870

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 17, NO. 3, AUGUST 2002

Wheeling of Power Under Deregulated Environment of Power SystemA Bibliographical Survey

Yog Raj Sood, Narayana Prasad Padhy, and H. O. Gupta
AbstractPower industry is moving rapidly from regulated conventional setup to a deregulated environment. There is an urgent need to keep a track of international experiences and activities taking place in this emerging field [131]. This paper gives a bibliographical survey and general backgrounds of research and development in the field of power system wheeling under deregulated environment based on over 170 published articles. Wheeling in general and the establishment of wheeling rate in particular, are subjects of extensive debate today. This will be very much useful for all countries, especially those developing countries which are moving toward the unbundling of electricity supply industry (ESI). The collected literature have been divided into many section, so that new researchers do not face any difficulty for obtaining literature particularly in the area of wheeling of power under deregulated environment. Index TermsAvailable transfer capability (ATC), congestion, deregulation, independent power producers (IPPs), independent system operator, nonutility generation (NUG), privatization, transmission open access (TOA), unbundling, wheeling.

II. GENERAL BACKGROUND Since the mid-1980s, the electrical power supply industry around the word has experienced a period of rapid and irreversible change. The need for more efficiency in power production and delivery has led to a restructuring of the power sectors in several countries traditionally under control of federal and state governments. The privatization process in Great Britain is the best known example, followed by others such as Spain, New Zealand, Argentina, and Chile. Even in countries with privately own utilities, such as the U.S., there has been a strong drive toward deregulation and a more intense participation of third-party generation. Other countries are also considering the restructuring of their electricity power sector so as to introduce more competition among producers and to offer more choices for customers. These changes are concerned with the ownership and management of the industry [120]. The basic features of electricity supply industry (ESI) restructuring, which will be of interest to both general reader and the specialist engineer, are as follows: 1) to introduce competition into a hitherto monopolistic industry; 2) in order to achieve this, to separate (vertical unbundling) the functions of power generation, transmission, distribution, and electricity supply to consumers; 3) to create several competing electricity generations companies (horizontal unbundling) and to recognize that the power transmission system is a natural monopoly and, accordingly, to make special regulatory provisions in this respect; 4) to allow consumers to exercise choice between suppliers (generation companies) while still using the existing transmission facilities. The incorporation of transmission into this competitive framework has proven more complicated and is the subject of an ongoing debate among utilities, consumers and suppliers. For obvious reasons, it is neither feasible nor economical to build independent transmission systems for each generation-load pair. Therefore, it is necessary to develop methods, which allow the shared use of the transmission system by utilities and third-party generators. Therefore, in order to support fair competition among producers of electricity, one important aspect is to treat the transmission of electrical energy as a separate business. Electrical energy would become a product, which could be bought or sold and transported from one place to another. In this case, it becomes important to evaluate the actual cost of transmission facilities, which provides the unbundling service. This idea of

I. INTRODUCTION HE TERM wheeling has a number of definitions. It may be defined as the use of transmission or distribution facilities of a system to transmit power of and for another entity or entities [90]. It may also be defined as in [155]; Wheeling is the use of some partys (or parties) transmission system(s) for the benefit of the other parties. The simple definition is Wheeling is the transmission of power from a seller to a buyer through the network owned by a third party. The wheeling utility is paid for its service and for meeting the losses. It might require rescheduling its own generation, because of wheeling transactions. The important issues are normally related to sharing of benefits and pricing of these transactions. In the deregulation environment, generation, transmission, and distribution are independent activities. There is a competition among generators for managing different customers. Main benefits from the deregulation include cheaper electricity, efficient capacity expansion planning, cost minimization, more choice, and better service. Wheeling is a mongrel concept resulting from mating two inherently different economic concepts: an ideal world of regulated utilities, and an ideal deregulated competitive market place.
Manuscript received March 2, 2001; revised January 12, 2002. Y. R. Sood is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India, and also with Regional Engineering College Hamirpur, H.P., India (e-mail: ysooddee@iitr.ernet.in). N. P. Padhy and H. O. Gupta are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India (e-mail: nppeefee@iitr.ernet.in; harifee@iitr.ernet.in). Publisher Item Identifier 10.1109/TPWRS.2002.800967.

0885-8950/02$17.00 2002 IEEE

SOOD et al.: WHEELING OF POWER UNDER DEREGULATED ENVIRONMENT

871

transmission open access (TOA) not only alters the traditional concept of monopoly, but also aims to achieve a greater level of competition in electrical power supply [140]. It does not appear to have a universal model and it is a relatively recent concept whose economic, regulatory and implementation structure continues to be adapted to the specific needs of each nation. The broad term TOA refers to the regulatory structure which includes rights, obligations, operational procedures, and economic conditions which enable two or more parties to use the transmission network belonging totally to or in part to another parties for electricity power transfer. This is gaining attention in countries that desire to introduce competition into traditional regulated utilities without giving up their existing regulatory structures. Hence, TOA format in these countries as well as wheeling under deregulated environment resulted from attempts to combine two inherently different approaches, regulation and fully competitive market. As part of this type of power management, competitive electricity market, and regulatory service, wheeling of electrical energy is one of the more prevalent of such unbundled services [109]. Publications on topics, relevant to wheeling of power under deregulated environment of power system, are far too numerous to exhaustively document in a single paper. We have therefore chosen to limit the resources from which this paper draws the references. In this bibliography collection of selected literature from IEEE transactions, IEE proceedings, important web sites, proceeding of conferences, and leading technical journals such as International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, Power System Research, etc., is included. Exceptions were made to include publication in other resources if a publication offered a significantly unique, technical viewpoint on the relevant issue. The bibliography has been broadly divided into the following sections: 1) basic concepts; 2) methodologies and analysis; 3) regulatory; 4) case studies; 5) general issues and future planning; 6) important web sites. Although the content of many publications spanned two or more of these sections, the desire to limit document length required that publication be placed, in general, only in the single most appropriate section. The publications are sorted alphabetically according to first author or publication resources. III. BASIC CONCEPTS This section includes the literature, which contains basic ideas and definitions about wheeling, marginal cost, available transfer capability (ATC), etc. As early as August 1989, Rau et al. [112] explained a model for energy exchange in interconnected power systems. In October 1989, Merrill et al. [90] given the basic concept of wheeling and evaluation of wheeling rate based on marginal-cost theory. At the same time, Shirmohammadi et al. [128] described the principles to evaluate the transmission network capacity use for firm transmission service including wheeling transactions. In 1991, Shirmohammadi et al. [129] gave an introduction for calcu-

lating cost of transmission transactions. Lo and Zhu [80], [81] illustrated the theory of wheeling and marginal wheeling rates with test problems in their two different papers in 1993 and 1994. In November 1995, Yu and David [166] described TOA and marginal wheeling cost evaluation. In 1996, Wood et al. [155] explained basic concepts of wheeling with numerical examples. In 1997, Yu and Devid [164], [165] explained the concept of long-run marginal cost in their two different papers. Ilic et al. [59] explained the concept of available transmission capacity. In 1998, Hirano and Yamaji [55], [56] explained basic concepts regarding allocation of wheeling costs [61]. In 1999, Tseng et al. [144] described price-based adaptive spinning reserve requirements and Rudnic et al. [117] explained the concept of open access pricing with system approaches. At the same time, Ethier et al. [28] described a uniform price auction that incorporates locational price adjustments on a web-based plateform. In August 2000, Wu et al. [157] explained the fundamentals of power transfer allocation for open access. In November 2000, Pan et al. [103] given a review of usage-based transmission cost allocation methods under open access. In July 2001, Shaaban et al. [127], described introduction to ATC and its evaluation by decomposition. In November 2001, Mehra [88] discussed the bulk power marketing potential in the developing countries. IV. METHODOLOGIES AND ANALYSIS This section contains those publications, which are related to operational issues, methodologies, technical analysis, costing, etc. In February 1986, Caramanis et al. [14] explained basis for setting wheeling rates based on marginal costs and again in May 1989, they described [12] wheeling rate evaluation simulator, which can be used to evaluate the marginal cost of wheeling between utilities, private users and private generators [13]. In August 1990, Clayton et al. [20] described the incremental pricing concepts and incremental loss concepts for interchange costing and wheeling loss evaluation. In August 1991, Shirmohammadi et al. [129] discussed major issues concerning cost of transmission transactions. In February 1992, Mukerji et al. [94] explained the application of optimal power flow (OPF) for the evaluation of wheeling and nonutility generation (NUG) related options. In May 1992, Pereira et al. [105] presented an approach for the integrated analysis of generation and transmission systems in terms of production costing and wheeling rate calculations. In August 1993, Nishimura et al. [98] examined the theoretical bases for benefit optimization in centralized and decentralized electric power systems in a multiutility environment [99], [125]. In February 1994, Li and David [76] described optimal multiarea wheeling. In February and April 1994, Happ [50], [51] presented in his papers number of embedded as well as newly developed long-run incremental methods of determining the costs of firm wheeling, and presented methodologies that allocate the wheeling costs in the case of multiple wheels [77]. In August 1994, Kovacs and Leverett [69] explained a method for calculating embedded incremental and marginal costs of transmission capacity. In September 1994, Ito et al. [62] given the anal-

872

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 17, NO. 3, AUGUST 2002

ysis of electric wheeling on cooperative fuel cell cogeneration systems installed in multiareas. In November 1994, Kuwahata and Hiroshi [72] explained utility-cogeneration game for pricing power sales and wheeling fees [113]. In January 1995, Farmer et al. [31] discussed the optimal pricing of transmission and distribution services in electricity supply. In February 1995, Perez-Arriaga et al. [107] presented in depth analysis of network revenues computed with marginal pricing. In June 1995, Jonard [63] described the long-term and short-term simulation of wheeling cost. In November 1995, Nishimura [97] explained various transaction modes of electrical energy exchange. In February 1996, Macqueen and Irving [85] describes an approach to the evaluation of loss adjustment factors and their use for wheeling calculations. In May 1996, Tsukamoto and Iyoda [145] described a methodology to allocate the cost of transmission network facilities to wheeling transactions in decentralized power systems. In the same month Robson et al. [114] explained energy trading between power generators and Ferro et al. [33] presented basis for a new approach for energy interchange in deregulated power system. In August 1996, Lu and Brammer [82] described transmission loss penality factors for area energy interchange and Perera et al. [106] explained optimum pricing of transmission services. In February 1997, Ghosh and Ramesh [40] investigated the development of an options market for bulk power trading. In April 1997, Zuwei et al. [171] proposed a fast algorithm for security constrained economic dispatch in case of Energy Exchange and Wheeling. In July 1997, Ferrero and Shahidehpour [32] described optimal power transaction with network constraints in deregulated systems. In September 1997, Ma et al. [83] analyzed the effect of neglecting volt/var optimization on marginal cost-based pricing for wheeling transactions. In May 1998, Galiana and Ilic [38] explained a mathematical framework for the analysis and management of power transactions under open access and in the same month Muchayi and El-Hawary [93] described wheeling rate evaluation using OPFs. In November 1998, Silva et al. [130] described transmission access pricing to wheeling transactions and in the same month Park et al. [104] proposed an analytical approach for allocating transmission costs among users in transmission services. In December 1998, Ma et al. [84] explained marginal cost pricing of wheeling transactions and independent power producers (IPPs). In JanuaryFebruary 1999, Yong and Lasseter [160] described OPF in market of retail wheeling. In February 1999, Gu et al. [45] described a new approach for pricing of fixed cost in wheeling rates by modified mile-power method and Oliveira et al. [100] explained the impact of flexible ac transmission system devices on transmission pricing. In the same month, Wu and Varaiya [156] described coordinated multilateral trades for electric power networks [65]. In June 1999, Yu [161] presented long-run marginal cost-based pricing of wheeling of interconnected system. In August 1999, Fang and David [30] explained transmission congestion management in an electricity market and Gribik et al. [42] explained transmission access and pricing [43]. In the same month, Cheng et al. [16] analyzed probabilistic security of bilateral transactions in deregulated environment [67]. In November 1999, Tai-Gen and

Shi-Lin [139] described incremental transmission capability evaluation applied to dispersed generation planning and retail wheeling assessment within the environment of power industry reconfiguration. In January 2000, Sood and Padhy [132] justified the importance and shortcomings of various methods that allocate the wheeling costs for multiple wheels in interconnected power systems. In Feb. 2000, Christie et al. [19] described the practice and some of the analytical backgrounds for each of the major techniques for congestion-management now in use world wide, analyzing strengths and weakness in the approaches, and exploring future directions and needs connected with this vital problem. Hamoud [47], [48] in his two different papers presented a simple and practical method for assessing the feasibility of simultaneous bilateral transactions. He also proposed a practical method for determining the ATC of transmission systems. Galiana and Phelan [37] presented a theory for allocation of transmission losses to bilateral contracts for point to point transactions in a competitive environment. Rubio-Oderiz and Perez-Arriaga [116] described a comparative analysis of network cost allocation Methods. In May 2000, Kirschen et al. [68] analyzes the effect that the market structure can have on the elasticity of demand for electricity. Gross and Tao [44] presented a physical-flow-based approach to allocating transmission losses in a multiple-transaction system. In July 2000, Rashidinejad et al. [111] described pricing of spinning reserve in a deregulated electricity market. In August 2000, G. Boris et al. [41] described practical methods for transfer limit analysis in the power industry deregulated environment. Ejebe et al. [27] presented formulation and implementation of fast Calculation for ATC. Marwali and Shahidehpour [87] explained short-term transmission line maintenance scheduling in a deregulated system [89]. Tao and Gross [141] presented transmission loss compensation in multiple transaction networks. Tuglie et al. [146] explained an optimization approach to assess ATC [168]. In September 2000, Xiao and Song [158] described ATC evaluation by stochastic programming. In December 2000, Seethalekshmi et al. [126] discussed the concept of unbundling of power system with emphasis on ensuring advantages of restructuring of power utility. In January/February 2001, Sood et al. [135] developed evolutionary programming-based algorithm for selection of various wheeling options. In the same month, Phichaisawat and Song [108] explained transmission-pricing using improved sensitivity indexes and Lee [74] described network congestion assessment for short-term transmission planning under deregulated environment. In January 2001 Sood et al. [134] explained analysis and management of wheeling transactions under deregulated environment of power sector. In February 2001 Sood et al. [133] explained methods of evaluating cost of wheeling under deregulated environment of power sector. In May 2001, Bhattacharya and Zhong [9] described the concept of reactive power as an ancillary service in deregulated environment and Fradi et al. [36] explained calculation of energy transaction factors. In November 2001, Khushalani and Khaparde [66] explained congestion management in the emerging energy market structures. Kumar and Srivastava [70] explained

SOOD et al.: WHEELING OF POWER UNDER DEREGULATED ENVIRONMENT

873

a methodology based on AC power distribution factors to allocate power transaction in a deregulated market. Tyagi and Srivastava [147] presented a general model of automatic generation control for multiarea system in a deregulated electricity market. V. REGULATORY As mentioned earlier, the power transmission system is a natural monopoly. Therefore, some special regulations are required for this system. This section deals with publications on these regulations. In 1987, Pace [101] explained wheeling concept and the obligation to serve the public. In 1989, Edison Electric Institute [24] published a summary of state laws and regulations of transmission access and wheeling. In May 1989, U.S. Government Printing Office [148] published technological and social considerations for electric power wheeling in increasing competition [92]. In June 1990, Einhorn [26] described electricity wheeling and incentive regulation. In 1991, Edison Electric Institute [25] updated the summary of state laws and regulations of transmission access and wheeling. In January/February 1993, Brown [11] described the regulatory agenda of electricity after the energy policy act of 1992. In 1996, Heinold [54] discussed whether retail wheeling is competition among energy utilities an environmental disaster or it can be reconciled with integrated resource planning. In September/October 1999, Durham et al. [23] described impact of electric re-regulation. In August 2000, Chown and Coetzee [17] described implementation of regulation as a competitive Ancillary Service in Eskom and the use of Eskom internal web for this service. VI. CASE STUDIES This section deals with those publications, which are related to restructuring or deregulation experience in different countries. In April 1992, Falcone [29] described electric utility industry structure in the U.S. and Gent [39] explained electric supply and demand in the U.S. in the next ten years. In 1993, Vaahedi et al. [149], [150] discussed benefits of economy transactions and wheeling in Canada. In May 1995, Rudnics et al. [119], described the application of Marginal Pricing in the Chilean power system and the difficulties faced in allocating the Supplement Cost among parties involved. In November 1995, Stein [137] discussed good prospects of deregulation in the U.S. [138] In January 1996, Zarnikau and Reilley [167] explained the evolution of the cogeneration market in Taxas. In AprilMay 1996, Sackey and Zakhary [122] described power wheeling through the West African interconnected system. In December 1997, Zinow [170] explained in his report, competition in the American ESI. In September 1997, Asano and Tsukamoto [5] described utilities policy regarding transmission pricing in Japan. In September 1997, Ilic et al. [60] described utilities policy toward regional transmission provision and its pricing in New England [46]. In June 1998, Baji and Ashok [6] described, wheeling powera case study in India. In February 1998, Christie and Wangensteen [18] given the introduction to energy market in Norway and Sweden. In November 1998, Sackey [121]

explained the concept of wheeling in West Africa. Wang et al. [154] determine power losses in Gansu 330 KV power network caused by wheeling. In February 1999, Mielczarski and Mischalik [91] explained open electricity market in Australia and Fosso et al. [35] described generation scheduling in deregulated system of Norwegian. In April 1999, Nabas et al. [95] explained that wheeling could be a feasible solution for the cogeneration using biomass in Brazil. In May 1999, Palanicharmy et al. [102] given an overview of privatizing and restructuring Indian power sector. In January 2000, Coulter et al. [21] explained the privatization in the Asia pacific region of the ESI in Victoria, Australia. In the same month Sarma et al. [123] discussed a case study of restructuring and reforms of power sector, in Andhra Pradesh State (India). In December 2000, Kumar and Srivastava [71] described a case study on an Indian power system regarding congestion management in deregulated market. In February 2001, Puttgen et al. [110] explained restructuring and reregulation of the U.S. electrical utility industry. In March 2001, Karkkainen and Lakervi [64] explained liberalization of electricity market in Finland as a part of Nordic Market. At the same time, Rudnic and Zolezzi [118] explained electric sector deregulation and restructuring in Latin America. In May 2001, Vucetic et al. [153] described PriceLoad relationship in Californias electricity market. In June 2001, Lamoureux [73] explained evolution of electric utility restructuring in the U.K. In July 2001, Dortolina [22] analyzed Venezuelan restructured electricity market of a dominant firms market power and Xing [159] given a study of the hierarchical structure for the power market in China. In November 2001, Chaube [15] explained restructuring of the Power Supply industry in India, Manglic [86] explained restructuring of Australias ESI and Roy et al. [115] described a framework for facilitating power trading in India. VII. GENERAL ISSUES AND FUTURE PLANNING This section deals with publications related to future planning, importance of the topic, critical comments and other general articles which may not be included in any of the above four sections. In May 1986, Fischetti [34] has given a concept, regarding deregulation of electric utility. In August 1991, Adsmson et al. [1] described the long-term impact of use of transmission by the third party. In May 1994, Stein [136] described the importance of competitive electricity supplies. In April 1995, Happ [52] discussed selection of methods for evaluating the cost of transmission wheeling services. In the same month, Scarfane [124] explained how short-circuits simulations help quantify wheeling flow. In November 1995, Zhu [169] given some considerations on transmission services concerning optimizing wheeling parties benefits. In February 1996, Vojdani et al. [152] explained important issues related with transmission access. In March 1996, Billinton and Gbeddy [10] described impact of power wheeling on composite system adequacy evaluation. In September 1996, Lewis [75] explained wheeling and dealing in power transmission. In January 1997, Overbye et al. [142] described visualizing power system operations in an open market. In February 1997,

874

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 17, NO. 3, AUGUST 2002

Baughman et al. [8] discussed advanced pricing in electricity systems. In May 1997, Hazan [53] explained the transformation of electric utilities industry. In NovemberDecember 1997, Arokiaswamy [3] explained that how private power could succeed as viable option. Arsali and Neelaanta [4] described a new concept for utility integrated resource planning. In 1998, Hanumantha and Krishna [49] explained customer service enhancement in electrical utility. In April 1998, Hulleman and Kerr [58] described transmission access as a global issue in electricity generation. In May 1998, Nakashima et al. [96] explained multiple-impact assessment of wheeling and IIPs in a deregulated power system. In November 1998, Lima and Oliveira [79] addressed some interesting topics about the effect of the transmission pricing methods on system cost in this new environment where generation is treated as an open market and transmission as a monopoly [78]. In December 1998, Hu et al. [57] described a research about optimal wheeling scheme. In February 1999, Allen et al. [2] pointed out issues critical for establishing a good transmission strategy in an energy market. In January 2000, Viswanath [151] given an overview of deregulation Concepts. In May 2000, Baran et al. [7] investigated the feasibility of allocating a congestion cost to the transactions that are responsible for the congestion in an equitable way. In July 2000, Yu et al. [162] proposed a market power-monitoring model for restructuring electricity markets. In November 2001, Tripathy and Khaiani [143] explained restructuring and privatization of power supply industry and suggested measures, such as, ending unmetered supply, sound pricing principles and transparency in subsidy regime [163]. VIII. IMPORTANT WEB SITES Finally, this section contains some important web sites, which provide information, practical applications, data, etc. related to wheeling of power under deregulation environment of power sector. 1) Amsterdam Power Exchange, http://www.apx.nl. 2) California Power Market http://www.caiso.com http://www.calpx.com. 3) CENTRAL, http://www.centrel.org. 4) DVG, http://www.dvg-heidelberg.de/. 5) ERCOT, http://www.ercot.com. 6) Frankfurt Power Exchanger, http://www.eex.de. 7) GENI, http://www.geni.org. 8) IEEE, http://www.ieee.org. 9) Leipzig Power Exchange, http://www.lpx.de. 10) MAPP, http://www.mapp.org. 11) NGC, http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk. 12) NYPP, http://www.global2000.net/nyppreg. 13) OASIS, http://www.tsin.com. 14) PJM, http://www.pjm.com. 15) PTI, http://www.pti-us.com. 16) Power Grid Corporation of India, http://www.powergridindia.com. 17) U.K. Power Market, http://www.elecpool.com, http://www.open.gov.uk/offer/offer.htm, http://www.ngc.co.uk.

18) Nordic Power Market http://www.nordpool.no. 19) European Union Power Market, http://www.eurelectric.org. 20) Australia Power Market, http://www.nemmco.com.au, http://www.tg.nsw.gov.au/sem. IX. CONCLUSION This paper gives an overview of concept of wheeling of power in deregulated environment of power system, with a bibliographical survey of relevant background, practical requirements, the historical events, the present state, and techniques. It is based on many research articles published from the past 20 years. The citations listed in this bibliography provide a representative sample of current engineering thinking pertaining to the wheeling of power under deregulated environment of power industry. Periodic bibliographic updates on this topic will be useful as the industry continues to evolve. REFERENCES
[1] A. M. Adsmson, L. L. Garver, J. N. Maughn, P. J. Palermo, and W. L. Stillinger, Summary of panel: Long-term impact of third-party transmission use, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 6, pp. 11831188, Aug. 1991. [2] E. Allen, M. Ilic, and Z. Younes, Providing for transmission in times of scarcity: An ISO cannot do it all, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 21, pp. 147163, Feb. 1999. [3] N. S. S. Arokiaswamy, Can private power succeed as viable option?, Ind. J. Power and River Valley Development, vol. 47, pp. 224227, 238, Nov./Dec. 1997. [4] N. Arsali and P. S. Neelaanta, New concept for utility integrated resource planning: Start with the customer, Strategic Planning for Energy and the Environment, vol. 17, pp. 2240, Winter 1997/1998. [5] H. Asano and Y. Tsukamoto, Transmission pricing in Japan, Utilities Policy, vol. 6, pp. 203210, Sept. 1997. [6] V. T. Baji and S. Ashok, Wheeling powerA case study in India, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 20, pp. 333336, June 1998. [7] M. E. Baran, V. Banunarayanan, and K. E. Garren, Equitable allocation of congestion relief cost to transactions, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 579585, May 2000. [8] M. L. Baughman, S. N. Siddiqi, and J. W. Zarnikau, Advanced pricing in electricity systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 12, pp. 489502, Feb. 1997. [9] K. Bhattacharya and J. Zhong, Reactive power as an ancillary service, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 16, pp. 294300, May 2001. [10] R. Billinton and F. Gbeddy, Impact of power wheeling on composite system adequacy evaluation, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 18, pp. 143151, Mar. 1996. [11] A. Brown, Electricity after the energy policy act of 1992: The regulatory agenda, Electricity J., pp. 3343, Jan./Feb. 1993. [12] M. C. Caramanis, N. Roukos, and F. C. Schweppe, WRATES; A tool for evaluating the marginal cost of wheeling, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 4, pp. 594605, May 1989. [13] M. C. Caramanis, R. E. Bohn, and F. C. Schweppe, Optimal spot pricing: Practice and theory, IEEE Trans. Power Applicat. Syst., vol. PAS-101, pp. 32343245, Sept. 1982. [14] M. C. Caramanis, R. E. Bohn, and F. C. Schweppe, The costs of wheeling and optimal wheeling rates, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. PWRS-1, pp. 6373, Feb. 1986. [15] K. S. Chaube, Restructuring of the power supply industry in India, in Proc. CIGRE Regional Meeting 2001Int. Conf. Bulk Power Transmission System Integration in Developing Countries, Nov. 810, 2001, pp. IX-iIX-viii. [16] J. W. M. Cheng, D. T. McGillis, and F. D. Galiana, Probabilistic security analysis of bilateral transactions in a deregulated environment, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 14, pp. 11531159, Aug. 1999. [17] G. A. Chown and M. G. Coetzee, Implementation of regulation as an ancillary service in Eskom and the use of Eskom internal web for this service, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 11321136, Aug. 2000.

SOOD et al.: WHEELING OF POWER UNDER DEREGULATED ENVIRONMENT

875

[18] R. D. Christie and I. Wangensteen, The energy market in Norway and Sweden introduction, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., vol. 18, pp. 4445, Feb. 1998. [19] R. D. Christie, B. F. Wollenberg, and I. Wangensteen, Transmission management in the deregulated environment, Proc. IEEE, vol. 88, pp. 170195, Feb. 2000. [20] J. S. Clayton and A. C. Gibson, Interchange costing and wheeling loss evaluation by means of incrementals, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 5, pp. 759765, Oct. 1990. [21] B. Coulter, A. Kalam, and A. Zayegh, Privatization in the Asia Pacific region the electricity supply industry in Victoria, Australia, in Proc. Symp. Electricity Distribution in the Developing Countries, CBIP, New Delhi, India, Jan. 2021, 2000, pp. 3437. [22] C. A. Dortolina, Venezuelan restructured electricity market analysis of a dominant firms market power, in IEEE Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, Vancouver, BC, Canada, July 1519, 2001. [23] R. A. Durham and M. O. Durham, Electric re-regulation impact, IEEE Ind. Applicat. Mag., vol. 5, pp. 4756, Sept./Oct. 1999. [24] Edison Electric Institute, Transmission access and wheeling a summary of state laws and regulations, Tech. Rep., Washington, DC, 1989. [25] Edison Electric Institute, Transmission access and wheeling an updated summary of state laws and regulations, Tech. Rep., Washington, DC, 1991. [26] M. A. Einhorn, Electricity wheeling and incentive regulation, J. Regul. Econ., vol. 2, pp. 173189, June 1990. [27] G. C. Ejebe, J. G. Waight, M. Santos-Nieto, and W. F. Tinney, Fast calculation of linear available transfer capability, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 11121116, Aug. 2000. [28] R. Ethier, R. Zimmerman, T. Mount, W. Schulze, and R. Thomas, A uniform price auction with locational price adjustments for competitive electricity market, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 21, pp. 103110, Feb. 1999. [29] F. C. Falcone, Electric utility industry structure in the United States, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., vol. 12, pp. 1317, Apr. 1992. [30] R. S. Fang and A. k. David, Transmission congestion management in an electricity market, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 14, pp. 877883, Aug. 1999. [31] E. D. Farmer et al., Optimal pricing of transmission and distribution services in electricity supply, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 142, pp. 18, Jan. 1995. [32] R. W. Ferrero and S. M. Shahidehpour, Optimal power transaction with network constraints in deregulated systems, Electr. Mach. Power Syst., vol. 25, pp. 661675, July 1997. [33] R. W. Ferro and S. M. Shahidehpour, Energy interchange in deregulated power systems, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 21, pp. 251258, May 1996. [34] M. A. Fischetti, Electric utilities: Poised for deregulation, IEEE Spectrum, pp. 3443, May 1986. [35] O. B. Fosso, A. Gjelsvik, A. Haugstad, B. Mo, and I. Wangensteen, Generation scheduling in a deregulated system. The Norwegian case, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 14, pp. 7581, Feb. 1999. [36] A. Fradi, S. Brignone, and B. F. Wollenberg, Calculation of energy transaction factors, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 16, pp. 266272, May 2001. [37] F. D. Galiana and M. Phelan, Allocation of transmission losses to bilateral contracts in a competitive environment, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 143150, Feb. 2000. [38] F. D. Galiana and M. Ilic, A mathematical framework for the analysis and management of power transactions under open access, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 13, pp. 681687, May 1998. [39] M. R. Gent, Electric supply and demand in the United States: Next ten years, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., vol. 13, p. 8, Apr. 1992. [40] K. Ghosh and V. C. Ramesh, An options model for electrical power market, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 19, pp. 7585, Feb. 1997. [41] S. Gisin Boris, M. V. Obessis, and J. V. Mitsche, Practical methods for transfer limit analysis in the power industry deregulated environment, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 955960, Aug. 2000. [42] P. R. Gribik, G. A. Angelidis, and R. R. Kovacs, Transmission access and pricing with multiple separate energy forward markets, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 14, pp. 865876, Aug. 1999. [43] P. R. Gribik, D. Shirmohammadi, S. Hao, and C. L. Thomas, Optimal power flow sensitive analysis, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 5, pp. 969976, Aug. 1990. [44] G. Gross and S. Tao, A physical-flow-based approach to allocating transmission losses in a transaction framework, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 631637, May 2000.

[45] N. Gu, X. Ling, and Z. Hou, A new approach for pricing of fixed cost in wheeling rates by modified mile-power method, Power Syst. Technol., vol. 23, pp. 666871, Feb. 1999. [46] S. Hadley, E. Hirst, and L. Baxter, The effect of various factors on estimates of electricutility transition costs, Utilities Policy, vol. 6, pp. 127135, June 1997. [47] G. Hamoud, Assessment of available transfer capability of transmission systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 2732, Feb. 2000. [48] , Feasibility assessment of simultaneous bilateral transactions in a deregulated environment, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 2226, Feb. 2000. [49] S. M. Hanumantha and P. G. Krishna, Customer service enhancement in electrical utility, in Proc. Power Quality Conf., Hyderabad, India, 1998. [50] H. H. Happ, Cost of wheeling methodologies, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 9, pp. 147156, Feb. 1994. , Transmission pricing policies and methods for evaluating [51] wheeling services, in Proc. Amer. Power Conf., Apr. 1994, pp. 295299. , Selection of methods for evaluating the cost of transmission [52] wheeling services, in Proc. Amer. Power Conf., 57th Annu. Meeting, Technology for a Competitive World, vol. 1, Chicago, IL, Apr. 1820, 1995, pp. 606611. [53] E. Hazan, Industry transformation is under way worldwide electric utilities, Transm. Distrib. World, vol. 49, pp. 4546, 4849, 51, May 1997. [54] D. L. Heinold, Retail wheeling: Is competition among energy utilities an environmental disaster, or it can be reconciled with integrated resource planning?, Rutgers Comput. Technol. Law J., vol. 22, pp. 301333, 1996. [55] D. Hirano and K. Yamaji, A study on fair allocation of the wheeling costs among multiple users, Trans. Inst. Elect. Eng. Jpn. B, vol. 118, pp. 990997, Sept. 1998. , A study on setting the wheeling rate of electricity on the basis of [56] marginal cost, Int. J. Global Energy Issues, vol. 11, pp. 195202, 1998. [57] J. Hu, J. Huang, and B. Bian, A research about optimal wheeling scheme, Autom. Electr. Power Syst., vol. 22, pp. 3436, Dec. 1998. [58] V. Hulleman and W. A. Kerr, Access: A global issue in electricity generation, Energy Sources, vol. 20, pp. 241257, Apr. 1998. [59] M. D. Ilic, Y. T. Yoon, and A. Zobian, Available transmission capacity (ATC) and its value under open access, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 12, pp. 636645, May 1997. [60] M. D. Ilic, Y. T. Yoon, A. Zobian, and M. E. Paravalos, Toward regional transmission provision and its pricing in New England, Utilities Policy, vol. 6, pp. 245256, Sept. 1997. [61] M. Ilic, F. Galiana, and L. Fink, Power Systems Restructuring Engineering and Economics. Norwell, MA: Kluwer. [62] K. Ito, R. Yokoyama, S. Gamou, and Y. Matsumoto, Analysis of electric wheeling on cooperative fuel cell cogeneration systems installed in multiareas, J. Energy Res. Technol., vol. 116, pp. 211217, Sept. 1994. [63] F. Jonard, Y. Smeers, P. Bruel, and B. Heilbronn, Wheeling costs: An economic analysis illustrated by short-term and long-term simulation, in Proc. Stockholm Power Tech. Int. Symp. Electric Power Engineering, Stockholm, Sweden, June 1822, 1995. [64] S. Karkkainen and E. Lakervi, Liberalization of electricity market in Finland as a part of Nordic market, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 148, pp. 194199, Mar. 2001. [65] P. Kemezis, Retail wheeling: New Hampshire kicks off pilot program after a year of debate, Elect. World, vol. 210, pp. 3940, 42, July 1996. [66] S. Khushalani and S. A. Khaparde, Congestion management in the emerging energy market structures, in Proc. CIGRE Regional MeetingInt. Conf. Bulk Power Transmission System Integration in Developing Countries, Nov. 810, 2001, pp. VII-16VII-24. [67] L. K. Kirchmayer, Economic Operation of Power Systems. New York: Wiley, 1984. [68] D. S. Kirschen, G. Strbac, P. Cumperayot, and D. Mendes de Paiva, Factoring the elasticity of demand in electricity prices, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 612617, May 2000. [69] R. R. Kovacs and A. L. Leverett, A load flow-based method for calculating embedded, incremental and marginal cost of transmission capacity, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 9, pp. 272278, Feb. 1994. [70] A. Kumar and S. C. Srivastava, Power transaction allocation in a deregulated market using AC power transfer distribution factors, in Proc. CIGRE Regional MeetingInt. Conf. Bulk Power Transmission System Integration in Developing Countries, Nov. 810, 2001, pp. VIII-9VIII-17.

876

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 17, NO. 3, AUGUST 2002

[71] P. Kumar and S. C. Srivastava, Congestion management in deregulated powerA case study on an Indian power system, in Proc. 11th NPSC, vol. 1, sec. IISc, Banglore, India, Dec. 2022, 2000, pp. 191196. [72] A. Kuwahata and A. Hiroshi, Utilitycogenerator game for pricing power sales and wheeling fees, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 9, pp. 18751879, Nov. 1994. [73] M. A. Lamoureux, Evolution of electric utility restructuring in the U.K., IEEE Power Eng. Rev., pp. 39, June 2001. [74] K. Y. Lee, Network congestion assessment for short-term transmission planning under deregulated environment, in IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, Columbus, OH, Jan. 28Feb. 1, 2001. [75] P. Lewis, Wheeling and dealing [power transmission], IEE Rev., vol. 42, pp. 196198, Sept. 1996. [76] Y. Z. Li and A. K. David, Optimal multiarea wheeling, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 9, pp. 288294, Feb. 1994. , Wheeling rates of reactive power flow under marginal cost [77] pricing, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 9, pp. 12631269, Aug. 1994. [78] J. W. M. Lima, M. V. F. Pereira, and J. L. R. Pereira, An integrated framework for cost allocation in a multiowned transmission system, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 10, pp. 971977, May 1995. [79] J. W. M. Lima and E. J. de Oliveira, The long-term impact of transmission pricing, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 13, pp. 15141520, Nov. 1998. [80] K. L. Lo and S. Zhu, Wheeling and marginal wheeling rates: Theory and case study results, Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 27, pp. 1126, May 1993. , A theory for pricing wheeled power, Electr. Power Syst. Res., [81] vol. 28, pp. 191200, Jan. 1994. [82] Q. C. Lu and S. R. Brammer, Transmission loss factors for area energy interchange, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, pp. 13871392, Aug. 1996. [83] X. Ma, A. A. El-Keib, and T. A. Haskew, Effects of neglecting volt/var optimization on marginal cost-based pricing for wheeling transactions and independent power producers, Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 42, pp. 229237, Sept. 1997. , Marginal cost-based pricing of wheeling transactions and [84] independent power producers considering security constraints, Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 48, pp. 7378, Dec. 1998. [85] C. N. Macqueen and M. R. Irving, An algorithm for the allocation of distribution system demand and energy losses, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, pp. 338343, Feb. 1996. [86] A. Manglic, Restructuring of Australias electricity supply industryimpact and emerging issues, in Proc. CIGRE Regional MeetingInt. Conf. Bulk Power Transmission System Integration in Developing Countries, Nov. 810, 2001, pp. VIII-iVIII-viii. [87] M. K. C. Marwali and S. M. Shahidehpour, Short-term transmission line maintenance scheduling in a deregulated system, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 11171124, Aug. 2000. [88] S. Mehra, Bulk power marketing in developing countries, in Proc. CIGRE Regional MeetingInt. Conf. Bulk Power Transmission System Integration in Developing Countries, Nov. 810, 2001, pp. VIII-1VIII-8. [89] J. Meisel, System incremental cost calculations using the participation factor load-flow formulation, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 8, pp. 357360, Feb. 1993. [90] H. M. Merrill and B. W. Erickson, Wheeling rates based on marginal-cost theory, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 4, pp. 14451451, Oct. 1989. [91] W. Mielczarski and G. Mischalik, Open electricity markets in Australia: Contract and spot prices, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., pp. 4951, Feb. 1999. [92] N. A. Mijuskovic, Reliability indexes for electric-power wheeling, IEEE Trans. Reliab., vol. 43, pp. 207209, June 1994. [93] M. Muchayi and M. E. El-Hawary, Wheeling rates evaluation using optimal power flows, in Proc. IEEE Can. Conf. Electrical and Computer Engineering, vol. 1, Waterloo, ON, Canada, May 2428, 1998, pp. 389392. [94] R. Mukerji, W. Neugebauer, R. P. Ludorf, and A. Catelli, Evaluation of wheeling and nonutility generation (NUG) options using optimal power flows, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 7, pp. 201207, Feb. 1992. [95] E. T. Nabas, J. A. B. Falleiros, and J. C. Masciotro, WheelingA feasible solution for the cogeneration using biomass in Brazil, in Proc. IEEE Transmission and Distribution Conf., vol. 1, New Orleans, LA, Apr. 1116, 1999, pp. 305309. [96] T. Nakashima, T. Niimura, and K. Okada, Multiple-impact assessment of wheeling and independent power producers in a deregulated power system, in Proc. IEEE Can. Conf. Electrical and Computer Engineering, vol. 1, Waterloo, ON, Canada, May 2428, 1998, pp. 8992.

[97] F. Nishimura, Transaction modes of electric energy exchange and their effects of benefit optimization and allocation, in Proc. Int. Conf. EMPD, vol. 1, Nov. 2123, 1995, pp. 2525. [98] F. Nishimura, R. D. Tabors, M. D. Ilic, and J. R. Lacalle-Melero, Benefit optimization of centralized and decentralized power systems in a multiutility environment, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 8, pp. 11801186, Aug. 1993. [99] K. Okada and H. Asano, A multiarea EDC with spot pricing and economic power interchange, in Proc. Int. Conf. EMPD, Singapore, Nov. 2123, 1995, pp. 1217. [100] E. J. de Olivvera, J. W. M. Lima, and J. L. R. Pereira, Flexible AC transmission system devices: Allocation and transmission pricing, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 21, pp. 111118, Feb. 1999. [101] J. D. Pace, Wheeling and the obligation to serve, Energy Law J., 1987. [102] C. Palanicharmy et al., Privatizing and restructuring Indian power sectorAn overview, Inst. Eng. J., vol. 80, pp. 2330, May 1999. [103] J. Pan, Y. Teklu, and S. Rahman, Review of usage-based transmission cost allocation methods under open access, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 12181224, Nov. 2000. [104] Y.-M. Park, J.-B. Park, J.-U. Lim, and J.-R. Won, An analytical approach for transaction costs allocation in transmission system, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 13, pp. 14071412, Nov. 1998. [105] M. V. F. Pereira, B. G. Gorenstin, M. Fo. Morozowski, and J. B. Silva, Chronological probabilistic costing and wheeling calculations with transmission network modeling, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 7, pp. 885891, May 1992. [106] B. L. P. P. Perera, E. D. Farmer, and B. J. Cory, Revenue reconciled optimum pricing of transmission services, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, pp. 14191426, Aug. 1996. [107] I. J. Perez-Arriaga, F. J. Rubio, J. F. Puerta, J. Arceluz, and J. Marin, Marginal pricing of transmission services: An analysis of cost recovery, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 10, pp. 546552, Feb. 1995. [108] S. Phichaisawat and Y. H. Song, Transmission pricing using improved sensitivity indexes, in IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, Columbus, OH, Jan. 28Feb. 1, 2001. [109] R. Pospisil, Wheeling battles turf wars of independence, Elect. World, vol. 208, Nov. 1994. [110] H. B. Puttgen, D. R. Volzka, and M. I. Olken, Restructuring and reregulation of the U.S. electric utility industry, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., pp. 810, Feb. 2001. [111] M. Rashidinejad, Y. H. Song, and M. H. Javidi, Option pricing of spinning reserve in a deregulated electricity market, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., pp. 3940, July 2000. [112] N. S. Rau and C. Necsulescu, A model for energy exchanges in interconnected power systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 4, pp. 11471153, Aug. 1989. [113] R. G. Tessmer, Jr, Cogeneration and Wheeling of Electrical Power, New York: Penn Well Publishers, 1995, p. 204. [114] I. A. Robson, H. W. Whittington, and J. Connelly, Decision support for energy trading between power generators, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 21, pp. 359369, May 1996. [115] A. Roy, M. G. Raoot, P. Pentayya, and R. K. Mediratta, Framework for facilating power trading in India, in Proc. CIGRE Regional MeetingInt. Conf. Bulk Power Transmission System Integration in Developing Countries, Nov. 810, 2001, pp. IX25IX-34. [116] F. J. Rubio-Oderiz and I. J. Perez-Arriaga, Marginal pricing of transmission services: A comparative analysis of network cost allocation methods, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 448454, Feb. 2000. [117] H. Rudnic, M. Soto, and R. Palma, Use of system approaches for transmission open access pricing, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 21, pp. 125135, Feb. 1999. [118] H. Rudnic and J. Zolezzi, Electric sectors deregulation and restructuring in Latin America: Lessons to be learnt and possible ways forward, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 148,, pp. 180184, Mar. 2001. [119] H. Rudnics, R. Palma, and J. E. Fernandez, Marginal pricing and supplement cost allocation in transmission open access, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 10, pp. 11251142, May 1995. [120] D. D. Sabin and A. Sundaram, Quality enhances reliability [power supplies], IEEE Spectrum, vol. 33, pp. 3441, Feb. 1996. [121] T. Sackey, Dealing with wheeling in West Africa, Transm. Distrib. World, vol. 50, pp. 6971, Nov. 1998. [122] T. Sackey and S. Z. Zakhary, Power wheeling through the West African interconnected system, in Proc. 6th Int. Conf. AC and DC Power Transmission, London, U.K., Apr. 29May 3, 1996, Conf. Publ. 423, pp. 1318.

SOOD et al.: WHEELING OF POWER UNDER DEREGULATED ENVIRONMENT

877

[123] S. R. Sarma, Gopalachari, and K. Viswanath, Restructuring and reforms of power sector, in Andhra Pradesh State (India)Case study, in Proc. Symp. Electricity Distribution in the Developing Countries. New Delhi, India: CBIP, Jan. 2021, 2000. [124] A. Scarfane, Short-circuit simulations help quantify wheeling flow, IEEE Comput. Applicat. Power, vol. 8, pp. 4447, Apr. 1995. [125] F. C. Schweppe, M. C. Caramanis, R. D. Tabors, and R. E. Bohn, Spot Pricing of Electricity. Norwell, MA: Kluwer, 1998. [126] K. Seethalekshmi, V. C. Trivedi, and M. Ramamoorty, Locational pricing under transmission constraints in an interconnected power system, in Proc. 11th NPSC, vol. 1, sec. IISc, Bangalore, India, Dec. 2022, 2000, pp. 197202. [127] M. Shaaban, Y. Ni, and F. F. Wu, Available transfer capability evaluation by decomposition, in Proc. IEEE Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, Vancouver, BC, Canada, July 1519, 2001. [128] D. Shirmohammadi, P. R. Gribik, E. T. K. Law, J. H. Malinowski, and R. E. ODonnell, Evaluation of transmission network capacity use for wheeling transactions, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 4, pp. 14051413, Oct. 1989. [129] D. Shiromohammadi, C. A. E. R. Rajagopalanet, and C. L. Thomas, Cost of transmission transaction: An introduction, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 6, pp. 10061016, Aug. 1991. [130] E. L. Silva, S. E. C. Mesa, and M. Morozowski, Transmission access pricing to wheeling transactions: A reliability-based approach, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 13, pp. 14811486, Nov. 1998. [131] S. N. Singh and A. K. David, Electricity supply industry restructuring: International experience, in Proc. 3rd R&D Conf. of CBIP, Jabalpur, India, Feb. 29Mar. 1, 2000, pp. 477488. [132] Y. R. Sood and N. P. Padhy, Method of evaluating cost of wheeling based on marginal cost theory, in Proc. Int. Symp. Electricity Distribution in the Developing Countries. New Delhi, India: CBIP, Jan. 2021, 2000. [133] Y. R. Sood, N. P. Padhy, and H. O. Gupta, Methods of evaluating cost of wheeling under deregulated environment of power system, in Proc. All India Seminar PSRAP21C,. Jaipur, India, Feb. 17, 2001. [134] Y. R. Sood, N. P. Padhy, H. O. Gupta, and S. Verma, Analysis and management of wheeling transactions based on AI techniques under deregulated environment of power sector, Water Energy Int. J., vol. 58, pp. 4552, Jan.Mar. 2001. [135] Y. R. Sood, S. Verma, N. P. Padhy, and H. O. Gupta, Evolutionary programming-based algorithm for selection of wheeling options, in IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, Columbus, OH, Jan. 28Feb. 1, 2001. [136] G. Stein, In search of competitive electricity supplies, in Proc. Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Conf., May 15, 1994, pp. 219223. [137] H. Stein, Deregulation in the U.S. promises good prospects, Modern Power Syst., vol. 15, p. 19, 21, 23, Nov. 1995. [138] G. Strbac, D. Kirschen, and D. Ahmed, Allocating transmission system usage on the basis of traceable contributions of generators and loads to flow, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 13, pp. 527534, May 1998. [139] L. Tai-Gen and C. Shi-Lin, Incremental transmission capability evaluation applied to dispersed generation planning and retail wheeling assessment, J. Chin. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 6, pp. 307316, Nov. 1999. [140] M. Takahashi, Evaluation of power system control in transmission open access, Record of Electrical and Communication Engineering Conversazione Tohoku University, vol. 67, pp. 190191, Aug. 1998. [141] S. Tao and G. Gross, Transmission loss compensation in multiple transaction networks, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 909915, Aug. 2000. [142] T. J. Overbye, G. Gross, M. J. Laufenberg, and P. W. Sauer, Visualizing power system operations in an open market, IEEE Comput. Appl. Power, vol. 10, pp. 5358, Jan. 1997. [143] R. Tripathy and S. K. Khaiani, Restructuring of power supply industry and privatizationSubsidies as social responsibility, in Proc. CIGRE Regional MeetingInt. Conf. Bulk Power Transmission System Integration in Developing Countries, Nov. 810, 2001, pp. IX-1IX-8. [144] C. L. Tseng, S. S. Oren, A. J. Svoboda, and R. B. Johnson, Price-based adaptive spinning reserve requirements in power system scheduling, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 21, pp. 137145, Feb. 1999. [145] Y. Tsukamoto and I. Iyoda, Allocation of fixed transmission cost to wheeling transactions by cooperative game theory, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, pp. 620629, May 1996. [146] E. de Tuglie, M. Dicorato, M. La Scala, and P. Scarpellini, A static optimization approach to assess dynamic available transfer capability, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 10691076, Aug. 2000.

[147] B. Tyagi and S. C. Srivastava, Automation generation control for multiarea system in a deregulated electricity market, in Proc. CIGRE Regional MeetingInt. Conf. Bulk Power Transmission System Integration in Developing Countries, Nov. 810, 2001, pp. VIII-18VIII-29. [148] U.S. Government Printing Office, Electric power wheeling and dealing: Technological considerations for increasing competition, U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, OTA-E-409, Washington, DC, May 1989. [149] E. Vaahedi, R. J. Poirier, C. Necsulescu, and A. N. Karas, Benefits of economy transactions and wheeling in Canada, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 8, pp. 12991306, Aug. 1993. [150] , Benefits of wheeling economy energy in Canada: Quantification and sensitivity analysis, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 141, pp. 585593, Nov. 1994. [151] K. Viswanath, Deregulation conceptsOverview, in Proc. Symp. Electricity Distribution in the Developing Countries. New Delhi, India: CBIP, Jan. 2021, 2000, pp. 2633. [152] A. F. Vojdani, C. F. Imparato, N. K. Saini, and H. H. Happ, Transmission access issues, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, pp. 4151, Feb. 1996. [153] S. Vucetic, K. Tomsovic, and Z. Obradovic, Discovering priceload relationships in Californias electricity market, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 16, pp. 280286, May 2001. [154] L. Wang, J. Chen, J. Wang, and Q. Yin, Power losses in Gansu 330 KV power network caused by wheeling, Power Syst. Technol., vol. 22, pp. 6870, Oct. 1998. [155] A. J. Wood and B. F. Wollenberg, Power Generation, Operation and Control. New York: Wiley, 1996. [156] F. F. Wu and P. Varaiya, Coordinated multilateral trades for electric power networks: Theory and implementation, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 21, pp. 75102, Feb. 1999. [157] F. F. Wu, Y. Ni, and P. Wei, Power transfer allocation for open access using graph theoryFundamentals and applications in systems without loopflow, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 923929, Aug. 2000. [158] Y. Xiao and Y. H. Song, Available transfer capability (ATC) evaluation by stochastic programming, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., pp. 5052, Sept. 2000. [159] W. Xing, J. Lin, F. Hu, and D. Qi et al., A study of the hierarchical structure for the power market in China, in IEEE Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, Vancouver, BC, Canada, July 1519, 2001. [160] T. Yong and R. Lasseter, Optimal power flow formulation in market of retail wheeling, in IEEE Power Engineering Society, Winter Meeting, New York, Jan.31-Feb. 4, 1999. [161] C. W. Yu, Long-run marginal cost-based pricing of interconnected system wheeling, Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 50, pp. 205212, June 1999. [162] Z. Yu, D. Gachiri Nderitu, and F. T. Sparrow, A proposed market power monitoring model for restructuring electricity markets, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., pp. 4142, July 2000. [163] Z. Yu, F. T. Sparrow, G. Nderitu, D. Gotham, F. Holland, and T. Morin, A large oligopoly competition model with an application to the midwest electricity markets, in IEEE Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, Vancouver, BC, Canada, July 1519, 2001. [164] C. W. Yu and A. K. David, Long-run marginal cost evaluation of transmission capacity, in Proc. Int. Power Engineering Conf., vol. 1, Singapore, May 2224, 1997, pp. 425430. , Security related long-run marginal cost analysis of transmission [165] service, in Proc. 4th Int. Conf. APSCOM, vol. 2, Hong Kong, Nov. 1114, 1997, pp. 463468. [166] , Transmission open access and marginal wheeling cost evaluation, in Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Advances in Power System Control, Operation and Management, vol. 1, Hong Kong, Nov. 911, 1995, pp. 277282. [167] J. Zarnikau and B. Reilley, The evolution of the cogeneration market in Taxas, Energy Policy, vol. 24, pp. 6779, Jan. 1996. [168] D. Zhang et al., Optimization-based bidding strategies in the deregulated market, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, pp. 981986, Aug. 2000. [169] S. P. Zhu, Some considerations on transmission services concerning optimizing wheeling parties benefits, in Proc. Int. Conf. EMPD, Nov. 2123, 1995, pp. 1924. [170] B. M. Zinow, Competition in the american electricity supply industryreport on a survey trip, Elektrizitaetswirtschaft, vol. 96, pp. 14921494, Dec. 1997.

878

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 17, NO. 3, AUGUST 2002

[171] Y. Zuwei, F. T. Sparrow, and T. Trafalis, A proposed fast algorithm for security constrained economic dispatch in case of energy exchange and wheeling, in Proc. Amer. Power Conf., Chicago, IL, Apr. 13, 1997, pp. 371376.

Narayana Prasad Padhy received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in engineering from the Institute of Engineering, India, in 1990 and 1993, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree from Anna University, Chennai, India, in 1997. He joined Birla Institute of Technology and Science as an Assistant Professor in 1997. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Electrical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee. He has taught courses in basic electrical engineering, power systems, and artificial intelligence. His field of interests are artificial intelligence applications to power system optimization problems, optimal wheeling, and FACT.

Yog Raj Sood was born in Banur (Patiala), India. He received the B.Sc. degree from P.U. Chandigarh, Chandigarh, India, in 1980, and the B.E. degree in electrical engineering (with honors) and the M.E. degree in power systems from Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh, in 1984 and 1987, respectively. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree at the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee. He joined Regional Engineering College Kurukshetra in 1986. Since 1991, he has been an Assistant Professor in the Electrical Engineering Department, Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur, H.P., India. He has published a number of research papers. His research interests are in the area of computer applications to power system, wheeling, deregulation, open access transmission system, power network optimization, and nonconventional sources of energy.

H. O. Gupta was born in Agra, India. He received the B.E. degree in electrical engineering from the Government Engineering College, Jabalpur, India, in 1972, and the M.E. degree in systems engineering and operation research and the Ph.D. degree from the University of Roorkee, Roorkee, India, in 1975 and 1980, respectively. He is currently a Professor in the Electrical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee. He visited McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada, from 1981 to 1983 as a Postdoctoratal Fellow. His research interests are in the area of computer-aided design, reliability engineering, power network optimization, and power transformers.