Report of the Planning Coordination Committee

WECC Board Meeting

Albuquerque, NM

December, 2007

2

PCC Agenda

Approval Items Revisions to the WECC Power Supply

Assessment Policy. 2007 Power Supply Assessment (PSA).

Information Items Facility Rating Process

3

Changes to the Policy Current policy approved in 2000 and revised in 2002 Proposed substantive updates

Specifies assessments shall consider capacity and energy

Adds fuel supply interruption as potential uncertainty for future evaluation, an issue of interest to NERC

Describes building blocks generally and characterizes them as initial adequacy guidelines, giving WECC a specific reference in policy for external parties

Removes direction to calculate probabilities of serving load (will still be area of future LRS exploration)

Creates a communication mandate to states and others

4

Proposed Motion

The PCC recommends that the WECC Board approve the revisions of the WECC Power Supply Assessment Policy prepared by LRS.

5

Power Supply Assement History

Aim: replace the Power Supply Design Criteria (PSDC) for WECC resource adequacy assessments

LRS has been developing a bottom-up approach based on “building blocks”

October 2006 PCC meeting: Described initial components in qualitative terms

March 2007 PCC meeting: More detailed description of components being considered

July 2007: Board approved the Building Block approach LRS made changes based on feedback October 2007: PCC unanimously approved the Assessment

6

2007 Power Supply Assessment

Two resource levels Class 1 – reported to be under construction and in-service

by January 2011 Class 2 – reported to be under regulatory review and in-

service by January 2013 Other reported resources (Class 3) listed but not used in

analysis Cases, combinations of:

Summer and winter Building block margins and flat 15% margin Extreme temperature scenarios, for 2010-11 only

7

Adequacy Reserve Margin Components

Calculated by BA, applied by sub-region Components

Contingency reserves from NERC/WECC standards Regulating reserves from NERC/WECC standards Reserves for additional forced outages that would

require rebuilding contingency reserves – estimate from outage data

Reserve for additional load caused by 1-in-20 temperatures

8

Response to Comments from Last Meeting

Added appendix clarifying that PSA margins are not intended to supplant any margins ordered by regulatory agencies nor are they directly comparable to the margins an individual LSE or regulator might use to evaluate adequacy Did modify the calculation for California LSEs within

ISO footprint to address aggregation issues Looked at effect of wind machines at 0% capacity factor

– negligible in this PSA but an issue for future PSAs

9

Adequacy Reserve Margin Values in PSA

Sub-area SAM Bubbles Included in Sub-area Summer Winter

Margin Margin

Canada BC, Alberta 12.0% 12.8%

SouthwestArizona, N. Mexico, S. Nevada, IID, Four

Corners, Palo Verde 15.7% 14.6%

Northwest Pacific Northwest, COB, Montana 13.7% 16.3%

Basin Idaho, Utah, N. Nevada 12.8% 13.5%

N. CaliforniaN. California, Central California, San

Francisco, SMUD 16.5% 12.2%

S. California/Mexico S. California, San Diego, LADWP, CFE, IPP 16.6% 13.0%

Rocky Mountains Colorado East, Colorado West, Wyoming 14.2% 15.4%

10

Power Supply Margin by Sub-region – Summer, Class 1 Resources Only

Sub-region 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Canada 2,250 2,084 1,761 1,487 1,246 935 593 322 -158Northwest 8,038 7,615 7,303 6,864 6,413 5,830 5,422 4,979 4,521Basin 0 0 0 -231 -537 -920 -1,248 -1,628 -1,849Rockies 0 -44 0 -154 -502 -851 -1,241 -1,653 -2,045Desert SW 0 -944 -1,829 -2,956 -4,016 -5,042 -6,037 -7,091 -8,065No. CA 0 -26 0 -488 -984 -1,488 -1,970 -2,484 -3,084So. CA/MX 0 -1,206 -1,714 -2,494 -3,341 -4,093 -4,992 -5,895 -6,934Surplus 10,288 9,699 9,064 8,351 7,659 6,765 6,015 5,301 4,521Deficit 0 -2,220 -3,543 -6,322 -9,380 -12,394 -15,487 -18,752 -22,135

11

Power Supply Margin by Sub-region – Summer, Class 1 and 2 Resources

Sub-region 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Canada 2,250 2,119 1,846 2,022 1,781 1,470 1,128 915 575Northwest 9,078 8,064 7,866 7,536 7,085 6,503 6,094 5,595 5,000Basin 0 0 0 0 -289 -759 -1,087 -1,476 -1,762Rockies 0 0 0 -5 -377 -724 -1,114 -1,526 -1,918Desert SW 0 0 237 -1,225 -3,330 -4,829 -5,976 -7,091 -8,065No. CA 0 0 0 0 0 -413 -893 -1,397 -1,929So. CA/MX 0 131 87 -270 -528 -796 -1,533 -2,369 -3,408Surplus 11,328 10,314 10,035 9,558 8,866 7,973 7,222 6,510 5,575Deficit 0 1 2 -1,500 -4,524 -7,521 -10,602 -13,859 -17,083

12

Power Supply Margin by Sub-region – Winter, Class 1 and 2 Resources

Sub-region 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Canada 0 -296 -716 -472 -718 -1,059 -1,420 -1,706 -2,043Northwest 10,779 13,483 13,447 11,624 10,377 8,769 8,018 7,388 6,648Basin 351 66 66 0 0 0 0 0 0Rockies 2,108 1,593 2,218 1,929 1,630 1,111 983 682 365Desert SW 15,170 15,390 15,243 15,161 15,275 14,973 13,132 12,512 11,706No. CA 8,785 9,119 9,143 9,143 9,014 8,812 8,618 8,420 8,230So. CA/MX 4,552 3,773 2,944 2,944 2,944 2,944 2,944 2,929 2,366Surplus 41,746 43,424 43,061 40,801 39,240 36,608 33,696 31,930 29,316Deficit 0 -296 -716 -472 -718 -1,059 -1,420 -1,706 -2,043

13

Response to Current Comments – 1

Comment: PSA assumes all existing resources remain in service. PSA should acknowledge uncertainty about aging plants, e.g., ~4,400 MW in N. California. Response: L&R data request asks for known

retirements. Issue especially complex in California because of limited future resource info available to CAISO. BA vs. LSE and/or market knowledge is ongoing problem. An issue for next year’s PSA.

14

Response to Current Comments – 2

Comment: Recommend WECC develop rules for counting resources based on completion of milestones. Response: LRS will continue to look at the categorization

of new resources in the L&R data request and in the PSA. Biggest problem is lack of BA knowledge.

Comment: In future PSAs, WECC should adjust the adequacy metric to reflect changing mix of resources, especially increasing amounts of intermittent and non-dispatchable resources. Response: LRS will examine this issue further in future

PSAs. Because of how we used resource class categories this is less of an issue this year.

15

Future Work

Continue evaluation of data needs and data requests, including by other WECC users, e.g., TEPPC

Adequately recognize energy constraints on the system Particularly, constraints on NW hydro operation and

effect on capacity available to meet load Review, perhaps expand, building blocks and calculation

of numerical values Examine use of Promod, or other models, for adequacy

analysis Continue to improve consistency of WECC resource

adequacy reports with NERC adequacy reports

16

Proposed Motion

PCC recommends that the Board approve the 2007 Power Supply Assessment (PSA).

17

Information Items

18

Facility Rating Process Projects Entering Regional Planning

Gateway/South Gateway/West Central California Clean Energy TransWest Wyoming West

Projects Entering Phase 1 (none)

Projects Entering Phase 2 Juan de Fuca Path 54 Springerville Unit #4 Tot 3 Upgrade Colorado/WY (TOT3)

Projects Entering Phase 3 Centennial Path Redefinition Green Path MATL Path 27