Modeling & Ratings Compliance Engineering

Verified generator models, accurate model data and facility ratings that trace to the most limiting equipment — the technical evidence behind the MOD and FAC standards.

Planners, operators and auditors all depend on two things being true: the model behaves like the plant, and the rating reflects the equipment actually installed. Keentel Engineering produces both, and documents them so a reviewer can follow every number.

Real and reactive capability verification and data reporting under MOD-025
Excitation, plant volt/var, governor and active power/frequency model verification under MOD-026 and MOD-027
Steady-state, dynamic and EMT model data for MOD-032 submissions and interconnection requirements
Facility Ratings methodology, equipment-level calculations and as-built reconciliation under FAC-008

Schedule A Call → Request A Proposal →

PSS®E · PSLF Positive-sequence platforms

PSCAD™ EMT modeling

2026 Facility ratings a CMEP focus area

All 6 Regional Entities supported

About Keentel Engineering

Your Trusted Partner in Electrical Engineering and Power Systems

At Keentel Engineering, we deliver electrical power engineering services built on 30 years of experience and a commitment to excellence. Our clients include utilities, developers, EPCs, and public agencies across the U.S.

Unlike firms that sacrifice technical depth to chase billable hours, we prioritize precision, compliance, and value engineering. From transmission services and relay modeling to winterization and SCADA planning, we never compromise on quality.

Keentel Engineering team of electrical engineers in hard hats and safety vests at a high-voltage substation site

Why Choose Keentel Engineering?

Client-Focused Work Approach

At Keentel Engineering, we take pride in being the go-to electrical power engineering firm for power and utility system planning, substation design, protection, control, and power system analysis. The following attributes distinguish our team in utility-grade substation engineering and compliance-driven project delivery.

30 Years of Experience

With three decades of hands-on project delivery, we bring unmatched expertise in substation layout design, substation electrical and civil engineering, relay protection, and grid-tie solutions. Our experience includes projects in complex terrain, urban retrofit environments, and utility-scale renewable integrations.

Quality with Innovation

Our engineering process applies AutoCAD 3D, BIM modeling, and system-level substation design practices to ensure accurate planning, reduced errors, and efficient coordination across all project stakeholders.

Our workflow includes 3D substation design, enabling clash-free coordination between structural, electrical, and civil disciplines.

Attention to Detail

From grounding grid studies to relay protection settings, we engineer every detail to improve system reliability, performance, and operational safety. Our rigorous QA/QC process ensures compliance with IEEE, NFPA, and ISO/TSO interconnection standards.

Among leading electrical substation design companies, Keentel Engineering stands out for 30+ years of proven high-voltage and utility-grade project delivery.

Learn More About Us

NSPE, National Society of Professional Engineers

Contact number (813) 389-7871 Email address contact@keentelengineering.com

Tell Us About Your Project

1 business day reply

First name, email and what you're interested in are all we need to get moving. Everything else, including drawings or an RFP, is optional.

We reply within one business day. Sending this does not create a contract or an engineer and client relationship.

Email us directly Call (813) 389-7871

The Numbers Everyone Else Relies On

Transmission Planners run studies with your models. Reliability Coordinators and Transmission Operators run the grid with your ratings. When a model does not match plant behavior, planning and operating decisions are made on the wrong basis. When a rating is higher than the most limiting piece of equipment, the grid can be operated beyond what the facility can actually carry.

That is why the ERO has made model quality — particularly for inverter-based resources — and facility ratings recurring priorities. Both are engineering problems first: they are solved with test data, simulation, nameplate verification and field walk-downs, then recorded as compliance evidence.

A model that passes a checklist but does not match the plant is still a bad model. Our verification compares simulated and measured response, not just parameter formats.

Electrical transformers and installed power equipment supporting model verification and facility ratings

Accurate models and defensible facility ratings begin with the installed equipment.

STANDARDS COVERED

MOD and FAC Standards and the Evidence Behind Them

Always work to the version in effect for your facility and audit period — several of these standards are being revised under FERC Order No. 901, particularly for inverter-based resources.

Standard	What it addresses	Engineering evidence we produce
MOD-025	Verification and reporting of generator real and reactive power capability	Test plans, staged or operational test data, capability curves, data reporting to the Transmission Planner
MOD-026	Verification of excitation control system or plant volt/var control models	Model parameter review, test or disturbance data, simulated vs measured comparison, verification report
MOD-027	Verification of turbine/governor and load control or active power/frequency control models	Frequency-response testing or event data, model tuning, verification report
MOD-031	Demand and energy data	Data compilation and submission support for applicable entities
MOD-032	Data for power system modeling and analysis	Steady-state, dynamic and short-circuit data prepared to the PC/TP data requirements; EMT models where required
MOD-033	Steady-state and dynamic system model validation	Comparison of planning models against actual system events, documented validation process
FAC-001 / FAC-002	Facility interconnection requirements and studies	Interconnection study models, requirement documentation and study-coordination records
FAC-008	Facility Ratings	Ratings methodology, equipment-level ratings database, most-limiting-element determination, as-built reconciliation

SCOPE OF WORK

What Our Modeling & Ratings Service Includes

Capability verification (MOD-025)

Test planning, witness support, data analysis and capability-curve reporting for synchronous and inverter-based plants.

Dynamic model verification (MOD-026 / MOD-027)

Model parameterization, benchmarking against measured response and verification reports in PSS®E and PSLF.

EMT model development

PSCAD™ plant models built from OEM inverter models, collector systems and plant controllers, benchmarked to positive-sequence models.

MOD-032 data submissions

Steady-state, dynamic and short-circuit data prepared to each Planning Coordinator’s and Transmission Planner’s requirements — PJM, CAISO, ERCOT, MISO, SPP, WECC and others.

MOD-033 validation support

Event-based comparison of simulated and actual system response for Planning Coordinators.

Facility Ratings methodology (FAC-008)

A methodology that covers every equipment type in the series path, with the assumptions a reviewer will ask about.

Ratings database and calculations

Equipment-level normal and emergency ratings, most-limiting-element determination and change control.

As-built reconciliation

Field and drawing verification that ratings reflect the installed equipment — CTs, jumpers, switches, breakers, conductors and relay limits.

FACILITY RATINGS

Ratings That Match the Equipment in the Field

Facility Ratings are one of the most persistent compliance issues in the industry because they depend on every piece of equipment in the series path — and equipment changes over time. A single replaced CT, a new jumper or an upgraded relay can change the most limiting element without anyone updating the rating.

Review the Facility Ratings methodology for completeness across all equipment types
Build or audit the equipment-level ratings database from nameplate data and drawings
Identify the most limiting element for each Facility and each rating category
Reconcile the database with as-built drawings and, where needed, field walk-downs
Establish change control so project and maintenance work updates ratings automatically
Document discrepancies and support mitigation where ratings were overstated

INVERTER-BASED RESOURCES

Model Quality for Solar, Wind and Storage

For inverter-based resources, model accuracy depends on the inverter firmware, the power plant controller, the collector system and the settings actually installed. Generic or outdated models are a recognized ERO concern, and planning entities increasingly require EMT models alongside positive-sequence models.

We build and verify IBR models from OEM data and site settings, benchmark positive-sequence against EMT behavior, and update both after augmentation, repowering, firmware changes or controller tuning.

HOW IT WORKS

Our Modeling & Ratings Process

Gather data

Nameplates, OEM models, settings, test reports, one-lines, drawings and the PC/TP data requirements that apply to you.

Check the as-built

Confirm the model and ratings inputs reflect installed equipment and in-service settings.

Test or collect measurements

Plan staged tests or use disturbance and operational data for capability and model verification.

Simulate and compare

Benchmark model response against measured behavior and tune within physically justified bounds.

Document and submit

Prepare verification reports, ratings records and data submissions in the format each recipient requires.

Keep it current

Re-verify after equipment, firmware, setting or configuration changes and on the standard’s periodic cycle.

ENGINEERING OUTPUTS

From Engineering Analysis to Audit-Ready Evidence

Model verification, equipment records and Facility Ratings should remain traceable to the engineering basis and installed system behind them.

WHAT YOU RECEIVE

Deliverables

✓

MOD-025 capability verification report

Test data, capability curves and data reported to the Transmission Planner

✓

MOD-026 / MOD-027 model verification reports

Model parameters, simulated vs measured comparison and conclusions

✓

Positive-sequence and EMT model packages

PSS®E, PSLF and PSCAD™ models with documentation and benchmarking

✓

MOD-032 data submission package

Data prepared to the Planning Coordinator and Transmission Planner requirements

✓

Facility Ratings methodology

FAC-008 methodology covering every equipment type

✓

Ratings database and most-limiting-element summary

Equipment-level ratings and the resulting Facility Ratings

✓

As-built reconciliation report

Discrepancies found, corrections made and supporting records

WHAT WE FIND

Common Modeling and Ratings Gaps

Models built from design data, never updated

Commissioning changes, firmware updates and tuning leave the submitted model behind the plant.

Verification without measured data

A parameter check alone does not show the model reproduces actual plant response.

EMT and positive-sequence models disagree

Planning entities increasingly reject submissions where the two models behave differently.

Ratings database missing equipment types

Omitted components — jumpers, CTs, relays, wave traps — can hide the true limiting element.

No change control for ratings

Equipment replacements quietly change the most limiting element.

Data requirements read too narrowly

Each PC and TP publishes its own requirements; a submission built for one region may not satisfy another.

WHY KEENTEL ENGINEERING

Modeling Engineers, Not Just Compliance Reviewers

Models built in-house

We build and run PSS®E, PSLF and PSCAD™ models ourselves — the same work that goes into interconnection studies.

Regional data requirements

Experience with PJM, CAISO, ERCOT, MISO, SPP and WECC model submission processes.

Ratings from the drawings up

Substation design experience means we know where the limiting element usually hides.

Audit-ready documentation

Every verification and rating record is written so a Regional Entity reviewer can trace it.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Modeling & Ratings Compliance Engineering — FAQs

Model verification demonstrates that the models used for your generating facility — capability, excitation or volt/var control, and governor or active power/frequency control — reproduce the actual behavior of the plant. MOD-025, MOD-026 and MOD-027 set the requirements for this verification.

Verification needs measured response to compare against the model. That can come from staged tests or, where the standard allows, from recorded disturbances and operational data. We help select the approach that meets the requirement with the least operational disruption.

MOD-032 requires entities to provide modeling data to their Planning Coordinator and Transmission Planner according to the data requirements those entities publish. The format, content and schedule vary by PC and TP.

Positive-sequence models cannot fully represent fast inverter controls and weak-grid behavior. Many planning entities now require PSCAD™ EMT models for inverter-based resources, benchmarked against the positive-sequence model.

FAC-008 requires Generator Owners and Transmission Owners to have a documented Facility Ratings methodology and to establish Facility Ratings consistent with it, reflecting the most limiting applicable equipment rating.

Ratings depend on every piece of equipment in the series path, and that equipment changes over time. Without change control and periodic reconciliation, ratings drift from the installed equipment.

Yes. Where drawings and records cannot be relied upon, we support field verification of nameplates and equipment to reconcile the ratings database with what is installed.

Yes. Adding storage, replacing inverters, changing firmware or retuning plant controllers can change plant behavior and capability. Models, data submissions and, often, ratings should be updated.

Order No. 901 directed NERC to develop new or revised standards for inverter-based resources, including model verification and data requirements. Model verification standards are being revised as part of that work, so the applicable version and its effective date should be confirmed for each facility.

No. This service covers Operations & Planning modeling and ratings standards. CIP cybersecurity is a separate discipline.

Keentel’s Grid IQ

Power system engineer reviewing model verification data

MOD-025 & MOD-026 After COD: Verification & Model Validation Guide

High voltage electrical substation equipment for facility ratings

FAC-008-5 Facility Ratings: NERC Compliance Services

Utility scale renewable generation for CAISO power system modeling

MOD-032 in the CAISO Footprint: Four Joint Processes, One Standard

Power system data and model validation infrastructure

NERC MOD-033-1 Steady-State & Dynamic Model Validation

Power plant and transmission infrastructure used for system modeling

PSS®E and PSCAD™ Model Updates for Power Plants

Solar generation facility supporting PJM modeling data submissions

PJM MOD-032 Data Submission Process