ADS Implementation Questions- Issue List1

General

Question / Response / Follow-up by:
G1.Can the WPRs and IPRs adopt a common process flow chart? / This has been the intent for the ADS. While there may be differences between the details of WPRs’ and IPRs’ specific activities, the primary processes are expected to be similar. / WPR/IPR discussion
G2.Who provides PCM other data to WECC if the provider of the data is not a Data Submitter? / PCM other data may be provided by a variety of sources, some of which are public (e.g., NREL) and some of which may be Data Submitters, which will be consistent with the regional plans. / Jamie and Jonathan
G3.Is the list of resources definition, not mapping, part of the topology? How are they defined and who defines those? / Both resource definition and resource mapping are components of transmission topology. / Jan, Radha, Gary, Jamie and Andrew
G4.If yes, do the planning regions believe that the “timeline differences” between regions and the L&R resource submissions to WECC must be reconciled in the ADS? / Yes, eventually / Version 2

ADS Power Flow

Question / Response / Follow-up by:
PF1.What data has been or will be submitted by WPRs (or their member data submitters, as applicable) and IPRs for inclusion in the ADS per existing WECC processes or as already agreed/committed to by those entities? / Andrew and Ron
PF2.What data (specifically) from the 2028 HS1 power flow case will be used to populate the PCM ADS dataset? / Jamie, Radha, and Andrew
PF3.What is the difference between loads used in the Power Flow versus Loads used to create the coincident dispatch in PCM? / Jamie and Radha
PF4.Are loads used important to the planning regions?
PF5.Will the 2028 HS1 base case be consistent with the resources and transmission in a single hour export of the 2028 PCM ADS?
PF6.If not, what are the expected differences and how will those be coordinated between the two? Need to identify and document those differences.

ADS Production Cost Model

Question / Response / Follow-up by:
PCM1.Review the PCM Data table (on behalf of PDWG), is it correct? / G2 and G3 should align / RPG (Mudita, Heidi, Jonathan, John) and Jamie
PCM2.Does the ADS Proposal expect the ADS to be for the WPRs/IPRs and WECC will, if necessary, build its own PCM case from the ADS for WECC use?
PCM3.Is the ADS a collection of data where coordinated input is of less concern than region specific data accuracy?
PCM4.Is the ADS a “Ready to go”, “plug and play” coordinated input dataset that has partial region specific data accuracy?
PCM5.What (specifically) is the “other” data that is needed complete the ADS PCM? / “Other Data” includes data that is not part of the Power Flow case, such as fuel prices, wheeling rates, emission rates. A complete set of other data is posted as part of WECC’s 2026 Common Case.
PCM 5. Can the PCM ADS data set fully replicate the data provided to it from the 2028 HS1? Including dynamics. What hurdles can we expect?
PCM6. How tight is the link between the PF and
PCM at this point? Will the ADS have to
comply with the NERC quality metrics? If
not how will WECC comply with the
designee requirement and keep the two
models linked?

ADS-RAC Processes

Question / Response / Follow-up by:
RAC1.Who is responsible for the data/information within Box D? / Box D includes the Other Date needed to complete the ADS PCM case. The PCM Data Work Group, the ADS Task Force and WECC staff are collaborating to develop this data.
RAC2.What are the roles of the PDWG and other RAC subcommittees? / In developing the ADS PCM case, the PDWG will be facilitating discussions to develop the other data which will be approved by the Data Subcommittee.
RAC3.Do they “modify” or do they “validate”? / The PDWG develops and validates “other data.”
RAC4.Can the PDWG develop a consensus on a specific standard for compiling the PCM dataset in Box “G” of the Process Flow Diagram? / The Data Development and Validation Manual (DDVM) describes the protocols for developing and validating data used in the ADS PCM.

Policy/Legal/Oversight

Question / Response / Follow-up by:
POL1.What is WECC’s role in providing generic data to replace confidential data? / WECC intends to use the appropriate data to build a valid ADS. To the extent that data is confidential, its release will be protected according to WECC’s Information Sharing Policy.
POL2.Data confidentiality and control? Generic versus actual data; if generic, who provides the data?
POL3.What to the WPRs/IPRs need?
POL4.What does WECC need?
POL5.Is there agreement that ADSTF should address these issues?
POL6.What do Data Submitters need?

General Questions of the Regional Planning Groups (Jan Strack- SDG&E):

  • The annual peak loads for each of the balancing authorities.
  • The annual energy loads for each of the balancing authorities.
  • The annual amounts by which energy efficiency programs implemented, or planned to be implemented, after 2009, reduced annual peak loads for each of the balancing authorities.
  • The annual amounts by which energy efficiency programs implemented, or planned to be implemented, after 2009, reduced annual energy loads for each of the balancing authorities.
  • Sources of the data for energy efficiency programs implemented, or planned to be implemented, after 2009.
  • The installed planning reserve margins in each of the balancing authorities.
  • For each balancing authority, the installed amount and type of distribution-connected generation (including storage) added since 2009.
  • For each balancing authority, the installed amount and type of behind-the-load meter generation (including storage) added since 2009.
  • Whether, for each balancing authority, distributed generation added since 2009 is modeled as stand-alone generators or as a reduction in hourly loads.
  • Sources of the hourly output profiles for behind-the-load meter distributed generation modeled as stand-alone generators.
  • The implied Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) percentage for each balancing authority whose Load Serving Entities (LSEs) are subject to an RPS requirement or goal.
  • Forecast natural gas dispatch prices for a central point within (i) the Pacific Northwest area, (ii) Sacramento area, (iii) Los Angeles area, (iv) Phoenix area, (v) Las Vegas area, (vi) Salt Lake City area, (vii) Denver area, and (viii) El Paso area.
  • Forecast coal dispatch prices for (i) Colstrip, (ii) Laramie River Station, (iii) Bonanza, (iv) Four Corners, (v) Navajo, (vi) Intermountain Power Project, and (vii) Cholla/Springerville.
  • Source of heat rates for gas-fired, coal and nuclear generators.
  • Whether the “spill box” is checked for behind-the-load meter distributed generation modeled as stand-alone generators. (The “spill box” should be unchecked if behind-the-load meter generation is intended to be “must-run.”)
  • Whether the “spill box” for transmission- and distribution-connected solar PV is checked.(The “spill box” should be checked if transmission- and distribution-connected solar PV is intended to be dispatchable based on variable operating costs (i.e., “dispatch price” + “variable O&M price”).)
  • The “dispatch price” for transmission- and distribution-connected solar PV.
  • The “variable O&M price” for transmission- and distribution-connected solar PV.
  • Whether the “spill box” for wind resources is checked.(The “spill box” should be checked if wind resources are intended to be dispatchable based on variable operating costs (i.e., “dispatch price” + “variable O&M price”).)
  • The “dispatch price” “variable O&M price” and for wind resources.
  • Whether geothermal resources are modeled as “must-run.” The start-up costs and start-up times for geothermal resources. ;The “variable O&M price” for geothermal resources.
  • Source of the maximum hourlycapabilityfor hydro-electric resources with storage.

Source of the hourly must-run constraints for hydro-electric resources with storage.Source of the hourly output values for run-of-river hydro-electric resources.

Western Electricity Coordinating Council