554

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 19, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2004

A Zonal Congestion Management Approach Using

Real and Reactive Power Rescheduling
Ashwani Kumar, S. C. Srivastava, Senior Member, and S. N. Singh, Senior Member

AbstractIn a deregulated electricity market, it may always

not be possible to dispatch all of the contracted power transactions due to congestion of the transmission corridors. System operators try to manage congestion, which otherwise increases the
cost of the electricity and also threatens the system security and
stability. In this paper, a new zonal/cluster-based congestion management approach has been proposed. The zones have been determined based on lines real and reactive power flow sensitivity indexes also called as real and reactive transmission congestion distribution factors. The generators in the most sensitive zones, with
strongest and nonuniform distribution of sensitivity indexes, are
identified for rescheduling their real power output for congestion
management. In addition, the impact of optimal rescheduling of
reactive power output by generators and capacitors in the most
sensitive zones has also been studied. The proposed new zonal concept has been tested on 39-bus New England system and a 75-bus
Indian system.
Index TermsCongestion zones, transmission congestion distribution factors, transmission congestion management.

I. INTRODUCTION

N a competitive electricity market, congestion occurs when

the transmission network is unable to accommodate all of
the desired transactions due to a violation of system operating
limits. Congestion does occur in both vertically bundled and
unbundled systems but the management in the bundled system
is relatively simple as generation, transmission, and, in some
cases, distribution systems are managed by one utility. The management of congestion is somewhat more complex in competitive power markets and leads to several disputes. In the present
day competitive power market, each utility manages the congestion in the system using its own rules and guidelines utilizing
a certain physical or financial mechanism. Various congestion
management schemes suitable for different electricity market
structure have been reported in literature. But there is still a need
for an efficient and more reliable method to solve this problem
[1].
Hogan proposed the contract path and nodal pricing approach
[2] using spot pricing theory [3] for the pool-type market. Chao
and Peck [4] proposed an alternative approach, which is based
on parallel markets for link-based transmission capacity rights
and energy trading under a set of rules defined and administered
by the system operator (SO). These rules specify the transmission capacity rights required to support bilateral transactions

Manuscript received March 20, 2003.

The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India (e-mail: ashwa@iitk.ac.in;
scs@iitk.ac.in; snsingh@iitk.ac.in).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRS.2003.821448

and are adjusted continuously to reflect the changing system

conditions.
Several optimal power flow (OPF)-based congestion management schemes have been proposed. An approach for relieving
congestion using the minimum total shift in the transactions
is presented in [5]. A willingness-to-pay premium [6] has also
been suggested to avoid curtailment of the transactions. Marginal cost signals are used in [7] for generators to manage congestion. A similar approach is proposed in [8], where the congestion cost is bundled with the marginal cost at each bus in a
pool model and a congestion cost minimization is adopted in bilateral model. With the help of flexible ac transmission systems
(FACTS), transmission network capability is utilized in a better
way and congestion can be managed in an efficient manner [9],
[10].
A congestion clusters-based method, which identifies the
group of system users according to their impact on transmission constraints of interest, has been proposed in [11]. These
clusters based on congestion distribution factors are termed as
clusters of type 1, 2 and higher, where type 1 cluster represents
users with strongest and nonuniform effects on transmission
constraints of interest. The proposed clustering-based method
has been used to create an efficient congestion management
market, where the readjustment of transactions in the most
sensitive cluster can help in eliminating congestion. However,
this method is based on dc load flow involving the assumptions
of lossless system and unity voltage magnitudes at all of the
buses.
The optimal reactive power support in the system plays a very
important role in maintaining an acceptable system voltage profile and helping in managing the congestion more effectively.
However, reactive power cannot always be delivered from a
source to an electrically remote sink. The local nature of the
reactive power also implies that the generator may provide the
reactive power support for a number of transactions even if that
particular generator is not involved in the real power dispatch.
The allocated contributions of the individual generators reactive power output to a particular transaction can be negative or
positive [15]. Thus, the Var support requirement from generators and capacitors to manage congestion along with real power
rescheduling poses a great challenge to SO in an open-access
electricity market.
In this paper, a new zonal/cluster-based congestion management approach has been proposed. The proposed method utilizes two sets of sensitivity indexes termed as real transmission
congestion distribution factors (PTCDFs) and reactive transmission congestion distribution factors (QTCDFs) for congestion
management in competitive power markets where selection and

0885-8950/04$20.00 2004 IEEE

KUMAR et al.: A ZONAL CONGESTION MANAGEMENT APPROACH USING REAL AND REACTIVE POWER RESCHEDULING

participation of generators/sources, not only depend on their relative sensitivity, but also on their bid price for up/down regulation to alleviate congestion. The most sensitive zones have been
identified as the union of most sensitive zones obtained on the
basis of real and reactive line flow sensitivity indexes separately.
The impact of optimal rescheduling of generators and capacitors
has been demonstrated in congestion management. The effectiveness of the proposed method has been tested on 39-bus New
England system and a 75-bus Indian system.

555

The coefficients appearing in (7) and (8) can be obtained

using the partial derivatives of real and reactive power flow (1)
and (2) with respect to variables and as
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)

II. MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION

and reactive power flow
in
The real power flow
a line- connected between bus- and bus- can be written as

(15)
(16)

(1)

For determination of TCDFs, the following Jacobian relationship has been used:

(2)

(17)

and are the voltage magnitude and angle at bus- .

where
and
are magnitude and angle of th element of
matrix.
is the shunt charging admittance of line- .

Neglecting
as:

and

coupling, (17) can be simplified

(18)
(19)

A. Transmission Congestion Distribution Factors (TCDFs)

Real and reactive transmission congestion distribution factors
(TCDFs) denote how much active and reactive power flow over
a transmission line would change due to change in real and reactive power injections, respectively. The real PTCDFs are dein a transfined as the change in the real power flow
mission line- connected between bus- and bus- due to unit
change in the power injection
at any bus- . Mathematically, the PTCDFs for line- can be written as

From (18) and (19), we get

(20)
(21)
Equations (20) and (21) can be rewritten in the following
form:
(22)

(3)
(23)
Similarly, the QTCDFs are defined as the change in the reactive power flow
in a transmission line- connected between bus- and bus- due to unit change in the reactive power
injection
at bus- and can be written as
(4)

where is the number of buses in the system and is the slack

bus.
It is assumed that the impact of change in the bus voltage on
real power flow and bus angle on reactive power flow is negligible and, therefore, (7) and (8) can be rewritten as
(24)
(25)

Using, Taylor series approximation, (1) and (2) can be written

(ignoring second and higher order terms) as

Substituting (22) into (24) and (23) into (25), we get

(5)

(26)

(6)
(27)
Equations (5) and (6) can be rewritten as

or
(7)
(8)

(28)

556

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 19, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2004

(29)
Equations (28) and (29) can be rewritten as

(30)
(31)
where

are the real and reactive transmission congestion distribution

factors corresponding to a bus- and a line- connected between
bus- and bus- .
The Jacobian utilized for computing the TCDFs, in the
present work will change for any change in the system operating condition. However, the suggested method is quite fast
and can be utilized for updating the TCDFs and, hence, the
cluster of buses (zones) for congestion management.
B. Zonal-Based Transmission Congestion Management
There are two broad methods for congestion management in
a deregulated market. The first one is based on price signal,
which may be in the form of change in locational marginal price
due to congestion or in the form of zonal price as practiced in the
California market. The second approach is based on readjustment of transactions, which have been considered in the present
work. The concept of congestion zone in this work is different
from that used in the California market. In the present work,
congestion zones are nothing but a cluster of buses, selected
based on sensitivity of flow in the congested line.
The TCDFs have been utilized for identifying congestion
clusters (zones) for a given system. The congestion zone/cluster
of type 1 has been defined as zone having large and nonuniform
TCDFs, and the congestion zones of type 2 and higher have
been defined as those having small or similar TCDFs. Therefore, the transactions in the congestion zone1 have critical
and unequal impact on the line flow. The congestion zones
of type 2, 3 and higher are farther from the congested line
of interest [11]. Therefore, any transaction outside the most

Minimize

sensitive zone 1 will contribute very little to the line flow.

Thus, the identification of congestion zones will reduce the
computational burden, considerably, in both redispatching and
physical curtailments necessary for the transmission loading
relief (TLR) in case of emergency and the adjustment of system
users themselves under normal conditions.
The congestion zonal-based method is also applicable if more
than one transmission line congestion conditions are present in
the system. The congestion clusters/zones for a multicongestion
case can be obtained by superimposing the clusters/zones corresponding to the individual line congestion.
The paper assumes that only one system operator is managing
the complete system. However, in case of several system operators, the clusters/zones will be defined separately to manage the
congestion in their operating area.
C. Selection of Generators and Optimal Location of
Capacitors for Reactive Power Support
The proper management of reactive power support in the network improves the system voltage profile and also helps in managing congestion up to some extent. It is important to identify
the generators and capacitors required to provide reactive power
support in congestion management. In the present paper, the reactive support of generators and capacitors, in addition to the
rescheduling of real power generation, has been considered to
manage the congestion.
Based on the QTCDFs, the SO identifies the most sensitive
zones and optimally selects the generators for their reactive
power rescheduling. However, the optimal placement of a
capacitor has been considered at a bus having the most negative
reactive power flow sensitivity indexes with respect to the
congested line.
D. Transaction Redispatch for the Congestion Management
The redispatch of transactions for congestion management in
a pool model is formulated as a nonlinear programming problem
and has been solved using the GAMS/CONOPT solver [13].
The optimization problem is formulated as: [See equations (32)
and (33) at bottom of page]
(34)
(35)
(36)
(37)

(32)

subject to

(33)

KUMAR et al.: A ZONAL CONGESTION MANAGEMENT APPROACH USING REAL AND REACTIVE POWER RESCHEDULING

and

(38)

557

The number of participants in the transmission congestion

will be generally much smaller than the number
market
of active participants in the electricity market. The congestion
cost can be determined for the hybrid type of market structure
in which bilateral and multilateral transactions are also taking
place along with pool demands. Pool model formulation can
be modified to incorporate the additional equality constraints
representing the bilateral and multilateral contracts.
E. Modeling Bilateral/Multilateral Contracts

(39)
where
is the number of generators participating in conis the MVA flow limit of a line
gestion management,
and
are the total
connected between bus- and bus- ,
real and reactive power loss, which have been expressed using
is the set of capacitors and
are
exact loss formula [14].
and
are the origthe number of buses in the system.
inal real and reactive power flow in line- (between bus- and
bus- ) caused by all of the transactions requesting the transmisis the real power adjustment of generator at
sion service.
is the change in the voltage due to
bus- .
change in the reactive power injection.
is the incremental or
decremental price bids submitted by generator- . These are the
prices at which generators are willing to adjust their real power
outputs. The second term in the objective function is the opportunity cost of the generator defined as [15]

(40)
where
is the cost of active power generation and is modeled
by a quadratic function as

where , , and are predetermined costs coefficients of

generator and
is the nominal apparent power of generator and is the profit rate of active power generation taken
between 5 and 10% [15].
The third term in the objective function is the equivalent cost
for return on the capital investment of the capacitors, which is
expressed as their depreciation rates (the life span of capacitors
is assumed as 15 years)

(41)
where

is the average usage rate of capacitors taken as

(in per unit at 100-MVA base). Equation (39) is a
linear cost function with a slope of

The second and third terms in (38) and (39) incorporate the
change in the losses in the system occurring due to redispatch
of the generators and capacitors.

The conceptual model of bilateral dispatch is that sellers and

buyers enter into transactions where the quantities traded and
the associated prices are at the discretion of these parties and
not a matter of SO. These transactions are then brought to the
SO with a request that transmission facilities for the relevant
amount of power transferred to be provided. If there is no static
and dynamic security violation, the SO simply dispatches all
of the requested transactions and charges for the transmission
service.
In a practical system, not all of the sellers have bilateral contract with buyers and vice-versa. Mathematically, each bilateral
transaction between a seller at bus- and power purchaser at
bus- satisfies the following power balance relationship:
(42)
The bilateral concept can be generalized to be multilateral
case where the seller (for example, a generation company) may
inject power at several nodes and the buyers also draw load at
several nodes. Unlike pool dispatch, there will be a transaction
power balance in that the aggregate injection equals the aggregate draw off for each transaction. The contracted demands of
load buses to be provided by generator- have to be shared in
a proportion decided optimally by SO. Mathematically, a multilateral contract- involving more than one supplier and/or one
consumer can be expressed as
(43)
and
stand for the power injections into the
where
seller bus- and the power taken out at the buyer bus- . is
the total number of contracts.
III. SYSTEM STUDIES
The proposed concept of congestion zone-based congestion
management system utilizing the real and reactive TCDFs has
been illustrated on a 39-bus New England system [16] and
75-bus Indian system [17]. The 39-bus system is a simplified
representation of the 345-kV transmission system in the New
England region having ten generators and 29 load buses.
The 75-bus Indian system represents a reduced network of
Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Boards network comprising of
400-kV and 220-kV buses with 15 generators, 24 transformers,
and 97 lines.
A. Thirty-Nine-Bus System (Single Congestion Case)
For this system, the congestion zones based on the real power
flow sensitivity for a line 34-14, which is considered as con-

558

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 19, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2004

Fig. 1. Congestion zones based on PTCDF for 39-bus New England system.
TABLE I
ZONES (BUS NO., PTCDF) FOR 39-BUS NEW ENGLAND SYSTEM

Fig. 2. Congestion zones based on QTCDF for the 39-bus New England
system.

TABLE II
ZONES (BUS NO., QTCDF) FOR THE 39-BUS NEW ENGLAND SYSTEM

gested line, are shown in Fig. 1. The congestion zones are decided on the basis of PTCDFs and accordingly the SO selects
most sensitive congestion zones for managing congestion. The
PTCDFs for the congested line 34-14 corresponding to each bus
are given in Table I for the four different zones.
The zone 1 is the most sensitive zone with larger magnitude
and strongest nonuniform distribution of PTCDFs. The magnitudes of PTCDFs in zone 4 are higher than zone 2 and zone 3
but due to uniform distribution of PTCDFs, the zone 4 is considered as the least sensitive zone. Fig. 2 shows the zones based on
the QTCDFs for the congested line 34-14. The reactive power
flow indexes are given in Table II. The combined zones based on
both real and reactive power flow sensitivity indexes are shown
in Fig. 3. The most sensitive combined zone (zone-1) has been
taken as the union of the most sensitive zones obtained from the
real and reactive power flow sensitivity indexes, separately.
The next sensitive zones (zones 2, 3, and higher) have been
formed, in sequence, by taking union of the remaining buses in
the respective zones obtained from the real and reactive power
flow sensitivity indexes. Since the sensitivity of both real and reactive power sources is with respect to the flow in the congested
line, the zones (clusters of buses) formed are almost overlapping.
Different combinations of market structures comprising pool
model and mix of pool plus bilateral and multilateral contracts
taken for study are
P:
pool model without bilateral and multilateral contracts;
C1: pool model with one bilateral contract between buses
335;
C2: pool model with two bilateral contracts between buses
335 and 821;
C3: pool model with one multilateral contract between
buses 335, 36;

Fig. 3. New combined congestion zones for the 39-bus New England system.

C4:

pool model with one bilateral contract between bus

821 and multilateral contract between 335, 36;
C5: pool model with two bilateral contracts between buses
821, 1023 and multilateral contract between buses
335, 36.
In the present study, the full capacities of generations at a
bus have been assumed to participate either in pool or in a bilateral/multilateral contract. For example, in a market structure
type-P, it is assumed that the full capacity of all the generators
bid only in the pool, whereas in type C1, the full capacity of
all the generators bid in the pool except the generator at bus 3
whose full capacity is assumed to participate only in the bilateral
contract. However, the problem formulation is quite general and
can consider the participation of any of the generators simultaneously in pool as well as in bilateral/multilateral contracts.

KUMAR et al.: A ZONAL CONGESTION MANAGEMENT APPROACH USING REAL AND REACTIVE POWER RESCHEDULING

559

TABLE III
CONGESTION COSTS (DOLLARS PER HOUR) FOR 39-BUS NEW ENGLAND
SYSTEM FOR DIFFERENT CASES

Fig. 6. Change in P-generation for the 39-bus system (case 2).

Fig. 4. Congestion costs for the 39-bus New England system.

Fig. 7. Change in P-generation for the 39-bus system (case 3).

Fig. 5.

Change in P-generation for the 39-bus system (case 1).

The congestion cost has been determined for a pool-based

market model and a mix of pool, bilateral, and multilateral contracts as given above considering the reactive support provided
by the generators and the optimally placed capacitors apart from
real power scheduling of generation in each case. The different
cases taken for the study are:
Case 1) without reactive power support from generators and
capacitor;
Case 2) with generators reactive support;
Case 3) with capacitor reactive support;
Case 4) with generators and capacitor reactive support.
It has been assumed that the SO selects generators G3, G8,
and G10 from the most sensitive zones to participate in the congestion management based on the qualifying bids. The capacitor
has been located optimally on bus 14 based on its most negative reactive power flow sensitivity index value as highlighted
in Table II.
The congestion costs for all of the cases are presented in
Table III and Fig. 4. The congestion cost for case 1 has also
been determined with dc method [11] and shown in Table III for

Fig. 8. Change in P-generation for the 39-bus system (case 4).

comparison. It is observed that the cost with proposed method is

much smaller compared with the method proposed in [11]. It can
also be seen that capacitors reactive support is more effective
in reducing congestion cost as compared to generator reactive
support. This may be due to the fact that the optimal placement
of capacitors meets the reactive power requirement of the zone
directly without involving the flow of reactive power through
lines. The congestion cost is found to be minimum with both
generator and capacitors giving reactive support in the system.
Figs. 58 show the optimal change in real power (P) output
of generators G3, G8, and G10 in per unit for different market
models considering four different cases. Comparing Figs. 58,
it is found that the generators are subjected to a lower magnitude
of rescheduling in the presence of reactive support provided by
the generators and capacitors.
The reactive power support from capacitor at bus-14 (C14)
and the change in reactive power output of generators for all
transactions (in per unit) are given in Table IV. The reactive

560

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 19, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2004

TABLE IV
REACTIVE POWER RESCHEDULING (IN PER UNIT) FOR CASES 2 AND 3

TABLE V
REACTIVE POWER RESCHEDULING (IN PER UNIT) FOR CASE 4
Fig. 10.

Congestion cost for 75-bus Indian system.

Fig. 11.

Change in P-generation for the 75-bus Indian system (case 1).

Fig. 12.

Change in P-generation for the 75-bus Indian system (case 2).

Fig. 9. Combined congestion zones for the 75-bus system.

power support from capacitor and change in reactive power outputs of generators for the case 4 are given in Table V.
From Tables IV and V, it is observed that capacitors are required to generate less MVAR when generators are also providing additional reactive support in the system. The generators
are subjected to lower reschedule of reactive power generation
when the capacitor is supporting the reactive power requirement
in the system.
B. Seventy-Five-Bus Indian System
For this system, the combined congestion zones based on the
real and reactive power flow sensitivity indexes for a line of interest 2641 are shown in Fig. 9. The system has been divided
into three zones with zone 1 as the most sensitive zone. It has
been assumed that SO selects generators G3, G12, and G13 from
the most sensitive zone 1 to participate in the congestion management based on their qualifying bids in an open market.
Different combinations taken for the study are:
P:
pool model without bilateral and multilateral contracts;
C1: pool model with one bilateral contract between buses
327;
C2: pool model with three bilateral contracts between
buses 327, 1224, and 1355;

C3:

pool model with one multilateral contract between

buses 1227, 73;
C4: pool model with one bilateral contract between bus
1355 and multilateral contract between 1227, 73;
C5: pool model with two bilateral contracts between buses
324, 1355, and multilateral contract between buses
1227, 73.
The changes in real power output of generators have been
determined for the two cases:
Case 1) without reactive support from generators;
Case 2) with reactive support from generators.
The congestion costs for the general market model structure
having pool, bilateral, and multilateral transactions are shown in
Fig. 10 along with the congestion costs for case 1 with dc model
[11]. Figs. 11 and 12 show the change in real power output of
generators for the above two cases.

KUMAR et al.: A ZONAL CONGESTION MANAGEMENT APPROACH USING REAL AND REACTIVE POWER RESCHEDULING

561

TABLE VI
CHANGE IN REACTIVE GENERATION (IN PER UNIT) (CASE 2)

Fig. 13.

Fig. 14.

Congestion cost for multicongestion case for the 39-bus system.

Fig. 15.
system.

Change in P-generation for multicongestion case for the 39-bus

Multicongestion case of 39-bus system.

From Fig. 10, it is found that the congestion cost is less for
case 2 compared with case 1 and the congestion costs are quite
less as compared to those obtained from dc model [11]. From
Figs. 11 and 12, it is observed that the generators are subjected
to lower real power rescheduling in the presence of reactive support from the generators. The change in reactive power output
of generators for all of the transactions for case 2 is given in
Table VI.

TABLE VII
CPU TIMES IN SECONDS

C. Multicongestion Case
In a power system network, there may be more than one
line getting congested simultaneously. The studies for the multicongestion cases were carried out for both 39-bus and 75-bus
system. However, the results for only 39-bus system are being
presented. For the simulation of a multicongestion case (case
mc), it is assumed that two lines 3414 and 3621 are congested
simultaneously. The combined zones based on real and reactive
TCDFs are shown in Fig. 13. The zone 1 and the zone 2 are
the most sensitive zones. For managing the congestion, generators 3, 8, 10 were selected from zone 1 and generators 4 and 6
were selected from zone 2, based on their qualifying bids in the
market. The congestion costs for the multicongestion case along
with those for case 1 are shown in Fig. 14 for the transactions P,
C1 to C5. It is observed that the congestion cost is significantly
high for the multicongestion case. The change in optimal real
power generation of the generators participating in the congestion management is shown in Fig. 15.
D. Computational Time
In order to compare the computational time taken by the proposed ac distribution factors-based method with the dc distribution factors based method, CPU times were computed on a
Pentium IV, 1.9-GHz, 512-RAM computer. The CPU time for
calculation of TCDFs (only real power TCDF in the dc method

whereas both real and reactive power TCDFs in the proposed

method) and the OPF utilized for congestion management are
presented in Table VII.
It is observed that the CPU time required by the proposed
method is quite close to that with the dc-based method [11].
IV. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a new zonal-based congestion management approach has been presented. The zones have been formed based
on the combined effect of real and reactive line power flow sensitivity indexes. An optimal power flow model minimizing the
congestion cost for redispatch of generators and capacitors considering a general market structure with pool, bilateral, and multilateral contracts has been studied. The test results on a 39-bus
New England system and 75-bus Indian system reveal the following.
The congestion costs in all of the cases based on the proposed method are found to be quite less compared with
those obtained from a dc model [11].
The congestion costs for cases employing reactive power
support from generators and capacitors are considerably
less than the cases without any reactive support.

562

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 19, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2004

The reactive power support utilized from an optimally located capacitor in the system is more effective in reducing
congestion cost as compared to additional reactive power
support taken from the generators.
The amount of rescheduling of real power transactions is
reduced in the presence of reactive support considered in
the system for congestion management.
The proposed approach is computationally efficient and
simple as it utilizes the sensitivity factors, which can be easily
updated.

[16] K. R. Padiyar, Power System Dynamics: Stability and Control. New

York: Wiley, 1996, p. 601.
[17] S. N. Singh and S. C. Srivastava, Corrective action planning to achieve
optimal power flow solution, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. C, vol. 142, pp.
576582, Nov. 1995.

REFERENCES
[1] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Regional Transmission Organizations, Washington, DC, Dec. 20, 1999.
[2] W. W. Hogan, Contract networks for electric power transmission, J.
Regul. Econ., vol. 4, pp. 211242, Sept. 1992.
[3] F. C. Schweppe, M. C. Caramanis, R. D. Tabors, and R. E. Bohn, Spot
Pricing of Electricity. Norwell, MA: Kluwer, 1988.
[4] H. Chao and S. Peck, A market mechanism for electric power transmission, J. Regu. Econ., vol. 10, pp. 2529, July 1996.
[5] 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.
[6] R. S. Fang and A. K. David, Transmission congestion management in
an electricity market, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 4, pp. 877883,
Aug. 1999.
[7] H. Glavisch and F. Alvarado, Management of multiple congested conditions in unbundled operation of power systems, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 13, pp. 10131019, Aug. 1998.
[8] H. Singh, S. Hao, and A. Papalexopoulos, Transmission congestion
management in competitive electricity markets, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 13, pp. 672680, May 1998.
[9] S. C. Srivastava and P.Perveen Kumar, Optimal power dispatch in
deregulated market considering congestion management, in Proc.
Int. Conf. Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and Power
Technologies, vol. 47. London, U.K., Apr. 2000, pp. 5359.
[10] S. N. Singh and A. K. David, Optimal location of FACTS devices for
congestion management, Int. J. Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 58, pp.
7179, 2001.
[11] C.-N.Chien-Ning Yu and M. Ilic, Congestion clusters-based markets
for transmission management, in Proc. 1999 IEEE Power Eng. Soc.
Winter Meeting , New York, Jan. 1999, pp. 111.
[12] N. G. Hingorani and L. Gyugi, Understanding FACTS: Concepts and
Technology of Flexible AC Transmission Systems. Piscataway, NJ:
IEEE Press, 2000.
[13] A Users Guide, GAMS Development Corp., 1999.
[14] A. J. Wood and B. F. Wollenberg, Power Generation, Operation and
Control. New York: Wiley, 1996.
[15] Y. Dai and Y. X. Ni et al., A study of reactive power marginal price in
electricity market, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 57, pp. 4148, 2001.

Ashwani Kumar received the B.Tech degree in electrical engineering from

G.B. Pant University, Pant Nagar, India, in 1988, and the M.Tech. degree in
power systems from Punjab University, Chandigarh, India, in 1994. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D degree under Quality Improvement Program (QIP)
in the electrical engineering department at the Indian Institute of Technology,
Kanpur, India.
Currently, he is a Lecturer in the Department of Electrical Engineering at National Institute of Technology (NIT)-Kurukshetra, Haryana, India. His research
interests include power system deregulation optimization and power system dynamics.

S. C. Srivastava (SM91) received the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering

from the Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi, India.
Currently, he is a Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering at the
Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India. His research interest includes energy management system, power system optimization, security analysis, voltage
stability, and power system deregulation.
Dr. Srivastava is a Fellow of the Indian National Academy of Engineering
(INAE), Institution of Engineers (India), and Institution of Electronics and
Telecommunication Engineers (IETE) [India].

S. N. Singh (SM02) received the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from

the Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, India, in 1995.
Currently, he is an Associate Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering at the Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur. He was with the Department of Electrical Engineering at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
Hong Kong, China, and was Assistant Professor with the Energy Program at
Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) Bangkok, Bangkok, Thailand. His research
interests include power system restructuring, flexible ac transmission systems
(FACTS), power system optimization and control, security analysis, and power
system planning.
Dr. Singh is a Fellow of the Institution of Engineers (India). He has received
several awards including Young Engineer Award 2000 of Indian National
Academy of Engineering, Khosala Research Award, and Young Engineer
Award of CBIP New Delhi (India).