2010 STUDY PROGRAM OUTLINE
VI-9
WESTERN ELECTRICITY COORDINATING COUNCIL
2010 STUDY PROGRAM OUTLINE
The goals of the 2010 WECC Study Program will be to:
Provide timely and accurately updated information to prepare 11 Power Flow and Stability
Base Cases as follows:





5 Operating Cases to be utilized for OTC seasonal studies
3 Scenario Cases
1 5 Year summer planning case
1 5 Year winter planning case
1 10 Year summer planning case
These cases will be used for the development of the 2010 Study Program Annual
Report through studies of existing and new transmission projects, paths, new
generation projects, and concerns that were identified in the 2010 WECC Study
Program Guidance Survey. In addition, the OTC sub-regional study groups will use
the five operating cases for conducting their seasonal operating studies. The cases
will also be used for Member System Studies, including reactive reserve margin
studies.
Description sheets for the base cases proposed for the 2010 Study Program are
included in the appendix.
1.1. Provide a means for complying with the NERC Reliability Standards in the NERC
Compliance Enforcement Program assigned to TSS. TSS will use Study Program
data submittals and The Study Program Annual Report as a means of complying
with the following Reliability Standards of the NERC Compliance Enforcement
Program:






TPL 001-004 M1-M2 – System Performance
MOD 010, 012 – Steady State and Dynamics Data for Transmission
System Modeling and Simulation
FAC 009-1 – Establish and Communicate Facility Ratings
PRC 006 – UFLS Dynamics Data Base
PRC 014 – Special Protection System Assessment
PRC 020 – UVLS Dynamics Data Base
Due to timing requirements of the 2010 NERC Compliance Enforcement Program,
portions of the 2010 Study Program will not be completed in time to be fully utilized
for the 2010 Compliance Enforcement Program. Therefore, portions of the 2009
Study Program results will provide a prime source for assessing compliance.
However, TSS will use the 2010 Study Program for future NERC Compliance
assessment.
1.2. Conduct disturbance simulations through post-disturbance and transient stability
studies to assess data quality, test the adequacy and security of the system under
expected, extreme, or critical operating conditions, explore the limits of system
operation, and study the effectiveness of safety nets used in the western
VI-10
interconnection.
1.3. Conduct/support special studies requested by TSS, OTC, or other groups.
STUDY PROGRAM OUTLINE
1.0
Introduction
The WECC Annual Study Program is conducted to provide an ongoing reliability
assessment of the interconnected system as it exists now and the system as planned
over the next ten years. Based on recommendations from the Report of the Study
Processes Work Group, the 2010 Study Program methodology will continue an
assessment of system security as well as adequacy. At the October 2002 PCC
meeting, PCC approved new procedures for developing stressed cases to assess
system security. The WECC Staff will review base cases identified for use in the
2010 Study Program prior to conducting simulations. For an outage being
simulated, if the best study plan case does not represent the path being studied at an
appropriate level, then the Staff may construct a Modified base case from the study
plan case. The Modified case will be placed on the WECC web site, with notes
indicating the changes, and the Members will be notified. Members wishing to
review the case may do so. Results of the simulations conducted on the Modified
case will be included in the Study Program Annual Report.
For results that do not meet the specified category of the “TPL – (001 thru 004) –
WECC – 1 – CR – System Performance Criteria” and the NERC Reliability
Standards for the Bulk Electric System of North America (NERC Reliability
Standards), the Staff will notify the responsible member(s). If the member
reviews the case and provides changes prior to SRWG review of the Study
Program Annual Report, the changes will be incorporated and the simulation
will be rerun, and included in the Study Program Annual Report. Results of
simulations conducted on Modified cases that do not meet the specified category
of the “TPL – (001 thru 004) – WECC – 1 – CR – System Performance Criteria”
and the NERC Reliability Standards prior to SRWG review of the Study
Program Annual Report will become recommendations in the Report, and
identified as needing further review in the next year’s Study Program.
TSS will use the Annual Study Program as its primary mechanism for promoting
compliance with the following NERC Reliability Standards:
TPL 001-004 – System Performance. These Standards require an annual assessment
of system performance to ensure compliance with the conditions defined in
Table I of the NERC Reliability Standards and the TPL – (001 thru 004) –
WECC – 1 – CR – System Performance Criteria. Although NERC requirements
do not always require assessment of all four levels of studies (TPL 001-004), the
Regions and individual members are still responsible for complying with these
NERC Reliability Standards. TSS will continue to use the cases prepared for the
Annual Study Program as its primary mechanism for promoting compliance with
these requirements.
VI-11

MOD 010, 012 – System Modeling Data Requirements, Steady State &
Dynamics Data. These two standards require submittal of data for the modeling
and simulation of the steady-state (MOD 010) and dynamic (MOD 012)
behavior of the WECC System. TSS will use the 10-Year Data Bank data
submittal requirements for promoting compliance with these requirements.

FAC 009-1 – Establish and Communicate Facility Ratings. This standard
requires transmission and generator owners to establish facility ratings for sole
and joint owned facilities that are consistent with the associated Facility Ratings
Methodology (FAC 008). Furthermore, transmission and generator owners shall
each provide facility ratings for sole and joint owned facilities to their associated
Reliability Coordinators, Planning Authorities, Transmission Planners, and
Transmission Operators. TSS will use the facility rating data requirements
identified in the WECC Data Preparation Manual (DPM) for promoting
compliance with this requirement.

PRC 006 – UFLS Dynamics Data Base. Regions and individual members are
responsible for complying with this standard and TSS will continue to maintain
and update the UFLS information included in the MDF.

PRC 014 – Special Protection System Assessment. This standard requires a
region to assess the operation, coordination, and effectiveness of all SPS’s
installed at least once every five years for compliance with NERC standards and
Regional criteria.

PRC 020 – UVLS Dynamics Data Base. Regions and individual members are
responsible for complying with this standard and TSS will continue to maintain
and update the UVLS information included in the MDF.
Eleven power flow base cases are scheduled to be compiled for the 2010 Study
Program. The 2010 Study Program will include heavy and light load operating cases
for the upcoming summer and winter seasons and a heavy load operating case for
the upcoming spring season. These five cases will be utilized by the OTC subregions
as a starting point for conducting their seasonal OTC studies. Three scenario cases
will be created to model critical operating conditions, such as severe weather
conditions, equipment out of service, and unusual generation patterns. Two fiveyear cases and one ten-year case will also be prepared for Council and member use.
Compliance with NERC Reliability Standards and Measurements associated with
Sections TPL 001-004 of the NERC Compliance Program requires seasonal studies
for the upcoming year, as well as a five-year planning horizon. Additional studies
for the 2-4 year time frame as well as the 6-10 year time frame may also be required,
depending on planned system additions. The base cases prepared for the 2010 Study
Program will be used by members and the WECC Technical Staff for conducting
studies to fulfill future compliance requirements.
The simulated disturbances shall cover the usual analysis of data quality and system
adequacy under anticipated system conditions, but will also attempt to determine the
limits of system performance through risk assessment and extreme contingency
studies. The impacts of new generation facilities will also be analyzed through their
VI-12
inclusion in the cases. An investigation into the effectiveness of safety nets will be
conducted through simulation of at least one extreme disturbance intended to initiate
or activate one of the schemes.
This outline specifies the eleven power flow base cases that will be compiled and
establishes the general objectives for the disturbance cases to be run for the 2010
Study Program.
The Performance Validation Task Force (PVTF) of the Modeling and Validation
Work Group may request that TSS prepare a system validation test case as part of
the 2010 Study Program. As part of their request, the PVTF will identify the
conditions to be modeled in the system validation case. If TSS approves the
preparation of this case, this case will replace one of the designated cases in the
2010 Study Program Outline.
2.0
2010 Study Program Objectives and Activities
1.4. Provide timely and accurately updated information for the WECC ten-year power
flow and stability data bank for Member’s and WECC committee use. Timely
submittal of data is necessary if the 2010 Study Program Outline schedule is to be
maintained. A late data notification process has been approved by PCC and will be
followed in the event of delayed ten-year power flow and stability data bank
submittals. A combination of typical cases and scenario cases will comprise the
eleven power flow cases prepared for the 2010 Study Program.
Typical Cases will model anticipated load levels, but in some instances may
model slightly heavier or slightly lighter than anticipated load levels to
achieve desired stressed transfer levels on designated paths. All lines for the
given time period are to be represented in service with expected generation
patterns. Typical cases usually include OTC operating cases, five-year cases,
ten-year cases, and additional cases as requested by TSS.
Nine typical cases are included in the 2010 Study Program, including:




Five operating cases
One five-year summer planning case
One five-year winter planning case
One ten-year case
Scenario Cases represent critical operating conditions such as severe weather
patterns, equipment out of service (transmission lines, reactive devices, or
selected SVC’s), unusual generation patterns due to forced outages, and
insecure voltage conditions. Some cases may represent extreme load
conditions (up to 110% of forecasted peak) in a particular sub-region.
Three scenario cases are included in the 2010 Study Program. The first
scenario case is a one-year heavy summer case representing heavy summer
loads (105%) throughout WECC. The second scenario case is a six-year
light autumn case representing high flows from California/Montana to the
Northwest. The third scenario case is a seven-year heavy winter case
representing high S-N Path 15 and E-W WOR flows.
VI-13
1.5. Provide five operating cases (heavy and light loading conditions for summer and
winter, and heavy loading conditions for spring) for the upcoming year. The OTC
sub-regional Study Groups will use these five cases as a starting point for their
seasonal operating transfer capability studies. These cases will also serve as a
starting point for system studies required by Standards TPL 001-004 of the NERC
Compliance Enforcement Program.
1.6. Review and perform general verification of system representation and data to:
1.
Ensure compatibility of the power flow and stability data.
2.
Ensure quality and adequacy of system representation.
3.
Improve accuracy of data submittals.
As part of the routine data checking process, a "no-disturbance" simulation
will be conducted on each power flow base case prepared for the 2010 Study
Program.
Base cases will not be approved for distribution or use in the Study Program
until acceptable results are obtained in these simulations. The “nodisturbance” simulations are conducted to ensure compatibility of data and
check for numerical instability.
In addition to the no-disturbance simulation, a standard disturbance
simulation will be conducted on each power flow base case as a way to test
the dynamics data as well as system operating levels represented in the
power flow base case.
The 2010 Study Program will use the two unit Palo Verde outage as the
standard disturbance for all cases with north-to-south COI flows. The PDCI
bipole outage will be used for all cases with south-to-north COI flows. The
switching sequence for the PDCI bipole loss standard disturbance is due one
week after the initial data submittal is due to the Staff (refer to the case
preparation schedule). Base cases will not be approved for distribution or
use in the Study Program until acceptable results are obtained in the standard
disturbance simulation.
If a standard disturbance simulation does not meet the TPL – (001 thru 004)
– WECC – 1 – CR – System Performance Criteria or the NERC Reliability
Standards, appropriate entities will be contacted prior to distribution for
suggested modifications. Correction of data problems and/or flows outside
of known operating limits could result in acceptable performance. If the
simulation results remain unacceptable, it will be brought to SRWG’s
attention and included in the 2010 Study Program Annual Report as a
potential log item.
After significant additions or changes are made to the Master Dynamics File,
a 35-second simulation of the Chief Joseph Brake Ringdown Test will be
conducted as an additional data check. The Chief Joseph Brake Ringdown
Test is conducted to check new data for numerical instability.
VI-14
To ensure quality base cases SRWG requests that Member Systems submit
data in accordance with the guidelines and criteria presented in the WECC
Data Preparation Manual (DPM). Member system’s submittal of data for
the 2010 Study Program, as specified in the DPM helps to support
compliance with NERC Reliability Standards MOD 010, 012 – System
Modeling Data Requirements, Steady State & Dynamics Data, which
requires the submittal of data for modeling and simulation of the steady-state
(MOD 010) and dynamic (MOD 012) behavior of the interconnected system.
Also supported is requirement FAC 009-1 – Establish and Communicate
Facility Ratings, which requires users of the interconnected transmission
system to provide appropriate equipment characteristics (facility ratings) and
system data in compliance with the respective procedural manuals. Members
should pay special attention to provide any new under-frequency or undervoltage load shedding data not already included in the Master Dynamics File
or update existing under-frequency or under-voltage data with each case. In
doing so members fulfill the requirement of NERC Reliability Standards
PRC 007 – UFLS Dynamics Data Base and PRC 020 – UVLS Dynamics
Data Base, which requires each region to maintain and annually update a
UFLS and UVLS program database including sufficient information to
model the regional UFLS and UVLS programs.
SRWG requests that planned facilities be represented when sufficient
modeling data are available. Uncertainties as to timing, size, or location of
new facilities should not be the reason for excluding representation in the
WECC base cases.
SRWG will revise the case description sheets as required at the time the
request letter is mailed to meet the stated purpose of the case. Revisions will
be made to account for delayed projects, revised transfer capabilities, revised
requests from the OTC sub-regional study groups, or other changes in plans
that affect the stated purpose of the case. The case year represented may be
changed for future planning cases to incorporate the desired project or
condition to be studied.
At the August 2002 TSS meeting, TSS approved using the baseload flag in
the GE PSLF program to indicate generators that cannot respond to low
frequency with additional mechanical power. When preparing power flow
data for submittal for the 2010 Study Program, members will be required to
set the baseload flag to “1” on all units that will not respond to low frequency
with additional mechanical power. Version 13 or higher of the GE PSLF
program, as distributed by WECC, is required to utilize this option.
Members that do not have the GE PSLF program will be required to provide
a listing of all of generating units that should have the baseload flag set to 1.
At the May 2001 TSS meeting, TSS approved inclusion of generic induction
motor data in all WECC 10-year data bank cases. WECC members who
have developed detailed or specific induction motor data for all or part of
their area should provide the specific induction motor data for their area as
VI-15
part of the standard data submittal and indicate which typical induction
motor data should be removed from the generic data.
2.4
Assess interconnected system security under anticipated stressed conditions
and scenario conditions to:
1. Assess anticipated steady state conditions.
2. Evaluate the risk associated with, and examine the consequences of
unanticipated operating conditions including component and / or
remedial action scheme failure or false operation. Assessment of
component failure (existing protection systems) is included in the
requirements of NERC Reliability Standards TPL 001-004.
3. Determine the ability of the present and future planned interconnected
system to meet applicable performance levels of the TPL – (001 thru
004) – WECC – 1 – CR – System Performance Criteria and the NERC
Reliability Standards. This will be accomplished by conducting transient
stability and post-disturbance studies simulating multiple contingency
disturbances to evaluate the security and adequacy of the interconnected
system. Some extreme contingency studies will also be conducted to
evaluate the system for risk and consequences and testing the
effectiveness of safety nets.
4. Identify potential interconnected system separation points.
5. Provide timely notification to PCC and OC of any potential near-term
operating problems.
6. Investigate the impact of significant new facility additions (new
transmission and new generation) which have not previously been
represented in Council data files.
7. Compare actual interchanges, loop flow, and general operating
conditions in the power flow base cases relative to the case descriptions
and known operating limits (such as existing or forecasted transfer
limits).
8. Maintain for TSS, logs of items identified during the Study Program
which do not meet the TPL – (001 thru 004) – WECC – 1 – CR – System
Performance Criteria or the NERC Reliability Standards (Performance
Log) or may indicate incorrect modeling (Representation Log) as
provided in the “SRWG Performance/Representation Log Procedure.”
As part of SRWG’s efforts to improve system representation, member
systems are now required to provide ratings for all branches in their
power flow data submittals. Failure to do so is one example of a data
problem that would result in a Representation Log item for the offending
member. The submittal of branch ratings fulfills NERC Reliability
Standard FAC 009-1 – Establish and Communicate Facility Ratings.
2.5
Conduct special studies as requested by PCC, TSS or the Operating
Committee (requires TSS approval) to:
VI-16
1. Support the study needs of the Planning Coordination and Operating
Committees of the WECC.
2. Evaluate the sensitivity of system security and performance to variations
in system component representations as required.
If TSS decides it is necessary to develop a special test base case, the test
case would replace one of the listed cases in the 2010 Study Program.
Study requests from the Operating Committee will be handled in
accordance with the "Statement of Principles and Procedures for
Conducting Operating Studies" document.
3.0
Comments
Scenario cases are intended to represent critical or unusual operating
conditions. Members must not be reluctant to model a condition outlined in the
case description sheet simply because it is not what is expected or forecasted.
Therefore if a case is to represent high levels of power transfers between areas,
schedules between the areas should include both contractual schedules of firm
and non-firm resources and potential economy schedules which could occur
during the time frame. If unusual load levels and/or generating patterns are
called for in the case description sheet, levels represented should not be limited
to historical levels.
WECC power flow base cases are designated as light or heavy, as in the 2010-11
LW1 (Light Winter) or the 2011 HS2 (Heavy Summer) to indicate the general load
levels to be represented in the cases. As a point of clarification, light loads may be
increased in the importing areas or heavy loads may be decreased in exporting areas
to provide for the desired interchange schedules. Specific information on the
desired load levels is contained in the power flow case description sheets and should
be used as a guide in preparing cases.
Generation and load levels referred to in the attached case description sheets refer to
the season being studied. For example, if a case description sheet for a winter case
calls for high hydro in a specific area, this means high levels of hydro generation for
a winter condition. In some areas, a high level of hydro generation in the winter
may be less than median hydro generation levels in the spring or summer.
VI-17
APPENDIX
2010 STUDY PROGRAM CASE DESCRIPTION SHEETS
2010 WECC 10-YEAR BASE CASE DATA BANK SCHEDULE
WECC BASE CASES LISTED BY YEAR OF STUDY PROGRAM
WECC BASE CASE TRANSFER OBJECTIVES
VI-18
2010-2011 HEAVY WINTER – 10-11 HW2-OP
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
II.
PURPOSE: TO REPRESENT ANTICIPATED OPERATING CONDITIONS WITH HEAVY
FLOWS FROM NORTHWEST TO CALIFORNIA.
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
IV.
LOADS:
100% of winter peak (1 in 2) in the Northwest, 90-100% of winter peak elsewhere.
V.
TIME:
Late afternoon (1600 to 1800 hours), winter conditions.
VI.
GENERATION**
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada
VII. INTERCHANGE**
Canada to Northwest
Northwest to California/Nevada
(COI/RATS)
(PDCI)
Path 15 S-N
Wyoming/Utah/Idaho to Northwest
Montana to Northwest
Utah/Colorado to Southwest
Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
Intermountain to Adelanto DC
Midway to Vincent
December 18, 2009
January 22, 2010
From Case
Stability Data
Significant Changes
2009-10 HW2 Operating Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2009-10 HW2 Operating Case
HYDRO
High
High
Median
Low
Median
Low
Low
Low
THERMAL
-High
High
High
-Median
Median
Median
RENEWABLE
---------
CONDITION
Low
TARGET*
500
% RATING
16%
Heavy
Heavy
--Moderate
-Moderate
Heavy
Heavy
3800
2500
--1400
-4000/5000
1850
2800
78%
81%
--64%
-50%/47%
96%
70%
* Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
** Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables should
be based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load and
generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be
kept in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
(1) Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
VI-19
2010-2011 LIGHT WINTER – 10-11 LW1-OP
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
II.
PURPOSE: TO REPRESENT ANTICIPATED OPERATING CONDITIONS WITH HIGH FLOWS
INTO THE NORTHWEST.
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
IV.
LOADS:
60-65% of winter (1-in-2) year peak in the Northwest, 60-80% of winter peak elsewhere.
V.
TIME:
Early morning (0200 to 0500 hours), winter conditions.
VI.
GENERATION**
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada
VII. INTERCHANGE**
Canada to Northwest
Northwest to California/Nevada
(COI/RATS)
(PDCI)
Path 15 S-N
Wyoming/Utah/Idaho to Northwest
Montana to Northwest
Utah/Colorado to Southwest
Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
Intermountain to Adelanto DC
Midway to Vincent
January 1, 2010
February 5, 2010
From Case
Stability Data
Significant Changes
2009-10 LW1 Operating Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2009-10 LW1 Operating Case
HYDRO
Median
Low
Median
Low
Median
Low
---
THERMAL
-High
High
Median
-Median
---
RENEWABLE
---------
CONDITION
Low
TARGET*
-500
% RATING
25%
Moderate
Moderate
Heavy
Heavy
Heavy
-Moderate
Heavy
--
-2500
-2000
3450
2000
2100
-5100/6900
1850
--
68%
65%
64%
83%
95%
-63%/65%
96%
--
* Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
** Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables
should be based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load
and generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case
should be kept in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
(1) Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
VI-20
2011 HEAVY SPRING – 11 HSP1-OP
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
II.
PURPOSE: TO REPRESENT ANTICIPATED OPERATING CONDITIONS WITH HIGH FLOWS
FROM NORTHWEST TO CALIFORNIA.
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
IV.
LOADS:
100% of spring peak.
V.
TIME:
Spring conditions (1600 to 1800 hours), spring conditions.
VI.
GENERATION**
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada
VII. INTERCHANGE**
Canada to Northwest
Northwest to California/Nevada
(COI/RATS)
(PDCI)
Path 15 S-N
Wyoming/Utah/Idaho to Northwest
Montana to Northwest
Utah/Colorado to Southwest
Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
Intermountain to Adelanto DC
Midway to Vincent
February 12, 2010
March 19, 2010
From Case
Stability Data
Significant Changes
2010 HSP1 Operating Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2010 HSP1 Operating Case
HYDRO
Median
High
High
Median
Median
High
-Median
THERMAL
-Low
Median
Median
-Low
-Median
RENEWABLE
---------
CONDITION
Moderate
TARGET*
-1000
% RATING
50%
Maximum
Maximum
-Low
Moderate
Heavy
Low
Heavy
Heavy
4800
3100
-400
1500
1145
3600/4500
1850
4000
98%
100%
-17%
68%
72%
45%/42%
96%
100%
* Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
** Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables
should be based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load and
generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be
kept in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
(1) Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
VI-21
2016 LIGHT AUTUMN – 16LA1-S
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
II.
PURPOSE:
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
IV.
LOADS:
V.
TIME:
VI.
GENERATION
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico
March 26, 2010
April 30, 2010
TO REPRESENT HIGH FLOWS FROM CALIFORNIA/MONTANA TO NORTHWEST.
From Case:
Stability Data:
Significant Changes:
2013-14 HW1 Base Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2013-14 HW1 Base Case
60-75% of autumn peak.
Early morning (0100 to 0400 hours), in October.
VII. INTERCHANGE**
Canada to Northwest
Northwest to California
(COI/RATS)
(PDCI)
Path 15 S-N
Wyoming/Idaho to Northwest
Montana to Northwest
Utah/Colorado to Southwest
Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
Intermountain to Adelanto DC
Midway to Vincent
SCIT
HYDRO
Median
Low
Median
Median
Median
Minimum
Low
Median
THERMAL
-Low
High
Median
-Median
Median
Median
RENEWABLE
---High
--High
--
CONDITION
Moderate
TARGET*
-1500
% RATING
75%
Moderate
Moderate
Heavy
Heavy
Maximum
--Heavy
Low
Maximum
-2500
-2000
-4500
2000
2200
--1850
-1200
--
68%
65%
83%
83%
100%
--96%
40%
--
Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables should
be based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load and
generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be kept
in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
(1) Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
*
**
VI-22
2016 HEAVY SUMMER – 16HS2
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
II.
PURPOSE:
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
IV.
LOADS:
Summer peak conditions.
V.
TIME:
N/A.
VI.
GENERATION**
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada
April 30, 2010
June 4, 2010
GENERAL 5-YEAR CASE WITH TYPICAL FLOWS THROUGHOUT WECC.
VII. INTERCHANGE**
Canada to Northwest
Northwest to California
(COI/RATS)
(PDCI)
Path 15 S-N
Wyoming/Idaho to Northwest
Montana to Northwest
Utah/Colorado to Southwest
Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
Intermountain to Adelanto DC
Midway to Vincent
From Case:
Stability Data
Significant Changes:
2015 HS2 Base Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2015 HS2 Base Case
HYDRO
High
Median
Median
Low
High
High
Low
Low
THERMAL
-High
High
High
-High
High
High
RENEWABLE
---------
CONDITION
--
TARGET*
--
% RATING
--
----------
--------/----
----------
Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables should
be based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load and
generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be kept
in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
(1) Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
*
**
VI-23
2017-18 HEAVY WINTER – 18HW1-S
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
June 4, 2010
July 9, 2010
II.
PURPOSE:
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
IV.
LOADS:
100% of winter peak in California, NW, and Montana and 80% elsewhere.
V.
TIME:
N/A.
VI.
GENERATION**
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada
TO REPRESENT HIGH WIND GENERATION IN THE NORTHWEST.
VII. INTERCHANGE**
Canada to Northwest
Northwest to California
(COI/RATS)
(PDCI)
Path 15 S-N
Wyoming/Idaho to Northwest
Montana to Northwest
Utah/Colorado to Southwest
Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
Intermountain to Adelanto DC
Midway to Vincent
From Case:
Stability Data
Significant Changes:
2015-16 HW1 Base Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2015-16 HW1 Base Case
HYDRO
Median
-Low
-Low
-High
High
THERMAL
--Median
--Median
High
High
RENEWABLE
-Maximum
-------
CONDITION
Moderate
TARGET*
-1300
% RATING
65%
Low
Low
Heavy
Medium
-Maximum
----
-1000
-1000
4500
-600
-1600
----
27%
32%
83%
50%
-100%
----
Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables should
be based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load and
generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be kept
in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
(1) Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
*
**
VI-24
2021 HEAVY SUMMER – 21HS1
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
II.
PURPOSE:
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
IV.
LOADS:
Summer peak conditions.
V.
TIME:
N/A
VI.
GENERATION
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada
July 9, 2010
August 13, 2010
GENERAL 10-YEAR CASE WITH TYPICAL FLOWS THROUGHOUT WECC.
VII. INTERCHANGE**
From Case
Stability Data
Significant Changes
2020 HS1 Base Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2020 HS1 Base Case
HYDRO
Median
Median
Median
Median
Median
High
Low
High
THERMAL
-High
High
High
-High
High
High
RENEWABLE
---------
CONDITION
TARGET*
% RATING
---
---
---
----------
--------/----
----------
TYPICAL FLOWS ON THE FOLLOWING PATHS:
Canada to Northwest
North of John Day
Northwest to California
(COI/RATS)
(PDCI)
Path 15 S-N
Wyoming/Idaho to Northwest
Montana to Northwest
Utah/Colorado to Southwest
Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
Intermountain to Adelanto DC
Midway to Vincent
Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables should
be based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load and
generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be kept
in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
*
**
(1) Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
VI-25
2011 HEAVY SUMMER – 11HS2-OP
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
II.
PURPOSE: TO REPRESENT ANTICIPATED OPERATING CONDITIONS WITH HEAVY
FLOWS TO CALIFORNIA FROM THE NORTHWEST AND MODERATE FLOWS
ELSEWHERE.
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
IV.
LOADS:
100% of summer peak.
V.
TIME:
Late afternoon (1600 to 1800 hours), summer conditions.
VI.
GENERATION
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada
VII. INTERCHANGE**
Canada to Northwest
Northwest to California/Nevada
(COI/RATS)
(PDCI)
Path 15 S-N
Wyoming/Utah/Idaho to Northwest
Montana to Northwest
Utah/Colorado to Southwest
Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
Intermountain to Adelanto DC
Midway to Vincent
August 13, 2010
September 17, 2010
From Case
Stability Data
Significant Changes
2010 HS3 Operating Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2010 HS3 Operating Case
HYDRO
High
High
Median
High
High
Median
---
THERMAL
-High
High
High
-High
-High
RENEWABLE
---------
CONDITION
Heavy
TARGET*
2300
% RATING
73%
Heavy
Heavy
--Moderate
Light
Moderate
Heavy
Heavy
4650
2980
--1200
-3000/5800
1660
4000
95%
96%
--55%
-37%/55%
86%
100%
* Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
** Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables
should be based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load and
generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be
kept in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
(1) Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
VI-26
2011 LIGHT SUMMER – 11LS1-OP
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
August 27, 2010
October 1, 2010
II.
PURPOSE: TO REPRESENT ANTICIPATED OPERATING CONDITIONS DURING LIGHT
LOAD PERIODS. MODERATE FLOWS FROM THE NORTHWEST TO CALIFORNIA AND
MODERATE TO HEAVY FLOWS FROM IDAHO/MONTANA TO THE NORTHWEST.
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
From Case
Stability Data
Significant Changes
2010 LS1 Operating Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2010 LS1 Operating Case
IV. LOADS: 65-75% of summer peak.
V.
TIME:
Early morning (0200 to 0500 hours), summer conditions.
VI.
GENERATION
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico/southern Nevada
VII. INTERCHANGE**
Canada to Northwest
Northwest to California/Nevada
(COI/RATS)
(PDCI)
Path 15 S-N
Wyoming/Utah/Idaho to Northwest
Montana to Northwest
Utah/Colorado to Southwest
Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
Intermountain to Adelanto DC
Midway to Vincent
HYDRO
Median
Median
Median
Median
Median
----
THERMAL
--High
Median
-High
---
RENEWABLE
---------
CONDITION
Moderate
TARGET*
2000
% RATING
63%
Moderate
Moderate
-Moderate
Maximum
Light
Moderate
Heavy
Light
3600
2000
-1600
2200
450
4600/5900
1850
1500
74%
65%
-67%
100%
28%
57%/56%
96%
38%
* Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
** Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables should be
based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load and
generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be kept
in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
(1)
Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
VI-27
2015-16 HEAVY WINTER – 16HW2
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
II.
PURPOSE:
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
IV.
LOADS:
Winter peak conditions
V.
TIME:
N/A
VI.
GENERATION**
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada
October 08, 2010
November 12, 2010
GENERAL 5-YEAR CASE WITH TYPICAL FLOWS THROUGHOUT WECC.
VII. INTERCHANGE**
From Case:
Stability Data
Significant Changes:
2013-14 HW1 Base Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2013-14 HW1 Base Case
HYDRO
Median
Median
Median
Low
Median
Median
Low
Median
THERMAL
High
High
High
High
-Median
Median
High
RENEWABLE
---------
CONDITION
TARGET*
% RATING
EXCEPT WHERE STATED, USE TYPICAL FLOWS ON THE FOLLOWING PATHS:
Canada to Northwest (S-N)
Heavy
--North of John Day
---Northwest to California
(COI/RATS)
---(PDCI) (S-N)
Heavy
--Path 15 S-N
Heavy
5000
93%
Wyoming/Idaho to Northwest
---Montana to Northwest
---Utah/Colorado to Southwest
---Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
Low
--Intermountain to Adelanto DC
---Midway to Vincent
---Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables should
be based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load and
generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be kept
in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
(1) Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
*
**
VI-28
2012 HEAVY SUMMER – 12HS3-S
CASE DESCRIPTION
I.
CASE DUE DATES:
To Area Coordinator:
To Staff:
II.
PURPOSE:
III.
ITEMS TO BE PREPARED:
IV.
LOADS:
105% summer peak conditions
V.
TIME:
N/A
VI.
GENERATION**
Canada
Northwest
Idaho/Montana
Colorado/Wyoming
Northern California Hydro
Northern California
Southern California
Arizona/New Mexico/Southern Nevada
November 12, 2010
December 17, 2010
HEAVY SUMMER LOADS THROUGHOUT THE WECC REGION.
VII. INTERCHANGE**
From Case:
Stability Data
Significant Changes:
2010 HS3-OP Operating Case
Master Dynamics File (1)
2010 HS3-OP Operating Case
HYDRO
Median
Median
Median
Median
Median
High
Low
Median
THERMAL
-High
High
High
-High
High
Median
RENEWABLE
---------
CONDITION
TARGET*
% RATING
---
---
----------
----------
TYPICAL FLOWS ON THE FOLLOWING PATHS:
Canada to Northwest
-North of John Day
-Northwest to California
(COI/RATS)
-(PDCI)
-Path 15 S-N
-Wyoming/Idaho to Northwest
-Montana to Northwest
-Utah/Colorado to Southwest
-Southwest to Calif. (EOR/WOR)
-Intermountain to Adelanto DC
-Midway to Vincent
--
Actual flows within  10% of target are acceptable, but not to exceed the actual rating of the path.
Targets may be altered as anticipated operating conditions become more clearly known. Renewables should
be based on individual entities’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.
(NOTE) Where no target flows are specified actual scheduled transfers should be based on each areas load and
generation (deficiency/surplus) balance and economical generation dispatch. The objective of the case should be kept
in mind and schedules should be coordinated between areas prior to data submittal.
(1) Only Corrections to the MDF or new data for the MDF need be submitted.
*
**
VI-29
2010
TEN-YEAR POWER FLOW AND STABILITY DATA COMPILATION SCHEDULE
CASE
DATE DATA
REQUEST
MAILED
DATE DATA DATE DATA DATE DATA
STAFF
DATE
DATE AREA
DUE TO
DUE TO
DUE TO
SEND
COMMENTS COORDINATOR
SUB COORD
AREA
STAFF
CASE FOR
DUE TO
COMMENTS
DATE L&R
COORD
REVIEW
AREA
DUE TO
INFO DUE TO
COORD
STAFF
SUB COORD
2010 HS3-OP
07/24/09
08/07/09
08/14/09
09/18/09
10/02/09
10/16/09
10/23/09
11/04/09
2010 LS1-OP
07/24/09
08/21/09
08/28/09
10/02/09
10/16/09
10/30/09
11/06/09
11/18/09
2014-15 HW2
09/18/09
10/02/09
10/09/09
11/13/09
11/27/09
12/04/09
12/11/09
12/23/09
2020 HS1
10/23/09
11/06/09
11/13/09
12/18/09
01/01/10
01/08/10
01/15/10
01/27/10
2010-11 HW2-OP
11/27/09
12/11/09
12/18/09
01/22/10
02/05/10
02/19/10
02/26/10
03/10/10
2010-11 LW1-OP
11/27/09
12/25/09
01/01/10
02/05/10
02/19/10
03/05/10
03/12/10
03/24/10
2011 HSP1-OP
01/22/10
02/05/10
02/12/10
03/19/10
04/02/10
04/16/10
04/23/10
05/05/10
2016 LA1-S
03/05/10
03/19/10
03/26/10
04/30/10
05/14/10
05/21/10
05/28/10
06/09/10
2016 HS2
04/09/10
04/23/10
04/30/10
06/04/10
06/18/10
06/25/10
07/02/10
07/14/10
2017-18 HW1-S
05/14/10
05/28/10
06/04/10
07/09/10
07/23/10
07/30/10
08/06/10
08/18/10
2021 HS1
06/18/10
07/02/10
07/09/10
08/13/10
08/27/10
09/03/10
09/10/10
09/22/10
2011 HS2-OP
07/23/10
08/06/10
08/13/10
09/17/10
10/01/10
10/15/10
10/22/10
11/03/10
2011 LS1-OP
07/23/10
08/20/10
08/27/10
10/01/10
10/15/10
10/29/10
11/05/10
11/17/10
2015-16 HW2
09/17/10
10/01/10
10/08/10
11/12/10
11/26/10
12/03/10
12/10/10
12/22/10
2012 HS3-S
10/22/10
11/05/10
11/12/10
12/17/10
12/31/10
01/07/11
01/14/11
01/26/11
2009 cases
VI-30
STAFF
FINALIZE
DATE
WECC BASE CASES LISTED BY YEAR OF STUDY PROGRAM
(I.E. 10 = 2010 STUDY PROGRAM)
Winter Cases Identified by the first year of case (i.e. 10 for 10-11 HW2)
SPRING
Light
SUMMER
AUTUMN
Heavy
Light
Heavy
2009
08
08
04, 06S,
08
2010
09
09
05, 07S,
09
10
10
06, 10
05S
2012
02, 07,
10S
08S
2013
08
2014
03, 07S,
09S
2015
06S, 09
2016
05, 10
2011
07S
2017
2018
Light
Heavy
WINTER
06S
05
09S
Light
Heavy
09
00, 09
10
05, 10
07
03, 08
04, 09
08S, 10
10S
06
10S
09S
07
2019
08
2020
09
2021
10
M - Modified Case
S - Scenario Case
VI-31
08
TARGETED FLOW SUMMARY
CASE
2010-11 HW2-OP
2010-11 LW1-OP
2011 HSP1-OP
2016 LA1-S
2016 HS2
2017-18 HW1-S
2021 HS1
2011 HS2-OP
2011 LS1-OP
2015-16 HW2
2012 HS3-S
Canada to
Northwest
500
-500
-1000
-1500
--1300
-2300
2000
---
NW to SW
AC/DC
3800/2500
-2500/-2000
4800/3100
-2500/-2000
--1000/-1000
--/-4650/2980
3600/2000
--/---/--
Path 15
S-N
-3450
--4500
--4500
---5000
--
WYO/ID
to NW
-2000
400
2000
--600
--1600
---
MT to NW
1400
2100
1500
2200
---1200
2200
---
VI-32
UT/CO
to SW
-----1600
--450
---
AZ to CA
EOR/WOR
4000/5000
5100/6900
3600/4500
---/---/---/-3000/5800
4600/5900
--/---/--
IPPDC
1850
1850
1850
1850
---1660
1850
---
Midway to
Vincent
2800
-2800
-1200
---4000
1500
---