamic studies

Closing Date: 5.00 pm (CET) on 6th October 2017

Subject line: Investigation on approximation steady-state criteria for assessing the dynamic performance without detailed dynamic studies + RFP 809

Proposal by “PROVIDER NAME” Email Address: [email protected]

Participants shall provide two (2) originally signed paper copies of the proposal documents and one soft copy on disk or memory key. In the event of discrepancies arising between the hard and soft copy proposals submitted, the hard copy version will take precedence. It is ENTSO-E policy to open proposals promptly on the closing date. Electronic copies will also remain “unopened” until after the closing date. Late proposals will be returned unopened to the Participant.

8.16. Interference

ENTSO-E will reject the proposal of any Participant who endeavours to influence or interfere in any way with the private procurement evaluation process or award decision. Any Participant who, in connection with this project:

(a) Offers any inducement, fee or reward to any member, officer or employee of ENTSO-E or any person acting as an

advisor for ENTSO-E in connection with this project; or (b) Does anything which would constitute a breach of the Prevention of Corruption Acts, 1889 to 2001; or (c) Canvasses any of the persons referred to in paragraph (a) in connection with this project; or

mailto:[email protected]

Restricted




of 23

(d) Contacts any officer or employee of ENTSO-E prior to the Contract being awarded about any aspect of this project in a manner not permitted by this RFP

May be disqualified at ENTSO-E’s sole discretion, without prejudice to any other civil remedies available to ENTSO-E and without prejudice to any criminal liability which such conduct by a Participant may attract.

8.17. Non-collusion

Any Participant who, in connection with this proposal: (a) Fixes or adjusts the amount or the terms of his proposal by or in accordance with any agreement or arrangement

with any other Participant (other than a member of its own consortium); (b) Enters into any agreement or arrangement with any other Participant that he shall refrain from bidding or as to

the amount or terms of any proposal to be submitted; (c) Causes or induces any person to enter into such agreement or arrangement as is mentioned in either sub-

paragraph (a) or (b) above or informs any Participant of the amount or approximate amount or terms of any rival proposal for this project;

(d) Canvasses any of the other Participants in connection with this project; (e) Offers or agrees to pay or give or does pay or give any sum of money, inducement or valuable consideration

directly or indirectly to any person for any information in connection with any rival proposal ; or (f) Communicates to any person other than ENTSO-E the amount or approximate amount or terms of his proposed

Tender, except where such disclosure is made in confidence and is necessary for the preparation of the Tender, May be disqualified at ENTSO-E’s sole discretion, without prejudice to any other civil remedies available to ENTSO-E and without prejudice to any criminal liability which such conduct by a Participant may attract.

8.18. Joint Submissions

Where the successful proposal is submitted jointly by more than one legal entity, one of the following arrangements will apply:

i) The contract may be awarded by ENTSO-E to the legal entity who acts as the agreed prime contractor. The prime contractor is responsible for the delivery of all services provided for under the terms of the contract and shall assume all the duties, responsibilities and costs associated with the position of prime contractor. Collateral warranties may be required in this case, in accordance with ENTSO-E requirements.

ii) A grouping may be required to contract as a single entity with joint and several liability arranged to ENTSO-E’s

satisfaction.

8.19. Conditions Precedent

If a contract is awarded arising out of this private procurement process, the award of a contract shall be conditional upon the Participant:

a. Satisfying ENTSO-E as to its financial and economic viability, by whatever means ENTSO-E may consider appropriate.

Restricted




of 23

8.20. Notification of Outcome

All Participants will be notified of the outcome of their proposal following the completion of the evaluation process. Potential outcomes can be:

i) A letter/mail of regret; ii) A letter/mail of intent to award; or iii) Notification of cancellation/postponement.

8.21. Award to Runner-up

If for any reason it is not possible to award the contract to the designated successful Participant emerging from this competitive process, or if having awarded the contract, ENTSO-E considers that the successful Participant has not met its obligations, ENTSO-E reserves the right to award the contract to the next highest scoring Participant on the basis of the terms advertised. This shall be without prejudice to the right of ENTSO-E to cancel this competitive process and/or initiate a new contract award procedure at its sole discretion.

Restricted




of 23

9. Evaluation Process

9.1. Award Criteria

Proposals will be examined initially by reference to the completeness of proposals relative to the RFP. In order for a proposal to avoid elimination from this competition and to warrant consideration under the award criteria, it must comply with the requirements of this RFP, including its Appendices. Proposals that are valid and substantially responsive to these requirements will be assessed against the award criteria set out below. Responses to this RFP will be evaluated in their own right. No recognition will be given to information previously submitted. No unsolicited communications from Participants will be entertained during the evaluation period. Participants should ensure that they have fully addressed each of the award criteria set out below and that complete information has been provided under each heading. ENTSO-E intends to evaluate and select the most economically advantageous proposal based on the criteria listed below. ENTSO-E may cancel the process at any time prior to entering into a contract and reserves the right to reject, in whole or in part, any or all proposals received. Proposals will be evaluated against the following criteria with % weighting as indicated. Please refer to Form 4 in this document for detailed requirements.

Evaluation Criteria Description Weighting Criteria & Scoring

Technical Criteria

1. Completeness of proposals relative to the RFP description of investigation items, defined tasks and objectives

2. Description of theoretical background, methodologies to be applied throughout the investigation to obtain results and validation procedures

3. Expected applicability

for ENTSO-E and TSOs

Higher degree of technical

requirements fulfilment

55%

Meets requirements of RFP

Cost Total cost

35% Lowest priced offer will achieve 35% and all other offers will be scored as a percentage of the lowest priced offer. For avoidance of doubt, and by way of example – if Offer 1 is €10 and Offer 2 is €20, Offer 1 will receive 35% and Offer 2 will receive 17.5%, Note also that abnormally low offers may be rejected.

Legal Acceptance of contractual conditions & payment schedule

Pass/Fail

5%

Participants accept ENTSO-E proposed conditions & payment schedule without material change. Some clauses are mandatory and must be accepted. These clauses are outlined in Form 3 below and the pass/fail criteria refers to these clauses.

Restricted




of 23

Evaluation Criteria Description Weighting Criteria & Scoring

All other amendments will be scored in accordance with % applied.

References/ Previous experience

Proposal should include a reference list focusing on previous experience in dynamic analysis, steady-state approximation methods, past cooperation with TSOs, ENTSO-E or other companies within the electricity sector.

5% Suitable previous experience of providing similar data sets.

Note: Participants shall provide an outline of the main assumptions made in preparing the proposal. Participants are requested to format their proposal submission in a logical approach with the response to each of the above criteria clearly identified and each of the points addressed under that specific criterion or referenced to the precise area of the submission document where the response may be found. Any marketing material or advertisements should be separated from the main proposal submission. ENTSO-E may cancel the private procurement process at any time prior to entering into a contract and reserves the right to reject, in whole or in part, any or all proposals received. In such a case no refund of costs incurred to date will be given by ENTSO-E

9.2. Evaluation

ENTSO-E intends to evaluate and select the most economically advantageous proposal based on the award criteria listed above. Evaluations will be carried out by a competent and experienced evaluation team. The team shall consist of individuals from a range of European TSO’s and ENTSO-E personnel.

9.3. Clarifications

During the proposal evaluation period and at ENTSO-E’s discretion, clarifications may be sought from Participants. Participants will be required to provide such clarification in writing. Responses to requests for clarification may not materially change elements of the proposals submitted. No unsolicited communications from Participants will be entertained during the evaluation period. ENTSO-E does not commit itself to accept the lowest or any of the proposals submitted.

10. COSTS

9.1 Introduction

Participants are required to provide details of all costs in accordance with Form 2 and the Pricing Schedule (included as part of the Tender Documents). It is the responsibility of Participants to ensure that the costs quoted are correct and calculated properly.

9.2 General

Proposals should:

• Confirm validity period of the proposal as six months from the closing date.

• Be stated in Euro.

Restricted




of 23

• Itemise any other associated costs not included in the proposal but which, in the Participant’s judgment and experience, may be required.

• Costs quoted should be exclusive of VAT. The VAT rates applicable and/or any other taxes should be indicated separately.

11. CONTRACTS

Award of contract

Award of contract will be subject to the Contract included as part of these proposal documents. Participants should raise any queries in relation to this document in their proposal submission.

Restricted




of 23

ANNEX

1. Document History

Revisions

Version Date Author Summary of Changes Changed Chapters

-

-

-

Distribution List

Version Date Target Audience Recipient’s Name Changed Chapters

Approval

Version Date Role Name Signature

Restricted




of 23

2. Technical requirements specification for Investigation on approximation

steady-state criteria for assessing the dynamic performance without detailed

dynamic studies

2.1. Main scope and objectives

It is the objective of the investigation to develop innovative approximation steady-state criteria methods to address the range of issues described in the scoping table below (Table 1). The work will include the supporting theoretical analysis, simulations and validation procedures to define new relevant indicators, filtering thresholds and methodology to compute them.

Table 1 – Summary of investigation scope, including the definition of the need and its target application, the objectives, and the expected results.

Need and application Objective Expected result

Trigger for coordinated assessment due to stability risks.

Screen planning cases and quickly identify critical and non-critical scenarios to trigger coordinated detailed analysis.

Individual TSOs at screening phase, Multi-TSO if coordination triggered.

Identification of system needs in Regional Groups and TYNDP plans can result from coordination results.

• Assess the risk of local/cross-

border transient or voltage

instability.

• Assess the risk of cascading

line tripping (risk of a system

split) due to transient angle

instability or voltage

instability.

• Contribute to overall

assessment of system stability

Steady-state criteria for assessing the phenomena of voltage stability without detailed dynamic studies.

Steady-state criteria for assessing the phenomena of transient angle stability of grid areas (coherent generator groups) without detailed dynamic studies.

Criteria should include thresholds and security margins.

Trigger for coordinated assessment due to interdependency risks.

Interdependency indicators which can also be used to screen planning cases and trigger coordination even if no stability issue is detected.

Individual TSOs at screening phase, Multi-TSO if coordination triggered.

Identification of system needs in Regional Groups and TYNDP plans can result from coordination results.

• Voltage stability. Assess

interdependency risks in

voltage control.

• Assess interdependency risks

in terms of system strength

(minimum short-circuit

power).

Steady-state criteria for assessing the interdependency risks.

Steady-state criteria can include distinguishing between internal (within responsibility area) and external (outside responsibility area) automatic produced Mar generation or short-circuit contribution.

Criteria should include thresholds and quantification of interdependency levels.

Evaluation of system strength

Usually short-circuit power at a given node is used as a measure of system strength providing indication on network meshing and electrical proximity to synchronous generation.

General application.

• Determine new steady-state

indicators in a system

dominated by non-

synchronous generation.

• Define new indicators to

better highlight system

stability challenges.

Steady-state indicators providing indication of system strength not based only on short-circuit power from synchronous generation.

Measurement of the impact of different types of projects (e.g. new AC lines, new HVDC links, STATCOMS, Synchronous Compensators) in the local/regional system stability conditions.

Contribute to characterise impact of investment projects in stability conditions of the network.

• Assessment of Projects impact

by steady-state indicators

Methodology to assess individual project impact on its location in the network based on steady state calculations and impact on relevant steady state indicators (stability, interdependency, system strength).

Principles for relevant criteria can be for example the impact on voltage angle between areas, inertia, short Circuit Power and voltage rate of change with respect to reactive power injection.

Restricted




of 23

2.2. General principles

The methods to use throughout the investigation are intentionally open in order to avoid constraining the analysis and the proposals from the service provider. As such, the service provider, according to its experience and evaluation, may propose any complementary theoretical analysis or approaches that considers adequate in the framework of the scope of the investigation. Nevertheless, the following aspects are already included for incorporation.

• Transient and voltage stability issues should be assessed locally by TSOs in a decentralized manner. Focus is

on improving/finding new steady state indicators to flag critical situations in terms of network security or

interdependency with neighbouring systems.

• Frequency stability issues should be assessed at synchronous area level. New indicators could be a subject of

investigation but thresholds to be determined internally by ENTSO-E.

• Results should be achievable with simple methods (e.g. results available from load flow, static short circuits

calculations, market model results or others).

• The criteria and methodologies should distinguish adaptations to different grid characteristics. Focus in not

so much on grid detail but on different grid characteristics that could be prone to specific kinds of problems.

• The investigation should use ENTSO-E data that is publicly available or eligible for public release under

request.

2.3. Software use

The output of the investigation is a set of methods to use steady state criteria and indicators or a combination of steady state criteria and indicators for assessing the dynamic performance without detailed dynamic studies. These methods shall be able for use with any standard power system simulation software. Hence, in order to obtain the expected results, the service provider is free to select and use the most adequate simulation software. However, it is highly recommendable that the software be compatible with the ENTSO-E CIM format standards to facilitate any data exchanges.

3. Implementation

A three-stage implementation methodology is described below. Each of the three stages will originate a specific report, which will be subject to approval by ENTSO-E. The approval of each report will complete the corresponding stage. The aspects to be included in the proposal for the execution of this study should include the following tasks, but are not limited to them. The service provider may thus submit in its technical proposal other aspects that it deems important for the attainment or valorisation of the objectives described above in Table 1.

3.1. Stage 1 – Theoretical analysis and collection of data

This stage will comprehend the relevant theoretical analysis as a foundation for all the subsequent work and the definition and collection of all the relevant data and information to be provided by ENTSO-E.

3.1.1. Key Tasks

1. Summary of the currently defined steady-state methods in literature, giving also an insight on the

reasoning/theory behind each method.

2. Study how the physics of the system is changing and how it affects the definition of new indicators and criteria.

3. Definition of a list of the relevant data necessary for the investigations.

4. Report describing the performed work, results obtained in the first stage and a description of the work that will

be done in the next stage.

3.1.2. Additional notes

Restricted




of 23

ENTSO-E will strive to provide all relevant information that may be required from the service provider as long as no confidentiality restrictions are applied.

3.2. Stage 2 – Definition of methodologies and study set-up

This stage will comprehend the development of the methodologies which shall be adaptable to different areas within ENTSO-E.

3.2.1. Key Tasks

1. Determination of the relevant dimensions (e.g. outputs from load flow, static short circuits calculations and

market model results, or others) that can be used or combined to assess the stability phenomena and its

thresholds.

2. Classification of types of grid shapes representing particularities influencing the stability phenomena to allow

translation of conclusions to different areas within ENTSO-E where grid shape types are applicable.

3. Definition of criteria to determine stability thresholds and the reasoning/theoretical explanation behind.

4. Identify the stability thresholds and security margins by incremental change in the relevant dimensions.

5. The stability thresholds should be adapted considering the particular grid shapes.

6. Report describing the performed work, results obtained in the second stage and a description of the work that

will be done in the next stage.

3.2.2. Boundary conditions

• Basic calculations in time domain or steady-state can be performed with an artificial grid model.

• Network model from TYNDP 2016 should be used to identify and classify regions according to relevant grid shapes.

3.3. Stage 3 – Testing and validation

This stage will comprehend the testing and validation of the methodologies developed in stage 2. The framework for its use and the validity assumptions should be clearly identified during this stage.

3.3.1. Key Tasks

1. The stability thresholds should be validated for different regions.

2. The validity conditions for application of the methodologies should be clearly identified and described during this

stage.

3. Criteria for identifying critical power flow situation from year-simulation should be developed and verified.

4. Report describing the performed work and results obtained in the third stage.

4. Organisational aspects

4.1. Interaction with ENTSO-E

The investigation will be led by a project manager in charge of dealing with the day to day practical and organisational aspects and making sure that all tasks and deadlines are achieved. The project manager will have the support from a steering group in charge of dealing with the technical issues and taking the initiative on actions or responding to questions concerning the course of the investigation. The steering group will provide steering and support to:

a) Define specific objectives and provide guidance on the ongoing work and in matters requiring clarification or debate.

b) Provide support to ensure the relevant interactions between ENTSO-E and the service provider organisation.

During the investigation, a number of meetings (either physical or by web-conference) should be agreed and established to ensure the efficient fulfillment of objectives and obligations. It is considered good practice to consider, in each stage, at

Restricted




of 23

least, a meeting to launch the stage, a meeting to debate the intermediate results and a meeting to debate the main conclusions, reporting and next steps.

4.2. Estimated timeline

The total duration of the project will be detailed with the service provider. The following aspects should be considered. a) Stage 1 results shall be available three months after the beginning of the project.

b) Stage 2 results shall be available eight months after the beginning of the project.

c) Stage 3 results shall available 12 months after the beginning of the project.

4.3. Deliverables and project outputs

• All deliverables shall be handed to ENTSO-E in open editing format.

• All developed software shall be delivered in open source format together with the respective technical supporting

information.

• All deliverables resulting from the investigation (documents, data files, methodologies, algorithms, simulation

models) will be property of ENTSO-E without any restriction on its use.

• The service provider shall not communicate the results of the investigation to third parties without written

consent from ENTSO-E.

5. Completion of the investigation

The achievement of the following deliverables completes the investigation:

• Delivery and approval by ENTSO-E of all the reports foreseen in this Terms of Reference.

• Delivery of all the auxiliary elements that supported the investigation, namely consulted references and all

supporting documentation.

• Delivery of any supporting material such as simulation models, algorithms or developed software.

• Presentation session in ENTSO-E including the most relevant work performed and the main conclusions of the

investigation.

Restricted




of 23

Part 2 - Response

PLEASE COMPLETE AND RETURN ALL OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS

Participants Name: _______________________

ENTSO-E Investigation on approximation steady-state criteria for assessing the dynamic performance without detailed dynamic studies

Form 1

DETAILS OF PARTICIPANT

Name of Organisation

Legal Form

Registered Office Address

Person to be Contacted regarding this proposal

Position in organisation

Telephone

E-mail

Signatory (if different, with position in organisation)

Restricted




of 23

Form 2

PRICING SCHEDULE

Participants shall confirm their pricing in accordance with the completed Pricing Schedule in the below form:

Item

Price €

Solution delivery/Item/Package

…

Total Price

The payment schedule for the Solution Delivery is as follows: Stage payments:

Contract signature 30%

Delivery and acceptance of Stage 1 20%



Restricted




of 23

Form 3

CONTRACT ACCEPTANCE DECLARATION

Award of contract will be subject to prior signature of the Contract included as part of these proposal documents.

Participants are required to sign the declaration below confirming that the contract, in its current form, is acceptable or alternatively raise any queries in relation to this document at proposal stage. This acceptance declaration (or list of issues) should be signed by the company solicitor.

List of mandatory clauses: ENTSO-E is not willing to accept amendments to: Articles 1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 16. Declaration: I …………………… as company secretary/company solicitor representing …………… confirm the contract agreement, included as part of the proposal documents are acceptable in current form and there shall not be any suggested changes to this contract subsequent to proposal submission.

OR

I …………………… as company secretary/company solicitor representing …………… confirm the contract agreement, included as part of the proposal documents is acceptable in its current form with the following exceptions which I would welcome the opportunity to discuss post proposal submission stage should this be necessary

Clause Issue Proposed Amendment

I understand that no contract shall exist with ENTSO-E unless and until contract documents are formally executed by both parties. Signature: ………………………………………………………………………………………… Print Name: ……………………………………………………………………………………….

European Network of For Electricity Market Modelling ... 809 - Investigation on... · This Request...

Documents

Transcript of European Network of For Electricity Market Modelling ... 809 - Investigation on... · This Request...