Calls Show Pre-Blackout Utility Confusion

AP ^ | 9/3/03 | JOSEF HEBERT

[Pro-Bush]

Calls Show Pre-Blackout Utility Confusion

WASHINGTON - During the hour before the Aug. 14 blackout, engineers in the control center of an Ohio utility struggled to figure out why transmission lines were failing and complained that a computer failure was making it difficult to determine what was going on, transcripts of telephone communications released Wednesday show.

At one point, an engineer at the Midwest grid managing organization asked engineers at the Ohio utility, FirstEnergy Corp., to explain why they had not responded to a line outage reported sometime earlier and asked that they find out what was going on.

"We have no clue. Our computer is giving us fits, too," replied a FirstEnergy technician identified as Jerry Snickey. "We don't even know the status of some of the stuff (power fluctuations) around us."

A short time later, a technician at the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operators, the group that monitors the Midwest power grid, expressed frustration with FirstEnergy's failure to diagnose the problems erupting in their power system.

"I called you guys like 10 minutes ago, and I thought you were figuring out what was gong on there," the MISO technician, identified as Don Hunter, complained, according to the transcripts.

"Well, we're trying to," replied Snickey. "Our computer is not happy. It's not cooperating either."

[SGCOS]

...It seems that the reason that Eastlake unit 5 tripped off was instability in the exciter. The unit was having trouble regulating voltage due to the system voltage sagging. The exciter overheated and tripped the unit off.

Sounds like a job for Viagra.

[Publius6961]

It was not designed with the operation of a grid in mind. The problem was that the in-house IT department dictated what the users got instead of the users dictating what the IT department should give them.

This was the major problem in 1964 when we first began having customized programs prepared for engineering design.
The programmers were briefed by beancounters or other company overhead as to the requirements, and only when the programs were substantially done were the actual users allowed to provide input.

Programmers and beancounters are not engineers.
User-hostile programs were the result.

Guess what kind of meeting I just got out of, 40 years later?
Right. Nothing ever changes much.

[snopercod]

Both of those names sound very familiar, but it was a long time ago. I was a contractor working for APS, and Bechtel was the prime contractor. I think the boiler controls were Leeds & Northrup, IIRC.

The man I worked for was Aubrey Parsons of APS. It was a fun job, mostly.

They had a problem with their drum level instrumentation, which I analyzed and solved.

[snopercod]

Re: the ET foam. Probably more important was the change in the solvent to prep the tank for foaming. That has received zero mention anywhere but FR. See bone's thread for the details I posted.

[Pro-Bush]

Thanks for sharing your knowledge. I read the whole thread...Very informing.