ADSTF Report of Lessons Learned from the Implementation of the 2028 ADS Anchor Data Set Task Force February 22, 2019 Introduction Throughout 2015 and 2016 the structure of committees in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) were evaluated. The Report and Recommendations from the Joint PCC-TEPPC Review Task Force (JPTRTF) to the WECC Board (Report) included the following recommendation: Create the Anchor Data Set (ADS) Development Process: The ADS process will establish consistent processes and protocols for gathering planning data, including reviews for consistency and completeness, to generate production cost, power flow, and dynamic models with a common representation of the loads, resources, and transmission across the Western Interconnection 10 years in the future. The ADS will include topology from the latest Western Planning Regions (WPR) transmission plans that establishes a common modeling foundation to be used by WECC, the WPRs and other stakeholders to analyze the bulk electric transmission system for planning and reliability assessments. The Anchor Data Set Task Force (ADSTF) was established to provide guidance in the development and coordination of processes for creating and implementing the ADS including the development of protocols to ensure adherence to the ADS processes. In collaboration with the WPRs, the ADSTF developed a process workflow that inherently visualized the Report s recommendations through detailed mapping of various ADS development responsibilities that were associated with the WPRs and RAC. The ADSTF also began developing the ADS Process Guide which is intended to formally document all of the processes associated with the ADS. Development of the process workflow and ADS Process Guide will continue well into 2019 and once completed and accepted by RAC will fulfill the ADSTF s responsibilities under its charter. The ADS process envisioned by the founding documents utilized existing WECC processes but presumed an amplification of existing coordination efforts among the WPRs, WECC, RAC, and certain RAC subcommittees and their workgroups. To facilitate the initial implementation of the ADS, the ADS proposal included four deliverables: 1. The 2028 initial Power Flow Case a WECC peak summer hour (between 17:00 to 19:00 PDT) developed from the Updated WPR s 2026 CC PCM ( Updated 2026 PCM ) power flow export. This case represents the Bulk Electric System (BES) generation and transmission topology of the regions latest transmission plans. The 2028 initial power flow case will be the 10-year case in WECC s Base Case Compilation Schedule (BCCS), 155 North 400 West Suite 200 Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 www.wecc.org
currently developed through the System Review Work Group (SRWG) and will be the starting point for the ADS. The first component of the ADS that was to be developed was a 2028 Heavy Summer 1 Base Case. The creation of this began with the development of the case description sheet. The case description emphasized that the regional planning groups would need to play a more significant role in case development than they had in the past. The development of that case began in August of 2017 and was completed in December of 2017. 2. A 2028 Production Cost Model. The second component of the ADS is a 2028 Production Cost Model (PCM). The PCM was developed to be consistent with 2028 Heavy Summer 1 base case (base case) topology (transmission and generation). The topology of the base case was imported into the PCM. Then, other supplemental data required to develop the hourly dispatch, energy dispatch for 2028was added to create the PCM database. The development of the PCM dataset began in late 2017 and was posted in June of 2018; subsequently multiple versions have been posted the most recent being version 2.2 (considered final) in January 2019. 3. A 2028 solved power flow case the PCM exported heavy summer hour (between 17:00 to 19:00 PDT) from a peak August day. The third deliverable of the ADS is a 2028 solved power flow case that is created by exporting an hour from the PCM, the hour to be exported being a heavy summer hour (between 17:00 to 19:00 PDT) from a peak August day. The development of this exported power flow case took place in parallel with ongoing improvements to the PCM database. There were a few iterations in finalizing the power flow case, but a case that was based on the June 2018 release of the 2028 PCM, was completed. 4. Change files or other comparative data provided by the WPR that reflect the differences between: 1) the WPR s 2026 CC and 2) the PCM version of the posted 2028 ADS. The WPR will provide a summary of the key differences that WECC will also post. The fourth deliverable for the initial ADS were change files or other comparative data formats to be provided by the WPR that reflected the differences between: 1) the WPR s 2026 Common Case and 2) the PCM component of the posted 2028 ADS. The WPR agreed to and did provide a summary of the key differences between the Common Case 2
and the initial ADS. WECC committed to and did post this summary on the WECC website. The design of the ADS anticipated that WECC and stakeholders would use the ADS as a starting point for creating additional data sets for specific assessments. It was anticipated that users would document the ways in which the additional data sets differed from the original ADS. The value of the deliverable being tied to just the WPRs was not identified, but the creation of a documented change case process allows stakeholders to understand and, if desired, use the change cases developed and posted as part of the ADS. Consistent with the Report first official version (version 1.0) of the 2028 Anchor Data Set (ADS) was completed and posted on June 29, 2018. While the report explored many of the processes that would need to be developed and implemented, during its effort to implement the ADS process the ADSTF learned that certain aspects of the ADS process had not been identified in the report. This was certainly not unexpected as the implementation of any process generally differs from the final implementation of a consistent and repeatable process. Though the ADS was completed, those involved with its creation and development have expected that they would identify opportunities to improve the data, models and processes used based on learnings as they developed the initial product. This document discusses and identifies the lessons that have been learned by the ADSTF since the WECC Board approved the ADS Proposal in December 2016. As the implementation of the ADS process continues, the information identified in this report is being applied by the ADSTF to further improve on the ADS process and its constituent models and data. Lessons Learned 1. Each of the Regional Planning Groups has its own process and timeline for developing its transmission plan and associated data. For ease of understanding, the Report generally treated the WPRs (California Independent System Operator, Northern Tier Transmission Group, Columbia Grid, WestConnect) and other Regional Planning Groups (RPGs) (e.g., BC Hydro, Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO)) as generally having similar processes. In developing the ADS, the ADSTF learned that while there are similarities across certain aspects of the WPRs regional processes and WECC s established processes, there are also differences in structure, timing, and especially differences regarding the relationship between each RPG and its respective WECC data submitters. This has introduced challenges to developing the ADS. For example, some WPRs develop their regional plans annually while others develop their regional plans biennially. Additionally, the currency of the data in the ADS for each of the RPGs naturally differs depending on where each of the RPGs are in their regional planning process and depending on whether the RPGs are willing to release interim or preliminary information. Future versions of the ADS 3
will need to accommodate WPRs differing planning timelines as well as identifying opportunities to align WPR and WECC processes and timelines to benefit ADS development. A second observation was that in some planning regions the WPR is directly involved with determining the data that will be provided by their respective WECC data submitters as part of the base case development. In other planning regions, the base case is developed by the WECC data submitters and the WPR has little involvement in the process of providing data to WECC. In this first iteration of the ADS, the WPRs were asked to work with their respective WECC data submitters to submit data to WECC that was consistent with their WPR s regional plans. Indications are that 1) each WPR has a different contractual relationship with their members that governs how the WPR manages and uses their data; 2) there were mixed results as to the degree of consistency between the WPRs regional plans and the data submitted to WECC by their members who submit data to WECC; and 3) once it became clear to the WPRs data submitted to WECC by their members was, in some cases, inconsistent with their regional plan, the WPRs immediately began working with their members to minimize inconsistencies in future data submittals. The ADSTF is exploring potential solutions to this challenge. 2. Data provided by data submitters for WECC base cases generally excludes planned resources whose location and technology are not know with certainty. The accepted premise and benefit of the ADS is that it starts with a base case from which a PCM data set is developed. Once the PCM data set that is consistent with the base case is available a power flow can be exported to reflect the conditions in any hour of the PCM 8760-hour run. There is a great deal of value in the data flowing in this way as it can provide a more efficient approach to developing base cases that can be used to produce more studies. However, there is a great deal of reluctance on the WECC data submitters (Transmission Planners) side to include certain types of information in the year- 10 base case developed through the Data Subcommittee s (DS) base case development process under the Data Preparation Manual (DPM). The ADSTF believes that most of the generation and transmission topology that is submitted by the data submitters through the DS base case development process to build the year-10 heavy summer base case encompasses the information needed by the PCM data set. However, the Production Cost Model Data Working Group (PDWG) asserts that the resources modeled in the base case does not balance for energy modeling, covering all 8760 hours. Utility s Integrated Resource Plans call on planned resources to serve the year 10 forecasted loads, however, the System Data Work Group (SDWG) has reported that they are unable in many cases to add resources that don t have adequate certainty. Additional resources that the PDWG identified are generally ones that are planned but are not yet in construction or possibly not yet represented through an interconnection agreement (another way to refer to generator interconnections or LGIAs); they may even be conceptual in nature. 4
Based on the information the ADSTF has received and extensively discussed, the ADSTF has concluded that the existing SDWG and PDWG processes do not currently support the premise of the original ADS concept. Specifically, the premise that the generation represented in the base case can be consistent with the generation needed in the PCM. One potential way to address the differences in representation is the create some criteria that is used uniformly across the interconnection that would identify the generating units that would be represented in the ADS. The ADSTF has discussed this possibility in the past but there has been limited interest as this would require widespread change to WECC s and entity s existing processes. Other challenges exist as well such as the difficulty in selecting the criteria that would have enough support. This idea of a common criteria will continue to be on the radar for the ADSTF. The ADSTF has requested the Data Subcommittee form a task force to address the data discrepancies between power flow and LAR. 3. The timeline of the collection of the data needed to build the ADS does not support getting the most current information included main ADS deliverables. One of the goals of the ADS process is to eliminate inconsistencies in the data collected and used by WECC in its long-term reliability assessments. There are primarily two sources of data that look out to year 10: 1) Generator and load information provided by WECC data submitters for purposes of developing year-ten base cases. 2) Generator and load information provided by WECC data submitters in response to LAR data request. Development of the PCM relies on data gathered through both. When the PCM development began in December of 2017, the most recent LAR data had been gathered by WECC during the first quarter of 2017. However, PDWG used the new LAR data, collected March 2018, in the PCM dataset to make it current and with same timestamp data. There are two timelines that are in conflict, the ADS must be available in June for the RPGs to meet their timelines and the LAR data is due in March to meet the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) Long Term Reliability Assessment (LTRA) timeline. It is desired to include the most current loads and resources data in the PCM. Including the data provided through LAR is possible but the generation topology in the year-ten base case (which is imported into the PCM) is completed before the end of the previous year (2017) and is based on data collected in the previous year (2017) when the year-10 heavy summer base case is developed and finalized. Considering the timing of the data set development, the results are that in the best-case scenario, there will be temporal differences between the generation and load data in the base case and the generation and load data in the updated PCM case. However, information learned from the first cycle of the ADS 5
suggests there are additional challenges between the base case and PCM that can be traced to the two different data submittal processes (the base case process and the LAR process). These additional differences reflect some data submitters contention that 1) the resources included in transmission reliability studies should exclude planned resources whose location and technology and are not known with certainty, and 2) the resources submitted as part of the LAR process should include such planned resources. Without being addressed, these differences present challenges to achieving the expectations of the ADS development. The ADS PCM can use the current year (2018) LAR submittals as the official source of resource data, in which case 1) the ADS power flow will be based on the year it was developed (2017), and 2) there will be differences in generation and transmission topology between what is in the ADS power flow and the ADS PCM. Another option is that the ADS PCM can use the data from the ADS power flow in which case 1) the ADS power flow and ADS PCM will reflect generation and transmission data that is based on the year the year-10 base case, and 2) there will be differences between the generation in the ADS and the generation in the most current LAR reports. Some WECC stakeholders believe the ideal outcome would be for each data submitter to submit year- 10 base-case data to WECC that is fully consistent with the resources included in the response to the LAR data request. It is the opinion of these WECC stakeholders that such an outcome would satisfy the ADS goal of data consistency. However, as noted above, the current timelines for submitting ten-yearout power flow data and for submitting data in response to the NERC L&R process, differ. Also, as discussed in #2 above, some WECC data submitters do not believe the same generation data should be included in the two submittals. Here, too, the ADSTF will be considering possible solutions to these challenges. 4. Current ADS data development procedures make it difficult to evaluate public policy requirements in the ADS base case. The Report identified that the ADS will include data such that; The data will reflect applicable state and federal statutory public policy requirements such as Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS), Regional Haze Programs, and Mercury and Air Toxic Standards (MATS). Since the Report was issued, other public policy requirements have been imposed, such as the small-scale storage mandates in California. As the ADS base case was being developed, it was recognized that there is generally no easy way to determine if the data submitted by WECC data submitters is compatible with these public policy requirements. Here, too, transmission owners and RPGs may have different perspectives on the compatibility of base case data with public policy requirements. Entities involved with developing the ADS PCM have created ways to measure the PCM s compatibility with state and provincial renewable portfolio standards. But, once the PCM has been created consistent with the topology of the ADS base case, there isn t an opportunity to address any 6
public policy deficiencies that are identified without risking incompatibility with the base case topology. Under the current ADS process, the ADS base case is completed and finalized before the ADS PCM can even be started thus making alignment between the two, while respecting public policy requirements, very challenging. 5. It is challenging to validate and test the deliverables within the development schedule. The base case and PCM are not able to be thoroughly tested and validated without stakeholders using the data. With the ADS being completed on such a short timeline there is insufficient time to allow stakeholders to use the data and identify possible deficiencies until after the data sets are completed. After the base case was completed a few issues were identified and corrections provided. Many of these corrections were made to the PCM before the 2028 ADS PCM was developed but the timing didn t allow for those changes to be vetted with regional planning groups or others. Similarly, only after stakeholders started using the PCM after its completion were they able to identify some issues that resulted in a version 2.2 of the 2028 ADS PCM being released in January of 2019. 6. WECC and stakeholders must use a robust change management system to accurately and transparently manage changes to the ADS data sets. WECC and stakeholders have invested a significant amount of time and resources in developing the ADS, beginning with the initial Seed Case in the summer of 2017 and continuing through the final version of ADS deliverables in October 2018. It is important to document the many changes implemented during the initial development process to avoid the need to repeat data and process changes unnecessarily and to ensure that future versions of the ADS reflect the improvements made in the 2017-2018 process. 7. Data submitters interpret and respond to data requests in widely varying ways. As a voluntary organization, WECC does not have the ability to compel any Data Submitter to submit data following any criteria or rules. Guidelines have been developed to define the data desired but are not required to be adhered to. Recognizing this reality, the data requests developed, in consultation with the SDWG, to collect power flow data from data submitters, contains guidelines. In support of the ADS process, the guidelines for submitting data for developing the 2028 Heavy Summer base case, recommended that data submitters submit base case data that was consistent with their respective RPG s transmission plan. Given comments received from certain data submitters during the development of the ADS process, and through this first iteration of the ADS, there are differing views on how NERC compliance obligations are to be satisfied and, accordingly, on what data can be collected for its year-10 base case. 7
Some data submitters believe NERC compliance obligations preclude data submitters from including planned generation for which location and technology are not known with certainty (sometimes referred to as fictitious generation ). These data submitters claim that reliability could be jeopardized if reliability studies assume these generators will be on-line. The notion is that studies performed with these uncertain generators would not identify potential reliability risks and if the generators are not built the risks would not be adequately addressed. Therefore, despite the guidelines issued with WECC s 2028 Heavy Summer data request, these data submitters responded to the data request by submitting data that excluded planned generation included in their respective RPG s transmission plan. Other data submitters have the view that important grid reliability issues could go undiscovered if the full amount of planned generation is not modeled in reliability studies. Additionally, by excluding planned generation, generation dispatch patterns may be significantly skewed from what is likely to occur in the event planned generation develops as projected. These data submitters believe conducting reliability studies based on highly improbable generation dispatch patterns, may produce misleading or useless results. The disparity between these two views is significant and is a challenge in creating an ADS that includes data on a consistent basis across both the ADS power flow and ADS PCM. Resolving this disparity is important but may be outside the scope of the ADSTF. 8