1
Analysis of South-East Europe Transmission
Network Expansion Plan under the Future
Market Conditions
Milan Vukasovic, Mladen Apostolovic and Sreten Skuletic
Abstract-- The South-East Europe region is faced with the
new challenges related to organization of electricity market.
The main goal of this paper is to analyze present South-East
Europe power transmission system infrastructure, taking into
account recent developments, and to examine influence of the
future market activities on a reinforced power grid. The
analysis has been made for several scenarios of cross-border
electricity exchanges, taking into account planned transmission
network projects as well as foreseen investments in a new
generation capacities in the following few years. Change in the
electricity consumption in the region has also been taken into
account. Analysis, which has been performed, emphasized a
several critical bottlenecks in the transmission network that
must be solved in a due time in order not to limit cross-border
electricity trade and thus not to distort competiveness in the
regional electricity market in South-East Europe.
Index Terms-- analysis, congestion, energy, flows, market,
SEE, trade
I. INTRODUCTION
F UTURE commercial electricity exchange, which will be
caused by the establishment of South-East Europe (SEE)
electricity market in the so called 8th region, as it was
defined by Ministerial Council of the Energy Community
[1], will have a high influence on power flows in the region.
It is also important to underline the importance that the
future transmission capacity allocation mechanism will have
on allocated/real power flows and security of operation
(bottlenecks in transmission network). Methods for
allocation of cross-border transmission capacities were
constantly evolving in a previous years towards the market
based mechanisms (explicit auctions), which are currently
applied on the most of the borders in SEE region. Outcome
of these allocation procedures clearly shows the necessity for
the transmission network expansion in order to
accommodate all the wishes of market participants for cross-
border electricity trade. The classical planning principle for
expansion of transmission network can not be applied under
the deregulated environment or it could lead to the non-
optimal solution (over-investments).
Romania, Bulgaria and Bosnia and Herzegovina are
electric energy exporters, whereas Montenegro, Macedonia,
M. Vukasovic is with Verbund Austrian Power Grid AG, Vienna,
Austria (e-mail: Milan.Vukasovic@verbund.at).
M. Apostolovic is with Energy Financing Team, Belgrade, Serbia
(e-mail: mladen.apostolovic@eft-group.net).
S. Skuletic is with the Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of
Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro (e-mail: skuletic@cg.ac.yu).
Greece and Albania have a deficit of electric energy. Control
area of Serbia, operated by EMS (Elektromreza Srbije), got
a variable energy balance during a year. The load flows are
oriented from the North to the South, most of the year. The
biggest problem, recognized in the SEE region, lies in
tripping of 400 kV Blagoevgrad (Bulgaria) – Thessaloniki
(Greece) tie-line. If that happens, it will lead to tripping of
400 kV Kosovo B (Serbia-UNMIK) – Skopje 5 (Macedonia)
tie-line, in most of the cases. Therefore, these two overhead
lines are recognized as the cross-border capacities of the
special importance in the SEE region. At present, profile
which is defined as a critical one is the border between
Serbia-UNMIK and Macedonia. This profile is mutually
cross-connected with three interconnection lines: one 400
kV over-head line (OHL) Kosovo B – Skopje 5 and two 220
kV OHLs Kosovo A – Skopje 1 (which are temporary out of
operation as they were destroyed during the war 1999 [2]).
Non-availability of 220 kV double line between Serbia-
UNMIK and Macedonia highly-affects electricity exchange
in direction North-South, mostly in summer months (July
and August) when Greece has peak demand and big imports
from the other power systems. Especially dangerous regime
during the summer is outage of 400 kV bus bars in sub-
station (SS) Kosovo B (Serbia-UNMIK). Power flows in this
case can have negative influence on the critical bottlenecks
(220 kV OHL Prizren(SR) – Fierze(AL), 220 kV OHL
Podgorica 1(CG) – Vau Dejes(AL) and 400 kV
Blagoevgrad(BG) – Thessaloniki(GR)) and therefore lead to
cascade outages and power supply cuts in the particular
region (example: 25th of July, 2007).
Commercial congestion is permanently present in
directions from Romania to Serbia and from Bulgaria to
Serbia. Reason for this lies in the fact that Romania and
Bulgaria got a surplus of electric energy and Serbia is used
as a transit area towards Montenegro, Macedonia and
Greece (countries with electric energy deficit). It should be
mentioned that the power system of Turkey, controlled by
system operator TEIAS, is currently not synchronized with
the UCTE network.
II. SEE NETWORK MODEL AND ANALYZED SCENARIOS
In the analysis described in this paper, current thermal
limits are used as rated limits for over-head lines. These
limits are established based on the temperature (different
limits for winter and summer models) to which conductor is
heated by current above which either the conductor material
would start being softened or the distance between

conductor and ground would drop beyond permitted limits.
For transformers, rated installed MVA power is used as
thermal limit. Every branch with current above its thermal
limit is considered as overloaded.
The electric power systems in the one part of the SEE
region are modeled with the complete 400 kV and 220 kV
networks (or 150 kV network in the case of Greece) and
additionally 110 kV network for the power system of
Montenegro (meshed network).
The analysis has been performed for the target year 2012,
taking into account the planned transmission network
Fig. 1. Existing tie-lines, recently built (Ia and Ib) and some of the newly planned (II and III) tie-lines in the SEE region
SEE transmission network is connected radial (island model)
with the power system of Turkey with two tie-lines (fixed
injection to SEE region of 300 MW). In the considered
network model all injection goes to Maritza 400 kV node
and power exchange from Italy to Greece over DC cable is
held on constant value (100 MW).
Overview of the analyzed scenarios:
• Scenario I: two 400 kV tie-lines that are already put into
operation (with additional necessary network elements
that have been constructed):
o Ia) Bitola(MK) – Florina(GR), and transformer
400/160 KV in SS Florina [4]
2
reinforcements (Fig. 1) and the foreseen investments in
generation capacities, i.e. power plants (Table I), as it is
given in [3]. Consumption has been changed (increased by
15%) proportionally in all SEE country nodes, except for
Greece where load has been just slightly adjusted (for 4%
due to the fact that numerous potential investments in the
Greece until 2012 have not been taken into account).
Generation and consumption have not been changed in
Hungary, Croatia and Slovenia.
o Ib) Stip(MK) – Chervena Mogila(BG), 42km long
OHL Dubrovo – Stip (internal line in Macedonia)
and transformer 400/110 kV 300 MVA in SS Stip
(Macedonia) [5]
• Scenario II: new 400 kV tie-line Podgorica 2(CG) –
Tirana(AL) [6]
• Scenario III: new 400 kV tie-line Fillipi(GR) – Maritza
East 3(BG)
• Scenario IV: all network elements from Scenarios I-III
assumed to be in operation as well as the new
generation capacities (Table I).

TABLE I
NEW GENERATION CAPACITIES (POWER PLANTS) IN SEE REGION
Power Plant Country Installed Power (MW)
TPP Maritsa East 3 Bulgaria 2x300
HPP Skavica Albania 300
TPP Kosovo C Serbia-UNMIK 500
CHPP Energetika Macedonia 200
III. CHANGE IN POWER FLOWS OVER THE MOST IMPORTANT
TIE-LINES IN SEE REGION: SCENARIOS I-III
In the Fig. 2 (Scenarios Ia and Ib), change in power flows
over the most important tie-lines in SEE region (year 2008
winter model) due to influence of recently built tie-lines, is
shown. It is obvious that construction of 400 kV corridor
Chervena Mogila – Stip – Dubrovo (displayed in Fig. 2 as
Scenario Ib) will decrease power flows over 400 kV OHL
Kosovo B – Skopje 5, 400 kV OHL Blagoevgrad –
Thessaloniki and 400 kV Dubrovo – Thessaloniki. On the
other hand, construction of 400 kV tie-line Bitola – Florina
and 400/160 KV transformer in SS Florina (Scenario Ia) will
have very low influence on the important regional tie-lines
(except on the parallel line Bitola – Meliti). It is important to
notice that all abovementioned investments have a positive
influence on flow reduction (around 130 MW in total) over
400 kV OHL Blagoevgrad – Thessaloniki.
Fig. 2. Change in power flows over the most important tie-lines in SEE region: Scenarios I-III
3
Commissioning Date Comments
2010 Rehabilitation and modernization of the facility
On Drin river – HPP node is connected to 220
2011
kV node Burrel
2011 Fuel: lignite
5 km from the capital Skopje – connected to
2012
110 kV network, but modeled on 220 kV side
As it can also been seen from the Fig. 2, construction of a
newly planned tie-lines (400 kV tie-line Podgorica 2 –
Tirana (Scenario II) and Fillipi – Maritza East 3 (Scenario
III) will have high influence on power flows over the most
important tie-lines in SEE region (year 2012 winter model).
Construction of 400 kV tie-line Podgorica 2 – Tirana, would
have the highest influence on reliving loading of 220 kV
parallel-line Podgorica 1 – Vau Dejes and Albanian
interconnector towards Greece (400 kV OHL Zemlak –
Kardia), but very low influence on the other important
interconnections in the SEE region. New tie-line between
Greece and Bulgaria, 400 kV OHL Fillipi – Maritza East 3,
would mainly influence power flows over 400 kV OHL
Blagoevgrad – Thessaloniki (reliving loading of the line) but
would also contribute to power flow decrease between the
following profiles: Serbia – Macedonia and Bulgaria –
Macedonia.

IV. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: NEW NETWORK ELEMENTS AND
GENERATION CAPACITIES (SCENARIO IV)
A. Load-flow and (n-1) contingency analysis
The system reliability is checked using (n-1) contingency
criterion. List of predefined critical contingencies includes:
• all tie-lines in modeled SEE region except tie-lines
toward the non-modeled area (“non-breathing” lines),
• all 400/220 kV and 400/110 kV transformers in the
modeled region,
TABLE II
ADDITIONALLY SIMULATED EXCHANGES ON BASE CASE SCENARIO IV (SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS)
Exchange UCTE1 CEE Ukraine Turkey
1 -200 200
2 -500
3 300 300
4 -650
5 -200 100 100
Insecure system operations for given generation and load
patterns are detected in the power systems of Serbia and
Bulgaria for the winter model, year 2012 (Fig. 3):
a) All disturbances on 220 kV side in control area of
Serbia-UNMIK have relatively high influence on
transformer 400/220 kV Nis. For example, outage of
220 kV line Kosovo B – Podujevo will lead to
overload of mentioned transformer up to 111% Snom in
the simulated Exchanges 2 and 4 (high export of
Romania and Bulgaria toward the non-modeled UCTE
region). In those Exchange cases Serbian 400 kV
network is loaded higher than usual (power flow over
400 kV Sofia – Nis is increased up to more than 100
MW).
b) Loss of the 220 kV line Feronikl – Prizren can cause
overloading of 220 kV tie-line between Serbia-UNMIK
and Albania (Prizren – Fierze). Problem is caused by
high distributive consumption which is supplied from
node Prizren (214 MW) and lower Iterm value of OHL
Fierze – Prizren (720 A compared to 1290 A of OHL
Feronikl – Prizren). In order to avoid electricity supply
cuts, 110 kV network inside Serbia-UNMIK area
should be reconfigured and part of consumption should
be supplied from the other 220 kV stations (if
possible). On the other hand, this critical contingency
will not have influence on the interconnected high-
voltage network.
c) In the simulated Exchange cases 1 and 5 (additional
Turkey export of 200 MW and 100 MW, respectively)
tripping of 400 kV tie-line Fillipi – Maritza East 3 can
1
UCTE virtual zone is consisted from CEE region with IT region (only OHLs between Slovenia and Italy, without DC
cable between Greece and Italy) and Ukraine.
4
• all 400 kV and 220 kV lines in the modeled region
except lines which outage cause “island” operation.
Additional exchange is simulated in the SEE region on
the starting base case Scenario IV (displayed in Table II) as
sensitivity cases.
Results of the security (n-1) analysis show the potential
problems in SEE regional network. It should be noted that
the change in area totals (simulation of additional exchange
between SEE control areas) is obtained by generation shift
up/down in the respected areas proportionally to the
engagement in the base case (i.e. starting Scenario IV).
Romania Bulgaria IT_cable Albania Greece
300 200
-300 -100 -200
200 200 250
100 100 -100 -100
lead to overload of Bulgarian internal line Maritza East
– Plovdiv. This clearly shows that with the analysed
400 kV network reinforcement in Bulgaria and Greece
(new 400 kV lines Maritza East 3 – Fillipi, 400 kV
lines Maritza East 3 – Babaeski and 400 kV lines
Maritza East 3 – Hamitabat) export of Turkey should
be limited to 350 MW. Internal network of Bulgaria
should be reinforced in order to support additional
energy exchange from Turkey towards Balkan area
(planned new 400 kV OHL Zlatisa – Plovdiv) but also
link between Greece and Turkey should be considered
(400 kV tie-line Nea Santa – Babaeski).
Analysis made on the winter model clearly shows the
importance of node Nis in Serbia (sub-station 400/220 kV)
and also necessity to install an additional transformation unit
400/220 kV, to reconstruct destroyed double 220 kV tie-line
Kosovo A – Skopje 1 between Serbia-UNMIK and
Macedonia (or to replace them with the 400 kV OHL on the
same route) or to build new 400 kV tie-line Nis (SR) –
Skopje (MK) [7]. In all analyzed cases transformer 400/220
kV in SS Nis is highly loaded (more than 80% Snom).
Problem could be temporary solved with the bus coupler in
SS Nis (400 kV side) and with the grouping some of 400 kV
lines to the other bus system (in order to constrain power
flow over transformer 400/220 kV). In this case one should
be careful in order not to shift the existing problem to the
other part of the network (by solving problems in node Nis).
Described sensitivity analysis on the winter model has been
performed with the 3rd transformer 400/220 kV in SS
Kosovo B in operation (disconnected in the starting base
case model).
 5

Fig. 3. Scenario IV – security (n-1) analysis for the 3rd week of January (10:30 a.m.) / winter model – year 2012

Insecure system operations for given generation and load
patterns are detected in the power systems of Serbia,
UNMIK, Bulgaria, Romania and Greece for the summer
model, year 2012 (Table III):
a) All exchange programs have relatively high-impact on
already congested Bulgarian internal network. The
weakest link is 220 kV OHL Plovdiv – Aleko which is
overloaded after the different (n-1) outages in range
from 103% Iterm to 124% Iterm. The highest average
loading of critical internal line is achieved in exchange
cases 1 and 5, i.e. in the situations when the additional
export of Turkey has been simulated.
b) In internal Serbian network, outage of 220 kV OHL B.
Basta – Pozega will lead to overloading of 220 kV
OHL Pozega – Vardiste and vice versa. It is important
to notice that this problem is present only in summer
model and can be slightly relived in the Exchange cases
2 and 4 (i.e. additional export of Bulgaria and Romania
to the rest of UCTE which will cause flows in direction
East-West). Temporary, problem could be solved by
means of redispatch action with the following HPPs:
Visegrad (on Bosnian side – cross-border redispatch
necessary) and B. Basta, but also with the HPPs
connected to the 110 kV network in Serbia (Kokin
Brod, Bistrica and Uvac). On the other hand, Exchange
cases 2 and 4, have counter-effect on problems related
to transformer in SS Nis which can be overloaded up to
115% Snom (problems with transformer 400/220 kV Nis
are also present in sensitivity analysis performed on the
winter model).
c) Critical outage of one transformer 400/220 kV Slatina
in Romania will lead to overloading of the second
transformer (115% Snom).
d) In internal Serbian network, outage of 400 kV OHL
Mladost – S. Mitrovica will lead to overloading of 220
kV OHL Novi Sad – Srbobran in all Exchange cases
except Exchange 3 (when additional flows are oriented
in direction from North to South).

TABLE III
SCENARIO IV – SECURITY (N-1) ANALYSIS FOR THE 3RD WEEK IN JUNE (10:30 A.M.) / SUMMER MODEL – YEAR 2012

BC EX1 EX2 EX3 EX4 EX5

Critical outage Critical line
Line/transformer loading (%)

400 kV Fillipi - Maritsa East 104 114 111 103 110 113

400 kV Plovdiv - Maritsa East 220 kV Plovdiv - Aleko 112 124 120 113 122 121
400 kV C. Mogila - Vetren 105 115 112 105 113 113
220 kV B. Basta - Pozega 220 kV Pozega - Vardiste 118 119 115 118 106 117
220 kV Pozega - Vardiste 220 kV B. Basta - Pozega 105 105 * 105 * 105
400/220 kV TR Slatina (1) 400/220 TR Slatina (2) 115 116 113 115 118 115
400 kV Mladost - S. Mitrovica 220 kV N. Sad - Srbobran * 102 105 * 105 103
400/220 kV TR Nis 220 kV Kosovo B - Podujevo * * 110 * 115 *
 6

B. Voltage profiles in the SEE region: Scenario IV

Voltage profiles in the SEE region (400 kV and 220 kV
nodes) after the reinforcement in the transmission network
and after the construction of new power plants is displayed
in Fig. 4. As it can be observed, voltage profile is
satisfactory as all nodes (except the voltage in 220 kV node
Skopje1(MK) which is also under allowed value in the
starting base case scenario and four nodes in Croatia
including Zakucac and Konjsko which are slightly above
allowed limits) are within requested range, i.e. between 0.95
p.u. and 1.1 p.u.. Bus voltage magnitudes below permitted
limits are not found in the analyzed scenario and, in general,
average increase of bus voltage levels can be recorded (after
network reinforcement) all over the SEE electricity network
compared to the starting scenario. Fig. 4: Histogram of 400 kV and 220 kV bus voltages in SEE region in the
Network reinforcement as well as the change in analyzed Scenario IV
generation/consumption patterns in interconnected power
systems have the highest influence on voltage level increase It should be emphasized that the network analysis has not
(winter model) in power systems of OST (Albania) in 220 been performed with the additional voltage controlling
kV SS Tirana and SS Burrel (change of 2.7 and 2.4 kV, devices in operation (transformer tap changers, switched
respectively). This is mainly caused by reinforcement made shunts, etc.), but rather on the starting model (also, only
in 400 kV Albanian network. consumption of active power has been scaled in Scenario
IV). Therefore, more detailed analysis is needed in order to
access possibilities for the voltage regulation in SEE region
after the proposed reinforcements.

TABLE IV
CHANGE IN BUS VOLTAGE: SCENARIO IV (400 KV NODES) – WINTER MODEL / YEAR 2012

Bus Voltage [kV] Bus Voltage [kV] Change in bus Bus voltage (p.u.)
Bus Name
Scenario IV Starting Base Case voltage [kV] Scenario IV
Fillipi (GR) 406,4 402,6 3,8 1,016
Hevic (HU) 407,3 405,5 1,8 1,018
Divaca(SI) 396,9 395,1 1,8 0,99
Zerjavinec (HR) 403,8 402,4 1,4 1,009
Meline (HR) 402,3 401,0 1,3 1,00

TABLE V
CHANGE IN BUS VOLTAGE: SCENARIO IV (220 KV NODES) – WINTER MODEL / YEAR 2012

Bus Voltage [kV] Bus Voltage [kV] Change in bus Bus voltage (p.u.)
Bus Name
Scenario IV Starting Base Case voltage [kV] Scenario IV
Tirana (AL) 216,2 213,5 2,7 0,980
Burrel (AL) 220,7 218,3 2,4 1,002
Urechesti (RO) 234,0 231,9 2,1 1,060
Rovinari (RO) 234,0 231,9 2,1 1,063
Mizia (BG) 240,7 238,7 2,0 1,094
Rashbull (AL) 211,9 210,0 1,9 0,960
Pleven (BG) 236,4 234,9 1,5 1,075
Targu Jiu (RO) 232,4 230,9 1,5 1,056
Elbasan 1 (AL) 217,4 216,0 1,4 0,988
Elbasan 2 (AL) 217,8 216,5 1,3 0,990
Fierza (AL) 212,3 211,1 1,2 0,960

consumption centers in Albania are located in the Southern

C. Analysis Summary
In the starting analyzed scenario, in a balanced situation
of the Albanian system, there is a loop flow of about 100
MW from Greece to Serbia-UNMIK (just small part goes to
Montenegro). Due to this reason and the fact that the main
part of the country, in case when Albanian power system
imports around 200 MW, the voltage profile in the Albanian
network goes down from the North part to the South part of
the country. Voltage profile in Albania is drastically
improved with the construction of 400 kV Podgorica 2 –

Tirana and the new SS Kashar on its route. In this paper only
one new power plant project is considered in Albania (HPP
Skavica with installed 300 MW), but according to the study
made by Institute of Hydroelectric Studies and Design [8],
the new possible power plants to be constructed in Albania
are: HPP Bushati (84 MW, Drin River), HPP Kaludha (75
MW, Vjosa River), HPP Dragot-Tepelena (130 MW, Vjosa
River), HPP Kalivaci (100 MW, Vjosa River), HPP Bratila
(115 MW, Devoll River) and HPP Banja (80 MW, Devoll
River). It is also predicted that TPP Vlora 1 (100 MW)
should be put in operation until 2012. All of the mentioned
investments have to be followed with the proper network
reinforcement, especially strengthening the Vlore and Fieri
nodes and their upgrade to 400 kV level. New 400 kV tie-
line between Elbasan and Bitola is also planed as the future
network project.
During the analysis it was clearly shown that additional
transformer is needed in SS 400/220 kV Nis (problem could
be temporary solved with 400 kV bus bar coupler in SS Nis)
since the existing transformer is very sensible to 220 kV
network situation in Serbia-UNMIK area and also to
additional export of Bulgaria towards West. Also, problems
are located in internal EMS network in the grid near the
following nodes: B.Basta, Vardiste and Pozega. Loading of
the 220 kV OHLs B.Basta – Pozega, Vardiste – Pozega and
B.Basta – Vardiste is highly dependent on energy transfer in
direction North to South as well as the current engagement
of PSHPP B.Basta, HPP Bistrica and HPP Visegrad (Bosnia
and Herzegovina).
In the summer network model, problems are also located
in the Northern part of the country. Namely, outage of 400
kV OHL Mladost – S.Mitrovica would lead to problems in
220 kV network (OHL Novi Sad – Srbobran). Future
reinforcement in this region are foreseen on 400 kV voltage
level: 400 kV Sombor – S.Mitrovica. New power plant
projects (beside TPP Kosovo C) are not considered inside
EMS control area since the first one is foreseen for 2015
(TPP Kolubara B).
Some of the problems present in internal transmission
network of EMS are also caused by changing thermal limit
of 220 kV lines from the winter to the summer regime (i.e.
changes in relay-system protection settings) [9],[10].
There were no problems located in Montenegrin network,
except in the starting base case model: critical outage of
400/110 kV transformer in SS Podgorica 2 could lead to
slight overloading of the second parallel transformer 300
MVA in the same substation. The problem is solved after the
construction of 400 kV OHL Podgorica 2 – Tirana. Problem
which is present in the starting base case model highly
depends on configuration of internal Montenegrin network
as well as on current consumption level. Temporary solution
for relieving congestion and solving network problems
would be to use the internal redispatch measures with HPP
Perucica or (in some cases when consumption supply from
110 kV substations is not that high, i.e. off-peak hours)
disconnection of the double 110 kV line between SS
Podgorica 1 and SS Podgorica 2 would be necessary in order
to avoid parallel operation of 110 kV network (loop flows).
Transformer in Romanian SS 400/220 kV Slatina has
appeared as the weak point during the performed analysis.
7
This is mainly caused by power plant investments (NPP
Cerna Voda, unit no.2 with 706 MW of installed power) and
flows (direction from East to South-West) which have high
influence on transformers 400/220 kV in Slatina node
(transformer loading 244 MW in Scenario IV compared to
170 MW in the starting base case scenario – summer
model).
The main problems in control area of ESO (Bulgaria) are
present after the investment in power plants (especially TPP
Maritsa East 3) which are not followed with the
reinforcements of the internal network and the radial
connection with Turkey (import of 300 MW). Better
distribution of the “incoming” power flows from Turkey
(import) has been achieved with the splitting of incoming
flows between Bulgaria and Greece after the construction of
400 kV tie-line Fillipi (GR) – Maritza East 3 (BG), together
with already constructed 400 kV OHL Fillipi – N.Santa
(GR) – Babaeski (TUR). Anyway, network problems in the
central part of Bulgaria could be solved with the internal
network reinforcement – new 400 kV OHL Plovdiv –
Zlatitsa (149 km, project investment of 25 mil. €) which is
one of the most important project for the future synchronous
interconnection of Turkey with UCTE.
V. CONCLUSIONS
The Southeast Europe region is faced with new
challenges related to organization of electricity market. In
the process of deregulation, new production companies,
Transmission System Operators, supply companies and
traders appeared. Present electricity infrastructure is not
fully designed to serve market activities properly and some
investments in transmission systems internally, as well in
interconnection lines are necessary in order to support
competition and expected market activities.
Southeast Europe transmission network operates on
750 kV, 400 kV, 220 kV, 150 kV and 110 kV voltage levels.
Power systems are mostly strongly interconnected through
many 400kV and 220 kV lines. Analysis has shown that
some insecure operational conditions are expected in some
parts of Romanian, Serbian, Bulgarian and Albanian
network so additional network reinforcement activities will
be necessary in order to minimize network congestions.
Balkan area is the new investment frontier for
international power companies. Although, numerous power
plant project that have been planned are not yet constructed
and therefore high level of uncertainty is present also when it
comes to high-voltage power transmission system extension
planning.
It is important to underline that the influence of global
economic crisis on power consumption level in SEE region
(decrease of energy consumption for industrial consumers)
and on delay of generation investment projects have to be
taken into consideration, as well as influence of other
ongoing infrastructure transmission investment projects (for
example: 400 kV OHL Nis – Leskovac – Vranje (Serbia)
with the connection point Stip/Skopje in Macedonia) in
some future similar analysis.
 8

VI. REFERENCES
[1] Ministerial Council of the Energy Community, “Decision No. 2008-
02 on Implementation of EC Decision amended Annex Regulation
1228/2003”
[2] UCTE, European Interconnections: State of the Art, Annual report of
the joint EURELECTRIC - UCTE Working Group "SYSTINT",
2002.
[3] ETSO, Winter Outlook Report, Detailed country analysis, June 2007.
[Online]. Available: http://www.etso-net.org/.
[4] D. Bajs, G. Majstorovic, M. Majstorovic, “Uticaj izgradnje novih
interkonektivnih dalekovoda u ovom dijelu Europe na rad EES
Hrvatske”, Energetski Institut Hrvoje Pozar, Zagreb 2001.
[5] UCTE, System Adequacy Forecast 2006-2015, 2005. [Online].
Available: http://www.ucte.org,
[6] E. Radheshi, “Priority Infrastructure Investments, Tehnical Workshop
on Priority Infrastructure Investments in Power Sector”, Vienna, April
2008.
[7] MEPSO, Study for optimization of connection point of new 400 kV
interconnection to Serbia, 2008. [Online]. Available:
http://www.mepso.com.mk/,
[8] L. Mihailova, Imagine all renewables… Is There a Potential?,
available at http://www.seeurope.net, January 2006.
[9] SECI Interconnection Study Task Group, “Development of the
interconnection of the electric power systems of SECI member
countries for better integration with European systems: Project of
regional transmission network planning”, Study sponsored by
USAID, 2002.
[10] D. Bajs, "South-East Europe transmission system planning project”,
in Proc. IEEE PES General Meeting, Toronto, Canada, July 2003.

VII. BIOGRAPHIES
Milan Vukasovic (b. 1981) received his DI degree and M.Sc. in Electrical
Engineering, both from the Department of Power Systems, Faculty of
Electrical Engineering Podgorica, University of Montenegro (2004 and
2007). He works in Verbund – Austrian Power Grid AG, Market
Management Department, on issues related to flow-based coordinated
allocation and market coupling. Previously he worked with Electric Power
Company of Montenegro (2005/07). His main interests are in electricity
markets modeling/simulation, congestion management, load-flow analysis
and computer applications in power systems.

Mladen Apostolovic (b. 1975) received his DI degree and M.Sc. in

Electrical Engineering, both from Faculty of Electrical Engineering,
University of Belgrade, Serbia (2000 and 2005). Presently, he works in
Energy Financing Team, Portfolio Management Department. Previously, he
worked with Electricity Coordinating Center (2001/05) and Electric Power
Utility of Serbia (2005/07). His topics of research include congestion
management, optimization techniques in power systems and deregulated
electricity markets.

Sreten Skuletic (b. 1949) graduated from the Faculty of Engineering at the
University in Titograd, and holds Ma degree (Electrical Engineering
Faculty, Belgrade) and Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering (Electrical
Engineering Faculty, Titograd). He is Full Professor at University of
Montenegro. His main research interests and activities have been in the
field of Power Electric Systems, particularly: Reliability modeling,
assessment, evaluations and analysis, energy, high voltage problems in
power systems, grounding, rational usage of energy, conventional and new
energy sources... He has published 186 papers.