EFFICIENT APPLICATIONS OF BUS TRANSFER SCHEMES
Craig Wester
Member, IEEE
GE Digital Energy Multilin
20 Technology Pkwy, Ste 300
Norcross, GA 30092
USA
Abstract - The application of bus transfer schemes in
industrial and utility facilities, such as paper mills,
petrochemical facilities, and utility power plants is
significant in both its number and criticality. This paper
will review the basics of main-tie-main bus transfer
schemes, highlight the technical challenges associated
with implementing such schemes, and examine how
modern technology can provide solutions that enhance
efficiency, engineering, and operations.
Among the issues to be discussed in this paper are: (a)
enhancing panel design by reducing the number of
devices necessary for implementation; (b) achieving
savings in wiring by utilizing IEC61850 peer-to-peer
communication methods; (c) how modern technology
enhances the ability to test and troubleshoot the scheme
and; (d) examination of the advantages and
disadvantages of different types of bus transfer schemes.
I. INTRODUCTION
The implementation of bus transfer schemes in industrial
and utility facilities has typically taken the form of discrete
electromechanical relays that provide the necessary level of
system protection and control. The value of these legacy
relays is their proven performance and high level of reliability.
The disadvantages of these legacy relays are their cost,
extensive use of panel space and extensive device-to-device
wiring.
Main-Tie-Main (M-T-M) bus transfer and protection for
industrial and utility installations has often been accomplished
using discrete relays and logic devices. Discrete relays were
used for overcurrent, overvoltage, undervoltage protection
and synchrocheck control. Auxiliary relays, timers, and
programmable logic controllers (PLCs) have been used for
control logic functions.
The development of the microprocessor-based relay has
provided the industry with a new tool that can not only meet
the needs of bus transfer scheme implementation, but also
offers numerous additional benefits that can help the
organization attain higher levels of cost efficiency. The ability
to provide protection, control, and automation in a single
device has led to the use of the term “intelligent electronic
device” or “IED”.
Advanced microprocessor-based protective IEDs with
programmable logic capabilities can simplify and enhance the
978-1-4244-5674-1/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE
Terrence Smith
Member, IEEE
GE Digital Energy Multilin
4650 Parker Loop Rd
Birchwood, TN 37308
USA
M-T-M bus transfer schemes. Thus, Main-Tie-Main bus
transfer schemes can be:
ƒ Accomplished by reduced amount of devices/IEDs (i.e.
“lean” applications)
ƒ Implemented using protective relay inputs and outputs
ƒ Implemented using protective relay-to-relay control
logic via IEC61850 GOOSE messaging
ƒ Simplified as a result of the protection and logic being
programmed in modern microprocessor based
protection & control IEDs, such as protection, transfer
logic, interlocking, timing and sequencing functions
The application of new technology is rooted in an
understanding of tried and true concepts. This paper will first
discuss the common types of bus transfer schemes that have
been deployed for many years in industrial and utility facilities.
Secondly, this paper will discuss several efficient methods of
using protective relay IEDs to perform M-T-M bus transfer.
II. AUTOMATIC BUS TRANSFER SCHEMES
In a typical Main-Tie-Main bus arrangement (Fig 1), the
automatic bus transfer scheme is used to minimize the effect
of outages on one of the incoming supplies by opening the
normally-closed incoming breaker connected to that supply,
and then re-energizing the decaying bus by closing the
normally open bus tie breaker after the voltage of the
decaying bus voltage drops to a predetermined level.
Fig. 1. Typical Main-Tie-Main Bus Transfer Scheme
 In the above-mentioned application, on recovery of the lost
source, the load is transferred back to the preferred source,
which is determined by a selector switch (either incoming
source S1 or incoming source S2). This transfer can be
accomplished automatically or manually and in a break-then-
make (open transition) or make-then-break (closed transition)
mode. During an Open Transition mode of re-transfer, the tie
breaker is opened, then the now healthy incoming source
breaker is closed. During a Closed Transition mode of re-
transfer, the now health incoming source is closed and then
the tie breaker is opened.
Synchrocheck relays may be required to synchronize the
motor bus with the incoming supply, such as when generators
are located on the bus or critical motor load applications, and
supervise the closing of the now healthy incoming source
breaker or tie breaker by comparing the difference in voltage
and possibly the phase angle between the incoming line
voltage and bus voltage. Typical synchrocheck settings are a
delta voltage of 5% of nominal, a delta phase angle of 10
degrees, and a maximum frequency difference of 0.5Hz.
The prime requirement of the automatic bus transfer
scheme is quick and safe restoration of power. However, the
simplicity of the automatic bus transfer application is offset by
the fact that each motor's bus has a unique voltage decay and
phase angle characteristic during a transfer. Also, the various
applications of the automatic bus transfer scheme typically
lack the design flexibility to deal with issues such as a
closed/open transition; variations in system-grounding
methods; and different motor starting configurations. Issues
such as the criticality of the motor loads and the cost of
implementation will drive the selection of the bus transfer
scheme to be employed. There are typically four types of bus
transfer schemes in practice
ƒ Slow transfer scheme
ƒ Residual Voltage Transfer Scheme
ƒ In-Phase Transfer Scheme
ƒ Fast Transfer Scheme
A. Slow Transfer Scheme
The slow transfer scheme involves the detection of a loss of
the incoming source by monitoring incoming line voltage; then
opening the affected incoming source breaker; and finally
energizing of the dead bus by closing the tie breaker after a
predetermined safe decay time. The slow transfer scheme
typically does not require the bus voltage to be monitored and
is designed to wait for a predetermined time of normally
greater than 0.5 seconds (allowing the motors to coast down),
before connecting the decaying bus voltage to the alternative
healthy incoming source by closing the tie breaker. The
predetermined time day should be such that flux in the motor
will not cause back EMF and motor damage.
Since a bus monitoring voltage relay does not supervise
this scheme, it offers cost effectiveness and easy
implementation for less critical motor loads.
The advantages of the slow transfer scheme are that it is
very cost effective; easy to implement; and is very safe with
regard to less critical motor loads. Among the disadvantages
of the slow transfer scheme is that it causes the complete loss
of motor loads, so it is not for use on critical process
applications. Also, the possibility of motor damage from
jogging exists if the bus is reenergized before the motor
coasts to an acceptable level.
B. Residual Voltage Transfer
One of the most commonly used main-tie-main bus transfer
schemes is the residual voltage transfer scheme. In the event
of a loss of the incoming source, this scheme transfers the
motor-bus to the alternate healthy incoming source after the
voltage level of the decaying bus drops to a predetermined
level. This protects the decelerating motors of the decaying
bus from damage when connecting them to an
unsynchronized alternative healthy voltage.
The permissible setting of the residual voltage to transfer
the motor-bus can be calculated from the given maximum
allowable voltage across the motors (machine data from the
manufacturer) and the stability of the power system as to how
many of these motors can be re-accelerated without
significant voltage sags.
The residual voltage transfer scheme criterion is indicated
by:
Vresidual < VM – VN
VM is maximum allowable voltage across the motor and VN is
alternative healthy incoming source's nominal voltage.
Based on the pre-load condition of the motor-bus, the
residual voltage transfer scheme can take between 0.5 to 3.0
seconds to complete. This scheme is slightly more
complicated as it requires voltage relays to detect
undervoltage conditions on the incoming source; overvoltage
voltage relays on the bus; electrical interlocks to accomplish a
safe bus transfer; and synchrocheck relays to synchronize the
system return of the lost incoming supply. This scheme is
applicable where the motor loads are non critical and the
safety of the motors is the prime concern. Typical healthy bus
conditions are determined by a voltage greater than 0.9 per
unit. Transfer and restore occur when the voltage passes this
threshold for a time delay, typically 5 seconds.
The advantages of the residual voltage transfer scheme is
that it provides for safe motor-bus transfer, is cost effective,
and less complicated to implement as compared with the two
remaining schemes to be discussed. The main
disadvantages are that load shedding may be required to
successfully transfer from the lost source, and paralleling of
incoming sources may be required for a time when returning
back to normal operation.
C. In-Phase Transfer
In the event of a loss of the incoming source, the in-phase
transfer scheme predicts and transfers the motor-bus to the
alternate healthy incoming source when the decaying bus
residual voltage phase angle is in-phase with the phase angle
of the alternate healthy incoming source voltage and phase
angle difference is near zero. By doing this, the voltage
difference across the alternative healthy source breaker is
reduced to only the difference in the magnitude of the
alternative healthy source (VN) and the decaying bus voltage
(VB).
The net result is minimization of the resultant V/Hz
difference between the decaying bus voltage and the alternate
healthy incoming source; thereby minimizing the impact on
the running motors and loads on the decaying bus.
In addition to the requirements of the residual voltage
transfer scheme, the in-phase transfer scheme requires an
automatic synchronizer relay to connect the decaying bus
voltage to the healthy source with near-zero phase angle
difference. Advanced and accurate information of the tie
breaker closing time is required to make this scheme function
properly. The in-phase transfer scheme also provides a fast
method for transferring the motor-bus in instances where the
two incoming supplies are not initially in sync.
The main advantage of the in-phase transfer scheme is that
continuous power is provided to the motors and load. The
disadvantages may include the remote possibility of motor
damage and the possible requirement of load shedding. Also,
this scheme is more expensive and complicated to implement
as compared to the other schemes discussed.
D. Fast Bus Transfer
In the event of a loss of the incoming source, this scheme
transfers the motor bus to the alternate healthy source as fast
as possible by keeping the dead time to a minimum. A
simultaneous / parallel fast transfer scheme simultaneously
issues commands to open (trip) the normal incoming source
breaker, close tie breaker and close the alternative healthy
incoming source breaker. By doing so, it limits the total
transfer time from 1 to 2 cycles (power system frequency).
Since this is a paralleling scheme it requires that the circuit
breakers interrupting and incomer transformers withstanding
capabilities be rated for the parallel operation. The sequential
fast transfer scheme prevents the paralleling of the incomer
supplies while transferring the motor-bus by first tripping the
normal source breaker of the lost incomer source, closing the
tie breaker and then closing the alternative healthy source
breaker. However, the total transfer time is increased by the
normal source breaker tripping time plus the time required in
acknowledging the breaker open status.
Both of the fast transfer schemes (simultaneous &
sequential) require a fast synchrocheck relay to detect the
change in relative phase angle between the
disconnected/decaying bus and the alternate source voltages
before closing the alternative source to the decaying bus. This
scheme is also referred as supervised fast transfer scheme.
In addition to the above requirements, this scheme requires a
dynamic high-speed synchronizer relay to ensure that the
phase angle, frequency, and voltage magnitude difference
between the motor bus voltage and the alternative source
voltage is within acceptable limits prior to issuing the closing
command to the alternative healthy breaker.
Similar to the in-phase transfer scheme, the fast bus
transfer scheme also requires advanced and accurate
information of the tie-breaker closing time. The intent of the
fast transfer scheme is primarily to maintain the uninterrupted
power supply to the bus thereby supporting critical loads and
critical motors in the system. However, accomplishing a high-
speed motor transfer involves relatively expensive equipment
and is generally complex to implement.
The main advantage of the fast bus transfer scheme is that
the power supply is uninterrupted. The possibility of motor
damage does exist due to motor jogging and this scheme is
the most complex and expensive to implement of those
discussed.
III. IMPLEMENTATION OF A TYPICAL RESIDUAL VOLTAGE
DEPENDANT TRANSFER SCHEME USING THREE
MICROPROCESSOR BASED RELAYS
The typical automatic main-tie-main bus transfer scheme
minimizes the effect of outages during a transformer fault or
an undervoltage condition on one of the incoming supplies by
opening the incoming breaker (for example, SB1) connected
to that supply, then re-energizing the decaying bus by closing
the bus tie breaker (52-T). This transfers the decaying bus to
the other healthy incoming source (for example, SB2).
To protect motors connected to the decaying bus from
damage, the bus tie breaker (52-T) is not allowed to close
after a transfer has been initiated until the decaying (residual)
voltage on the bus has been reduced to a safe level.
In addition, the scheme also confirms the following before
issuing a close command:
1. Both incoming breakers (SB1 and SB2) are racked-in
and closed with the tie breaker (52-T) also racked-in.
2. The incoming breaker is not carrying any fault
current. This prevents a faulted bus from being
transferred to the alternative healthy source.
3. There is no undervoltage condition existing on the
other incomer source and no voltage dipping,
followed by a consecutive voltage restoration of both
the incomers due to a system disturbance.
Traditionally, the automatic bus transfer scheme was
implemented by using individual electromechanical relays,
and by developing the control systems of electrical interlocks
separately. The relay panels would be rather large with space
for discrete relays along with associated voltmeters, amp-
meters, and control & selector switches.
Developments in relay technology led to the first generation
of microprocessor-based relays. They offered simplicity in the
implementation of the automatic bus transfer scheme by
providing a built-in control system and protection elements as
shown in Figure 2, which uses three microprocessor based
relays. This configuration has extensive wiring between the
contact inputs and contact outputs of the three
microprocessor based relays.
 Fig. 2. Diagram of Three Microprocessor Based Relay Implementation of Main-Tie-Main Transfer Scheme
These first generation microprocessor-based relays were
superior in providing control and protection elements in
comparison to their ancestral electromechanical relays.
However, they still lacked a custom built automatic bus
transfer scheme, due to their limited hardware and software
capabilities. Due to the various onsite practices, the
implementation of the residual voltage dependent bus transfer
scheme also varies from one site to another and requires a
great flexibility in its implementation. Here are the few
examples of onsite flexibility requirements.
ƒ On the return of the lost power supply, it is the practice
of using various restoration methods such as: manual
and automatic; close transition and open transition.
ƒ Generally the line side Potential Transformer (PT) input
detecting undervoltage on the incomer supply is phase-
phase or phase-ground. This arrangement cannot
detect a blown fuse condition on the unmonitored
phase-ground voltage of the primary side of the
incoming transformer.
ƒ Similarly, the blown fuse of the measured voltage
inputs could cause the initiation of the bus transfer
scheme and needs to be blocked.
ƒ While transferring the motor-bus to another healthy
incoming source, there is need to select control
mediums (based on the measured analog inputs) to
decide the completion of the transfer. For example,
monitoring an overloading condition on the incoming
transformer and its required load shedding.
ƒ Need for more inputs and outputs from the relay to
implement electrical interlocks (such as picking up
master trip relay 86 for a fault on the bus side) which
also creates undervoltage condition on the incoming
feeder, and to avoid paralleling of the incoming
sources.
 IV. PEER-TO-PEER COMMUNICATIONS USING IEC61850 ƒ Interlocking (bus protection) with downstream relays
GOOSE MESSAGING can be accomplished with IEC61850 GOOSE
messaging
Technological advancements in relay hardware design and ƒ Scheme alarms when either protective relay is off-line
the development of high-speed peer-to-peer communication or not communicating.
protocols have resulted in a new generation of intelligent ƒ Reconfiguration of scheme without time and expense
electronics devices (IEDs). These protective and control of additional wiring.
relays have the capability to accept multiple levels of current .
and voltage inputs and to analyze these values at significantly
increased speeds. The main advantages of using these
numerical IEDs are simplification of the automatic bus transfer
system, component cost reduction, increased system
reliability, and the availability of events for transfer analysis.
An efficient way to apply these IEDs and obtain a custom-
built automatic bus transfer scheme is to use high-speed
peer-to-peer IEC61850 GOOSE messaging between two
protective relays. IEC61850 uses an Ethernet connection as
the medium of communication between the protective relays.
Logical I/O via Ethernet communications is used in place of
traditional hard wire to exchange the information between the
two protective relays. The information sent over the network
might include main and tie breaker status, voltage detector
status, current detector status and transfer scheme status.
Modern IEC61850 implementations are able to send
messages between relays at speeds of around 2-4 ms. Also,
IEC61850 has recently added the capability of exchanging Fig. 3. Data Exchanged Between Two Protective Relays with
analog data between relays so actual values of currents and IEC61850 Peer-to-Peer Communications
voltages are now also able to be sent over the high speed
network. Figure 3 illustrates some of the data that can be
exchanged between the two relays via the high-speed When applying main-tie-main automatic bus transfer using
network. two protective relays and IEC61850 GOOSE messaging,
When using IEC61850 GOOSE messaging, one can limit protective relay 1 will be the master and implement automatic
the wiring to the protective relay to the following: bus transfer logic and provide protection for Main 1 circuit
breaker. Protective relay 1 controls Main 1 circuit breaker and
ƒ 3 phase & ground currents Tie circuit breaker. Protective relay 1 provides overcurrent
ƒ 3 phase bus voltages protection for Main 1 circuit breaker. Protective Relay 2
ƒ 1-3 phase line voltages provides overcurrent protection and transfer control for Main 2
ƒ 52a contact circuit breaker. Figure 4 shows the typical configuration.
ƒ TOC contact (is breaker racked in?)
ƒ Trip output
ƒ Close output

Reduction in wiring is attractive to the switchgear builder

and allows them to limit the wiring across shipping splits.
The advantages of using two protective relays and
IEC61850 GOOSE communications are:
ƒ Significant reduction in hardwiring as compared to that
between traditional bus transfer schemes.
ƒ Transmitting and receiving digital status between two
protective relays high speed via Ethernet port.
ƒ The use of programmable logic controller functions
such as timers and control logic within the protective
relay provides for the flexibility to implement a custom
bus transfer scheme to best meet the needs of the
application.
ƒ Selector switch functions (select to trip, auto transfer
on/off) can be traditionally wired switches, or
implemented via protective relay faceplate
programmable pushbuttons, eliminating components
and installation costs.
Fig. 4. Transfer Scheme Solution Using Two Protective Relays with
IEC61850 Peer-to-Peer Communications
 V. AUTOMATIC M-T-M BUS TRANSFER SCHEME USING
SINGLE IED
The final implementation we will discuss uses a single Source 1 Source 2 Tie Brkr
S1 Clsd. S2 Auto Dead
52a 52a 52a TOC 86LOR 43AM Spare
protective relay IED with the capability to accept the Contact Contact Contact Contacts
Pref. Trans Pref. Return Source

necessary number of current transformer (CT) and potential

transformer (PT) inputs required for the application.
B3b H7a H7c H8a H8c P7a P7c P8a P8c U7a U7c U8a U8c

B3a

S1 S1 TIE TIE S2 S2
+Power CLS TRIP CLS TRIP CLS TRIP
+ + + + + +

B5b H4c H1c H3c H6c H5c H2c

Power
Supply

B6a H4b H1b H3b H6b H5b H2b

S1 S1 TIE TIE S2 S2
-Power
CLOSE TRIP CLOSE TRIP CLOSE TRIP

Fig. 5. Automatic Bus Transfer with Single IED
The protective relay performs the logic necessary for the
transfer scheme internally via programmable logic. Figure 5
shows this type of configuration.
Using a single IED for automatic bus transfer has the
following:
ƒ Position and status indications for each circuit breaker.
ƒ Phase and neutral/ground overcurrent protection for
Main 1 and Main 2 circuit breakers.
ƒ Undervoltage supervision for Main 1, Main 2, and Tie
circuit breakers.
ƒ Synchronism check for closing Main 1 & Main 2 circuit
breakers
ƒ Transfer auto/manual selection via front pushbuttons or
external control switch
ƒ Transfer scheme lockout and block via internal
programmable logic
ƒ Trip selector via front pushbuttons or external control
switch.
ƒ Oscillography & sequence of events capture entire
scheme operation and timing.
ƒ Ability to custom the transfer scheme to any
application.
Fig. 6 Discrete Inputs and Outputs for a Single Protective
Relay Transfer Scheme
The relay used in a single IED transfer scheme must have
expanded capabilities to perform the transfer function. First,
the relay must have three phase voltage inputs for both mains
and if residual voltage transfer is desired a voltage input for
each bus. Three phase voltage inputs are necessary to
transfer on negative sequence overvoltage as well as loss of
source. This allows the bus to be transferred before
equipment is damaged or motors are tripped on negative
sequence voltage. The relay must also have sufficient
undervoltage elements and negative sequence voltage
elements to implement the scheme. Lastly, the relay must
have sufficient logic capabilities to perform the transfer for all
three breakers.
A single protective relay IED that performs all of the transfer
needs of the switchgear simplifies design of the transfer
scheme because information is no longer needed to be
passed from one relay to another. As an additional benefit,
with one relay, the programmable logic settings to provide the
transfer functions can more easily be tested in simulation
conditions before the switchgear is installed reducing
commissioning time. This highlights an additional benefit of
single relay transfer schemes; the relay logic can be
configured such that, with limited modifications, one logic
setting can provide transfer for any bus architecture or
transfer option. The same logic settings can use pushbutton
or discrete inputs to provide several options of transfer
including:
• Main-Tie-Main or Main-Main architectures by
treating the Main-Main as a Main-Tie-Main where
the tie is always closed.
• Open or closed transition modes upon return from
transfer.
• A preferred main bus arrangement, that
determines which main is closed in main-main
architectures or which combination of two breakers
are closed in main-tie-main architectures.
• Auto return or manual return
Discrete inputs, necessary to accomplish the options listed
above are shown in Figure 6.
VI. TESTING
Unlike conventional transfer schemes using traditional
electromechanical relays, testing microprocessor-based
automatic transfer schemes requires additional steps and
better understanding of the different logic used within the
protective relay(s). Knowledge regarding the software and
firmware revision is required before programming these
microprocessor-based relays. Microprocessor-based relays
generally have numerous pages of settings to be entered into
the protective relay to ensure the proper functionality.
Moreover, it is necessary to determine which settings
specifically affect the transfer scheme. We also need to bear
in mind that some manufacturers have factory default settings
values already installed on these protective relays and only by
understanding these values one can accomplish the desired
functions. Here are the basic requirements for the on-site
starting and testing of the transfer scheme:
ƒ Understanding the method for programming the
protective relay by downloading the settings using a
personal computer via front port or Ethernet port.
ƒ Verifying the firmware revisions on the protective
relays and ensuring they are the most recent or at
least the same on all protective relays.
ƒ Ensuring the date and time synchronization (time
stamping) on the protective relays is correct (in order
to facilitate troubleshooting).
ƒ Understanding the different means by which the
protective relays communicate with each other; e.g.
contact inputs/outputs, serial port communications,
analog inputs, virtual inputs/outputs, Ethernet
networking, etc.
Once the protective relay has been properly programmed,
one can proceed in applying voltages and currents to the
protective relay (s). Applying an undervoltage on one of the
sources and watching the source breaker trip (open) and the
alternate source or tie breaker close does not complete the
true testing. On microprocessor-based protective relays, it is
very important to work through all the different scenarios
applicable to the design and to ensure all criteria are met.
Some additional checks while testing an automatic transfer
scheme are:
ƒ Verifying that all contact and analog inputs are
registered by the protective relay(s). For example,
open/close breakers, rack in/out breakers, change
operating selector switch positions, etc.
ƒ If using IEC61850 peer-to-peer GOOSE messaging,
make sure all devices are on-line and communicating
with each other and that relevant breaker and transfer
status are being recognized across the network.
ƒ If the synchrocheck is being used, make sure that the
incoming breakers do not close when the phases are
swapped or are out of predetermined phase angle
boundary.
ƒ Ensuring that all output contacts operate per the logic
and schemes; e.g., the close output contact is asserted
when a signal to close is received from the control
switch, or perhaps via a serial or Ethernet
communications link.
ƒ Ensuring that an open transition scheme does close
the tie breaker or alternate healthy breaker if the main
breaker fails to open.
ƒ Making sure that a transfer does not get initiated when
control power is lost to any one of the protective relays
and that the bus is experiencing a short circuit fault.
There are both advantages and disadvantages when testing
microprocessor-based relays and associated transfer scheme
logic.
Among the disadvantages are that the programmable logic
is more complex and may require additional testing time and
software tools. Additional training may be required of both
engineers and technicians to properly program and test these
protective relays. Also, the programming and configuration of
the protective relays is a complex process that not only
requires knowledge of the application but knowledge of how to
integrate the relay into any possible automation systems via
Ethernet or serial communications.
A key advantage is that a programming standard can be
developed and implemented at numerous locations with
decreasing engineering development costs after the standard
is developed. Microprocessor-based relays also offer
numerous tools in terms of event recording, oscillography, and
the ability to send information to different places via serial or
Ethernet communications networks. Software tools allow the
real-time graphical representation of the programmable logic
and aid in the transfer scheme testing and troubleshooting.
The process of document control can also be streamlined as
settings can be stored in files apart from the actual protective
relay and any changes can be done off-line before sending to
the protective relay.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
The bus transfer scheme in industrial and utility facilities is
a critical application that requires careful thought in how it is
implemented. While electromechanical relays have provided
a reliable solution for a number of years, it is imperative that
modern organizations seek to utilize new technology to
optimize resources and improve efficiency. Proven installed
solutions exist today using single IED or multiple IED
configurations and IEC61850 based peer-to-peer messaging.
Engineers, designers, and technicians in the field need to be
adequately trained on the full capabilities of the new
technology so that the different parts of the organization can
fully utilize the technology. From there, the organization can
reap the benefits of streamlined design and system operations
that maximize reliability and overall efficiency.

VIII. BIOGRAPHIES
Craig Wester is the southeast US regional sales manager
for GE Digital Energy Multilin in Norcross, Georgia. He was
born in Belgium, Wisconsin, and received a B.S. in Electrical
Engineering with a strong emphasis on power systems from
the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1989. Craig joined
General Electric in 1989 as a utility transmission & distribution
application engineer. He is a member of the IEEE.

Terrence Smith has been an Application Engineer with GE

Digital Energy Multilin since 2008. Prior to joining GE,
Terrence has been with the Tennessee Valley Authority as a
Principal Engineer and MESA Associates as Program
Manager. He received his Bachelor of Science in Engineering
majoring in Electrical Engineering from the University of
Tennessee at Chattanooga and is a professional Engineer
registered in the state of Tennessee.