“ADSTF Issue List_G2”

Who provides PCM other data to WECC if the provider of the data is not a Data Submitter?

The WECC Reliability Assessment Committee’s (RAC’s) Anchor Data Set Task Force (ADSTF) formed a task group comprised of Jamie Austin and Jonathan Young to respond to question G2 on the Anchor Data Set Implementation Questions dated November 1, 2017. This document will attempt to answer the question as well as provide some context of how that data is used.

Problem Statement

The PCM dataset is non-confidential. In addition to power system modeling data that comes from the power flow, much of the “Other Data” needed to complete the hourly dispatch of the Western Interconnect, for a year, is considered confidential. The confidential data is replaced by “proxy” data and is developed in committee, posing a bigger challenge for compiling the dataset. We have been developing such data in WECC committees with the help of volunteers from the California Energy Commission, the PNWCC, the PUCs and the National Labs who possess the technical expertise needed, and their processes and data are transparent and can be shared openly.

The ADS PCM dataset is based on two primary sources of data:

  1. Network topology data that comes from the power flow (static look – one hour dispatch of the Western Interconnect)
  2. Existing, planned, and retired transmission topology in the year 10 planning horizon;
  3. Existing, planned, and retired resources (generators) in the year 10 planning horizon;
  4. Other Data
  5. Data needed to create the hourly dispatch for 8760 hours (one year)
  6. Generator unit commitment data (e.g., heat rate curves, Pmin, Pmax, planned and forced outage rates, ramp rates, variable O&M costs – fuel and plant start-up costs, emission costs and other data necessary for PCM modeling such as economic grid simulation).
  7. Hourly Load forecasts in the year 10 planning horizon; and coincident hourly energy forecasts for hydro, wind, solar, EE, AEE, DSM, DR, etc.)
  8. Geo-coordinates to use for mapping future resources to the bus.
  9. Transmission Wheeling Rates

The WECC Data Collection Process

Assembling, reviewing and finalizing planning data requires significant coordination between TPs, BAs and PCs (some of which are covered by NERC\FERC standards and are currently accomplished through WECC processes), including data that is usable in PF/dynamic models and PCM for reliability analyses and evaluations.

Additionally, to help ensure that the WPR, IPR, TPs’, BAs’ and PCs’ developed data is accurate, WECC reviews initial data submissions and report any data errors found to the original data providers.

The power flow dataset constitutes a merging of collected data for power system modeling from Planning Authorities and Planning Coordinators consistent with NERC compliance (MOD 32-1); this is a mandatory process that has been perfected streamlined over time.

This data collection process can lead to a gap between the provided resources and the needs identified in the Public Policy Considerations (e.g.: RPS Assumptions) are covered under MOD 31-2. and the WECC LAR data collection but not necessarily under MOD 32-1; there is no common criteria that applies to all “planning coordinators” under MOD32-1 with regards to future resources. Nearly half of the WECC limits future resources submittals to generators that have established firm contracts, leading to a truncated list of future resources.

Collecting\Developing ADS-PCM “Other Data”

Given the PCM dataset is non-confidential, category 2 data, “Other Data”, Proxy data is developed by RAC committees; including the Production Cost Data Work Group (PDWG). Sources of data include but are not limited to public sources:

  1. Loads
  2. Start with the LAR monthly peak and energy Load forecast in the year 10 planning horizon (deemed non-confidential under the WECC universal data sharing agreement - UDSA).
  3. In breaking the monthly loads down to hourly, PDWG and the WECC staff uses historic, actual hourly data reported under FERC 714. This data is included in the annual Electric Balancing Authority Area and Planning Area Report.

FERC 714 data is used to obtain a broad picture of interconnected balancing authority area operations including comprehensive information of balancing authority area generation, actual and scheduled inter-balancing authority area power transfers and loads. It is also used to prepare status reports on the electric utility industry including review of inter-balancing authority area bulk power trade information. Planning area data will likely be used to monitor forecasted demand by electric utility entities with fundamental demand responsibility, and to develop hourly demand characteristics.

  1. Load Modifiers
  2. Energy Efficiencies EE and AEE (AEE is specific to California) – LBNL has surveyed BAs and assisted the DWG with making adjustments to the firm and non-firm load forecasts over the last several planning cycles. in order to:
  3. Support the overarching intention of the PCM dataset (i.e., to reflect current policies) and to
  4. Improve consistency across BAs in terms of EE & DR accounting

Objective: adjust firm load forecasts, as necessary, to fully capture energy efficiency impacts under current policy program plans. It is important to formalize that the ADS PCM dataset is intended to reflect current policies and utility plans (RPS, IRP, etc.).

  1. Demand Response (DR) – LBNL has helped DWG with reviewing the LAR non-firm load forecasts looking for public DR filings (e.g., IRPs, regulatory dockets) and then communicate with utility staff about any proposed adjustments.
  2. Developing DR Hourly Profiles – The WECC staff has supplied LBNL with hourly load and hourly prices from the initial PCM run that has enabled LBNL to produce hourly DR profiles, customized to the L&R profile in the dataset.
  3. Distributed Generation, Behind the Meter Photo Voltaic (BTM-PV) – The definition for BTM_PV for California comes from the California Energy Commission (CEC) Load Forecast. For other jurisdictions outside of California, E3 has helped DWG with determinig BTM-PV forecasted programs. E3 used their market-driven DG model to produce projections based on populating their model with public information from studies and regulatory filings (e.g., NREL studies, IRPs, regulatory dockets).
  4. For the ADS PCM 2028 dataset, PDWG will likely start by comparing the E3 estimates in the 2026 Common Case - v2.0 with EIA 861 – 2016 actuals.
  5. Pumping Loads – CAISO had previously assisted DWG with backing out pumping loads from the load forecast (using historic hourly shapes) and made the information available to model large California pumps as stand alone.
  6. Station Service (SS) – A temporary solution is being pursued for lining up SS data in both power flow and PCM that involves post processing seasonal data, starting with SS data from the WECC 2028 HS power flow case. Ultimately an algorithm can be developed in the PCM model that allows for setting SS values consistent with generator dispatch level and accounting for if the generator is in or out of service.
  1. Wind and Solar Hourly Profiles
  2. NREL has been the source for Wind and Solar hourly profiles.
  3. DWG members developed plant specific geo-coordinates using EIA 860 data and Google Maps.
  4. PNNL mapped plant specific geo-coordinates (from b) and paired them with NREL 15 minute climatological data for each 2 Km square (from 3.a. above) and produced plant specific profiles.
  5. NTTG implemented the “new” wind and solar shapes in the ADS PCM 2026 Seed Case.
  6. Hydro Hourly Profiles
  7. For California hydro, the CAISO has aggregated PI data by river system and redistributed it to the plant level using Pmax
  8. Previously, TEPPC used Peak data to develop the “P” and “K” factors for PSLF and HTC option, however since the bifurcation of WECC such data has become off-limits. Hence, for northwest hydro plants, Kevin Harris has been using BPA data to generate P & K and keeping the actual data confidential.
  9. Thermal Plant Unit commitment Data
  10. DWG agreed to use CEMS data for developing consistent Heat Rate Curves that are plant-specific; DWG recognizes that using one year’s data may not be representative of future operation, and therefore the decision was made to use average values from past five years. Paul Deaver from the CEC, needing to update the heat rate curves for the Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR 2016), agreed to work collaboratively with DWG and also update the curves for the TEPPC 2026 CC.
  11. Heat Rate (HR) Curves – DWG developed the algorithm for calculating the Heat Rate Curves and the CEC applied the algorithm to compute plant specific HR curves for all thermal plants in the Western Interconnect.
  12. FOR and Maintenance Rates – DWG used EPA - Continuing Emission Monitoring System (CEMS) data to calculate FOR & Maintenance Rates for coal-fired plants in the TEPPC 2026 Common Case. The CEMS method allows for using unit-specific plant FOR and Scheduled Maintenance Durations from publically-available data.
  13. Forced outages and scheduled maintenance on coal-fired plants can have a significant impact on congestion, especially when multiple plant outages occur at the same time.
  14. Proposed replacement data has been developed using 14 years of hourly CEMS data (2002-2015) and is now available for implementation
  15. O & M Prices
  16. Fuel Prices – Recently, DWG has adopted a hybrid approach that includes using California Energy Commission major and minor Hub Prices and the Northwest Power Council for monthly shapes; both forecasts start with EIA’s latest forecast. The two models differ in that the council’s model is a regression model that reflects historic usage (starting with EIA data and adding transportation and local taxes) and accounts for forward look factors (e.g., LNG development, Pipe expansions, etc.) exogenously. In contrast, the CEC model, “NAMGas”, starts with the World Gas Trade Model (WGRM) and applies the following changes:
  17. Reconfigured the California portion of the model to suit the Energy Commission needs
  18. Removed all non-North American structure
  19. Added functional nodes to account for approved LNG imports and exports
  20. Added nodes as necessary to plant burner tip
  21. Coal and other fuel prices are derivative of CEC and the Council’s forecast.
  22. Plant Start-up Cost – WECC teamed-up with NREL and hired Aptech engineering to produce Plant start-up Costs
  23. Wheeling Rates – The terms “hurdle rates” and “wheeling rates” are often used synonymously, however in reality the two differ greatly. “Wheeling Rates” cover utility tariffs, the cost of transporting power over transmission lines. Whereas, “Hurdle Rates” are used to align the imperfection of real dispatch with the perfect foresight of model generated dispatch. For example, TEPPC used “Hurdle Rates” in the TEPPC 2010 back-cast as a Band-Aid to cover inexplicable results and align with historic results.
  24. Wheeling rates should be used to cover non-firm transactions, whereas, in the TEPPC database they are applied as flat rates on all transfers resulting in double-dipping. Firm transactions are associated with rights that have sunk costs and should not be charged wheeling rates. Most WECC paths are fully committed; the non-firm piece constitutes a small percentage of total flows on the transmission, about 10%.
  25. Have used utility tariffs to update Wheeling Rates
  26. Validation Data
  1. Validating Generator Dispatch – Use public sources such as the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Forms 860, 860-1 data; EIA collects generator-level specific information about existing and planned generators and associated environmental equipment at electric power plants with 1 megawatt or greater of combined nameplate capacity. Summary level data can be found in the Electric Power Annual.
  2. Generation Dispatch (e.g., capacity factor by plant technology)
  3. RPS Levels
  4. Path flows – using historic actual hourly flows is essential for validating the PCM model. Previously, the WECC staff had used actual data when comparing modeled results to actual. There has been concerns about associated data confidentiality and the interpretation of the new UDSA with Peak Energy.
  5. Historic hourly path flows can come from alternate public sites: BPA & CAISO OASIS. Note: these sites do not provide for full coverage of Paths and region-specific flow gates.

1 | Page