subregional planning group coordination group (scg)in 2012, the subregional planning group (spg)...

Regional Planning Coordination Group (RPCG) 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions (CCTA)

June 2, 2014 FINAL

RPCG 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions Report – Final Page ii

Executive Summary The Regional Planning Coordination Group (RPCG) aids the Regional Transmission Expansion Planning (RTEP) process by providing the Transmission Expansion Planning Policy Committee (TEPPC) with a list of regionally significant transmission projects that have a high expectation of being in service in a 10-year timeframe given current trends. This list of projects serves as a key input assumption for TEPPC’s 10-year planning studies. The RPCG assisted in the development of the Western Electricity Coordinating Council’s (WECC) 10-Year Regional Transmission Plans by providing this list in 2010 and 2012. TEPPC is starting to develop the next 10-year Common Case dataset, which requires an update to that list. This iteration of the list is called the 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions (CCTA). The purpose, process and projects in the CCTA are presented in this report. The CCTA is not the WECC Interconnection-wide Transmission Plan, nor does it indicate that WECC members or stakeholders support or endorse any of the transmission projects in the CCTA. The CCTA is comparable to other assumptions required for transmission planning studies, such as predictions on load growth and generator installations. When conducting transmission planning studies, it is sometimes necessary to identify and include transmission projects that are expected to be in service in the study timeframe. Results from a planning study would be unrealistic if they included changes in predicted load and generation but failed to include any expected incremental transmission or exclude transmission that cannot pass an expected threshold. It must be recognized that implementation of the CCTA selection process on a going-forward basis will continue to require broad stakeholder consultation due to some criteria requiring subjective judgment that only a broad-stakeholder process can provide. The CCTA projects were selected using a transparent, repeatable, consistent and well-documented process. The meetings and webinars where the RPCG developed the CCTA selection process were public and open to all TEPPC stakeholders. The process relied upon public data and predefined criteria that were used to guide the selection of projects for inclusion in the CCTA. Project information, project development status indicators, selection criteria, and any exceptions to the established process are documented in this report. The WECC Transmission Project Information Portal (PIP) contains publically available project information for 98 projects currently under development in the Western Interconnection (Appendix C – WECC Project Information Portal). The RPCG reviewed all of these projects and several others as part of the CCTA selection process. In certain cases project sponsors provided information directly to the RPCG. The 2024 CCTA selection process resulted in the inclusion of 221 transmission projects to be on the list. Of these 22 projects, 12 were under construction as of November 11, 2013.

1 The original TEPPC-approved CCTA list included 23 projects. In lieu of new information provided and a recommendation by the project sponsor, the Walla Walla to McNary (Energy Gateway Segment A) project was removed from the CCTA list by the RPCG.

http://www.wecc.biz/Planning/TransmissionExpansion/Map/Pages/default.aspx

RPCG 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions Report – Final Page iii

RPCG 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions Report – Final iv

Acknowledgements RPCG Leadership Susan Henderson, Colorado Coordinated Planning Group, RPCG Chair Rich Bayless, Northern Tier Transmission Group, RPCG Vice Chair RPCG Members California Independent System Operator

• Gary DeShazo California Transmission Planning Group

• Steve Metague Colorado Coordinated Planning Group

• Jeff Hein ColumbiaGrid

• Jeff Miller Northern Tier Transmission Group

• Rich Bayless Sierra Subregional Planning Group

• Phil Sanchez Southwest Area Transmission

• Patrick Harwood Alberta Electric System Operator

• Jason Doering BC Coordinated Planning Group

• John Rich Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Keegan Moyer – Manager Transmission Planning WECC Gary Simonson – Associate Staff Engineer

The RPCG would like to thank all stakeholders who have dedicated their time, effort and resources contributing to this work.

Cover photo: An Erickson S-64 Aircrane releasing the mid-section of the 500-kV tower for the Mona-to-Oquirrh segment of the Energy Gateway Transmission project (photo courtesy of PacifiCorp).

RPCG 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions Report – Final v

Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... ii

Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................... iv

Background ....................................................................................................................................... 1

Common Case Transmission Assumptions (CCTA) ............................................................................... 2 Purpose of the CCTA ................................................................................................................................. 2 Development of the 2024 CCTA ................................................................................................................ 3

The CCTA Process .................................................................................................................................. 3 2024 CCTA Projects ................................................................................................................................... 8

1. Under Construction (Criterion 2) .................................................................................................. 8 2. Not under construction, but met CCTA selection Criterion 3, Criterion 4, and Criterion 5. ......... 9

CCTA Process Exceptions ........................................................................................................................ 12

Categorization of Projects ................................................................................................................ 13

APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... 14 Appendix A – Outreach Activities ........................................................................................................... 14 Appendix B – Letter to Project Sponsors ................................................................................................ 15

Original Letter ..................................................................................................................................... 15 WECC Transmission Project Information Portal Questionnaire ......................................................... 16

Appendix C – WECC Project Information Portal ..................................................................................... 23 Appendix D - Comparison to the 2022 CCTA .......................................................................................... 35

New Projects within the Project Information Portal .......................................................................... 35 2022 CCTA Projects in service: ............................................................................................................ 35 2022 CCTA Projects cancelled or suspended: ..................................................................................... 35 2022 CCTA Projects that have been renamed: ................................................................................... 35

Appendix E – Exceptions: Boardman-Hemingway, Gateway West and Gateway South ........................ 36

Glossary .......................................................................................................................................... 39

RPCG 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions Report – Final Page 1

Background Multiple utilities own and operate the transmission system that makes up the Western Interconnection. Because changes to the transmission system in one area can impact performance and reliability of the system in another utilities’ territory, a regional approach is required when studying the effect of major additions or changes. One of the responsibilities of the Regional Planning Coordination Group (RPCG) is to assist in coordinating regional transmission plans for the Western Interconnection. The RPCG is an ad-hoc committee as described in its charter. Any interested party may participate in RPCG activities. The RPCG members are listed below and shown in the map to the right. • Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) • British Columbia Coordinated Planning

Group (BCCPG) • ColumbiaGrid • California Independent System Operator

(CAISO) • California Transmission Planning Group

(CTPG) • Colorado Coordinated Planning Group

(CCPG) • Northern Tier Transmission Group (NTTG) • Sierra Subregional Planning Group (SIERRA) • Southwest Area Transmission (SWAT) The Transmission Expansion Planning Policy Committee (TEPPC) guides the Regional Transmission Expansion Planning (RTEP) process used to create Interconnection-wide Transmission Plans. The RTEP process is bottom up with information flowing to TEPPC from stakeholders throughout the Western Interconnection. The RPCG represents a set of these stakeholders and provides TEPPC with transmission study assumptions and related technical guidance as necessary. In 2012, the Subregional Planning Group (SPG) Coordination Group (SCG) – now the RPCG – provided a list of CCTAs to TEPPC by submitting a list of transmission projects that were assumed to be in service for the TEPPC 2022 Common Case and 2032 Reference Case. The 2022 Common Case was the starting case for all production cost studies used to inform the 2013 Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Interconnection-wide Transmission Plan, and the 2032 Reference Case was the starting case for all capital expansion studies used to inform the 2013 WECC Interconnection-wide Transmission Plan. TEPPC is constructing a 2024 Common Case to be used as the starting point for studies run in the TEPPC 2013 and 2014 Study Programs. The creation of the 2024 Common Case requires that the RPCG provide an updated CCTA list to TEPPC. This report documents the purpose, process and resultant list of projects submitted to TEPPC for inclusion in the 2024 Common Case.


Common Case Transmission Assumptions (CCTA) In response to stakeholder comments, the RPCG’s effort to identify transmission projects that have a high expectation of being in service in the approaching 10-year timeframe resulted in the development of a transparent, repeatable and consistently applied process. During this robust process, RPCG membership sought greater stakeholder input and also turned to the project sponsors to submit project information to the WECC Transmission Project Information Portal (PIP). In addition to typical project information (e.g., substation terminations, voltage, length, in service) the RPCG coordinated with WECC to include new PIP questions designed to help determine whether a project was sufficiently far enough along the developmental timeline to be assumed in service by 2024.

Purpose of the CCTA Electric transmission infrastructure, loads and generation resources must be accurately represented when conducting transmission planning studies. Generation, load and transmission change over time and TEPPC has a set of established tools, processes and resources to help estimate these changes. The RPCG provides TEPPC with a list of regionally significant transmission projects that have a high expectation of being in service in the next 10 years. The CCTA relation to other WECC 10-year study inputs is shown in the next diagram:

If TEPPC and the RPCG did not include projects that have a high expectation of being in service during the appropriate timeframe, results from forward-looking planning studies would be skewed. Generation

10-Yr Plan

Stakeholder Input/Review

TEPPC Study Case Results

Generation, Load, and

Transmission Assumptions

Public Policy

Environmental and Water

Information

Reliability Analysis

CCTA


and load levels typically increase due to population and economic growth. By failing to include expected incremental transmission, study results would report unrealistic amounts of congestion. Including all potential transmission projects has the opposite, yet still undesirable, effect. By including a set of expected incremental transmission projects, along with predictions on changes in load and generation, an accurate representation of the future Western Interconnection is achieved in TEPPC 10-year studies. TEPPC’s transmission plan can reflect the addition of transmission facilities to mitigate congestion and integrate new resources as necessary. The inclusion of a particular project in the CCTA does not preclude TEPPC from removing the project from its transmission studies. Furthermore, the CCTA does not replace or impose changes on individual SPG transmission planning processes and plans.

Development of the 2024 CCTA Similar to predictions on load growth and generator installations, the CCTA is one of many assumptions used as input into TEPPC planning studies. The CCTA is not “the WECC transmission plan” nor does it indicate that WECC members or stakeholders support or endorse any of the transmission projects in the CCTA. The following section is a description of how the 2024 CCTA projects were selected.

The CCTA Process Development of the 2024 CCTA process used project-sponsor-supplied information, as submitted through the PIP. The RPCG attempted to make the CCTA process highly transparent, repeatable and publicly available. The RPCG realized that specific project information was not only important to the CCTA process, but for other planning processes and policy. The projects and project sponsors were identified by two main methods: 1) SPG or Regional Planning Group (RPG) transmission plans; or 2) previous entry into the PIP. Once project sponsors updated their project information in the PIP, the RPCG reviewed the information and assessed the regional significance and development status of each project using a number of indicators. There were several benefits to using the PIP, including: availability of public information; all information is stored in one location; and the information can be logically filtered and sorted based on an established criteria. The latter benefit allows the CCTA process to be repeatable. These benefits are consistent with what stakeholders requested through the process. The overall process can be seen in Figure 1.


Figure 1: CCTA Process Diagram

The PIP questions were similar to the ones used in the 2022 process. The RPCG revised and reorganized the PIP questions for easy readability. Some questions were edited with stakeholder input to provide clarity on the question conveyed. In one instance, the financial and permitting questions were reordered to provide clarity on the progress of the project. Project development indicators were used by the RPCG as a guide for selecting the 2024 CCTA. Predetermined criteria were established and each project was evaluated against the criteria using a consistent set of development indicators. It is recognized that strict and rigid criteria for determining what projects should be in the CCTA are neither achievable nor desirable. The RPCG used publicly available information in the PIP to assess the development status of projects. The list of fields that project sponsors could respond to is available in Appendix B – Letter to Project Sponsors. As such, there were some instances where exceptions were made and projects that met the original developmental criteria were excluded from the 2024 CCTA. The reasons behind these exceptions are documented in this report. Because information was provided directly by project sponsors, only minimal effort was made to verify the accuracy of the submissions. The RPCG did contact project sponsors when obvious inconsistencies arose (such as “under construction” was identified but conflicted with “permitting not started”) to clarify responses. In addition, projects in the PIP that had incomplete information were contacted to obtain their responses. Projects listed in the PIP or those submitted for RPCG consideration were evaluated for inclusion in the 2024 CCTA using the process and criteria shown in Figure 2.

Project Screening and Selection Process

2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions

Regional significance

Project development

indicators

RPCG 10-year plans

WECC Project Information Portal (PIP)

2024 CCTA

Information Gathering Process


Figure 2: 2024 CCTA Selection Process Flow Chart

The 2024 CCTA selection process criteria are explained in more detail below.

Criterion 1: Regional Significance A project must meet one of the following voltage levels to be of regional significance2 and be further considered in the CCTA selection process:

1. Projects that are 500 kV and above; or 2. Projects at 345 kV, unless they are not a backbone3 facility; or 3. Projects above 200 kV that are backbone facilities.

If a project met the regionally significant requirement, then it moved on to Criteria 2, 3, 4, and 5 for further evaluation.

2 Projects of lower voltage are modeled by WECC members in the power flow base case assembled and vetted by the Technical Studies Subcommittee (TSS). 3 Backbone transmissions are those facilities that provide network connectivity that are 345 kV or above for most of the Western Interconnection, but in certain western regions that voltage may only be 230 kV.


Criterion 2: Construction Status A project that is currently under construction4 and met Criterion 1 is automatically included in the CCTA list. A project that meets Criterion 1, but is not currently under construction, is further considered in Criteria 3, 4, and 5.

Criterion 3: Financial Indicators The RPCG distilled this list of questions down to six main financial indicators used to evaluate the project in Criterion 3.

1. Does the project have a commitment for financing to construct the project? 2. Does the project have executed transmission service agreements that commit the project

developer to construct the project? 3. Is the project included in an Integrated Resource Plan (IRP)?5 4. Does the project have regulatory approval for cost recovery?6 5. If there is generation associated with the project (i.e., contracted), has the generation project

been identified in a Load-Serving Entity (LSE) procurement process and/or have contracts for the generation been signed?

6. Does the project have executed participation contractions with other parties that commit the parties to construct the project?

To be considered eligible for inclusion in the CCTA, there must have been at least one affirmative response (“yes”) to any one of the preceding financial indicators.

Criterion 4: Implementation Status Indicators The RPCG distilled this list of questions down to two key-implementation indicators used to evaluate the project in Criterion 4.

1. Does the project require a federal Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and/or similar state environmental or siting process?

2. If the project does not require a federal EIS and/or state similar state environmental or siting process, does the project require any country/town-level environmental permitting?

If a project requires a federal EIS, similar state environmental siting, and/or county/town-level environmental permitting, it must have the following completed.

1. Filed the required applications; 2. Applications must have been accepted or deemed completed; and 3. Formal noticed public meetings (or equivalent) must be completed.

4 “Under construction” is defined as physically building the facility. 5 Due to differences between state and regional requirements for IRP planning, this criterion is only applicable where transmission is included in the IRP process. For regions or states where transmission is not included in the IRP process, this criterion is not applicable and therefore not used. In Colorado, for example, specific transmission lines are not identified in IRPs, making this criterion not applicable. Alternatively, in Nevada, specific transmission lines are acknowledged through an IRP. Although this is not an official approval of the project, it does serve as a strong indicator that the project will be built. This criterion was not applied uniformly across all projects to accommodate the unique state and regional approval processes 6 Cost recovery is separate from cost allocation and varies depending on the jurisdiction of the project developer.


Once a project has met those requirements, the project’s current status of required federal EIS, similar state environmental siting, and/or county/town-level environmental permitting threshold was reviewed. The status indicators available for selection in the PIP are listed below:

• Not applicable • Not started • Scoping started • Draft started (threshold for upgrade projects) • Draft complete (threshold for new projects) • Final complete • Record of decision or order received

For new projects, the federal EIS, similar state environmental siting, and/or county/town-level environmental permitting status threshold for inclusion is set at the draft complete or higher stage. For upgrade projects, the federal EIS, similar state environmental siting, and/or county/town-level environmental permitting status threshold is set at the draft started or higher stage. Once these thresholds are met, the project would move to Criterion 5. Projects that do not require federal EIS, similar state environmental siting, and/or county/town-level environmental permitting would move to Criterion 5.

Criterion 5: Project Dependency The RPCG distilled this list of questions down to two main project-dependency questions used to evaluate the project in Criterion 5.

1. Is this project dependent on another transmission project to be completed and used for its intended purpose(s)?

2. If so, did the dependent project pass the CCTA criteria? To be considered eligible for inclusion in the CCTA, there must be an affirmative response (“Yes”) to the second preceding project-dependency question if the project is dependent upon another transmission project to be completed. Projects that are not dependent on another transmission project to be completed and have met Criteria 1, 3, and 4 will be eligible for inclusion in the CCTA. Process summary All CCTA-eligible projects must pass Criterion 1 (Regional Significance). Projects meeting Criterion 1 that were under construction (Criterion 2) were included as CCTA projects. Those projects passing Criterion 1 and not under construction had to pass Criterion 3 (Financial Indicators), Criterion 4 (Implementation Status Indicators), and Criterion 5 (Project Dependency) to be included in the CCTA. As a final step, all projects in the CCTA list underwent a final review by the RPCG, which reserved the right to exclude projects on an individual basis because selecting projects using rigid criteria is neither achievable nor desirable. All dialogue pertaining to any exclusion, if applicable, took place in open meetings with stakeholders and sponsors of the projects.


2024 CCTA Projects By making use of the CCTA selection process, as introduced above, there are two types of projects that make up the CCTA.

1. Projects that are of regional significance and under construction. 2. Projects that are of regional significance and not under construction, but have developmental

indicators sufficient enough to meet the predefined criteria designed to indicate that there is a high expectation that the project will be in service in the 10-year timeframe (i.e., met Criteria 3, 4 and 5).

The following sets of projects are of regional significance (Criterion 1) and have a high expectation of being in service by 2024. These lists, when combined, make up the 2024 CCTA.

1. Under Construction (Criterion 2)

• Delany-Palo Verde 500-kV Line • Delany-Sun Valley 500-kV Line • Desert Basin – Pinal Central • Devers - Colorado River 500-kV (DCR) Transmission Line Project • Gateway Central Project – Sigurd – Red Butte • Hassayampa – North Gila #2 Line • Interior to Lower Mainland Transmission (ILM) Project • Northwest Transmission Line • One Nevada Line (ON Line) • Pinal Central-Tortolita • Pinal West-Pinal Central-Browning (SEV) • West of McNary Reinforcement Project Group 2 (Big Eddy - Knight)


2. Not under construction, but met CCTA selection Criterion 3, Criterion 4, and Criterion 5.

Project Name

Criterion 1: Regional

Significance

Criterion 3: Financial Indicators

Criterion 4: Implementation Status Indicators Criterion 5: Project Dependency

Regionally Significant

Financial Indicator(s) criterion met

Project requires federal EIS and/or similar state environmental or siting process

Current status of federal EIS and/or equivalent state environmental process

Dependent on another project

Dependent project passed criteria

Boardman-Hemingway 500 kV (B2H)

Yes Project has been included in an IRP.

Yes New Project - Draft Started7 No

Central Ferry - Lower Monumental (Little Goose Area Reinforcement)

Yes Generation identified in LSE procurement process.

Yes Record of decision or order received No

Gateway South Project – Segment #2 (Aeolus-Mona 500 kV)

Yes Project has been included in an IRP.

Yes New Project - Draft Started7 Yes Yes

Gateway West Transmission Project Segment 1A – Windstar to Jim Bridger 230 kV, 500 kV

Yes Project has a commitment for financing to construct & project has been included in an IRP.

Yes New Project - Draft Completed7 Yes Yes

Gateway West Transmission Project Segment 1B – Jim Bridger to Southeast Idaho (Bridger – Populus single circuit 500 kV)

Yes Project has a commitment for financing to construct & has been included in an IRP.


7 Project included in CCTA Process Exceptions section outlined in this report. 8 Project included in CCTA Process Exceptions section outlined in this report.


Project Name

Criterion 1: Regional

Significance

Criterion 3: Financial Indicators

Criterion 4: Implementation Status Indicators Criterion 5: Project Dependency

Regionally Significant

Financial Indicator(s) criterion met

Project requires federal EIS and/or similar state environmental or siting process

Current status of federal EIS and/or equivalent state environmental process

Dependent on another project

Dependent project passed criteria

Gateway West Transmission Project Segment 1C – Southeast Idaho – South Central Idaho (Populus – Midpoint 500 kV)

Yes Project has been included in an integrated resource plan (IRP).


Gateway West Transmission Project Segment E – South to Southwest Idaho (Midpoint – Hemingway 500 kV)

Yes Project has been included in an integrated resource plan (IRP).


I-5 Corridor Reinforcement Project (Castle Rock - Troutdale)

Yes Project has a commitment for financing to construct.

Yes New Project - Draft Completed No

Morgan-Sun Valley 500-kV Line

Yes Project has a commitment for financing to construct & project has been included in an integrated resource plan.

Yes New Project - Draft Completed Yes Yes

Path 8 Upgrade/Colstrip Transmission Upgrade (western portion only)

Yes Appropriate regulatory agencies approved cost recovery.

Yes Upgrade Project - Draft Started Yes Yes


CCTA Process Exceptions All CCTA projects were selected based on a consistent process as described in “CCTA Selection Process.” There were several projects that met the initial screening criteria based on responses included in the PIP, but were excluded from the CCTA list based on follow-up discussion with the project sponsor or further review of the information submitted to the PIP. There were also several projects that did not meet the initial screening, but based on follow-up discussion and a consensus vote from the RPCG were included in the CCTA. These projects and the associated reasons for being excluded or included as viewed by the RPCG are listed in the following table. All projects that were not selected as CCTA projects and remain under development will be re-evaluated for future study cycles according to the selection criteria established at that time. PROJECT REASON FOR INCLUSION OR EXCLUSION Boardman-Hemingway 500 kV (B2H)

Inclusion: The Boardman-Hemingway project did not meet Criterion 4 as specified, but information brought up by the project sponsors indicated the project was close to completing the draft EIS. Project was put up for vote and the RPCG reached consensus to include project.

Gateway South Project Inclusion: The Gateway South project did not meet Criterion 4 as specified and had less certain finical indicators, but information brought up by the project sponsors indicated the project was close to completing the draft EIS. Project was put up for vote and the RPCG reached consensus to include project.

Gateway West Transmission Projects

Inclusion: The Gateway West project had less certain finical indicators. Information brought up by the project sponsors indicated the project was close to receiving a Record of Decision (ROD). Project was put up for a vote and the RPCG reached consensus to include project.

SunZia Southwest Transmission Project

Exclusion: Insufficient demonstration of financial commitment. There is inadequate contractual documentation to specify the buyer or identified customers responsible to bear the costs of the project.

Tres Amigas Exclusion: Insufficient demonstration of financial commitment There is inadequate contractual documentation specifying the buyer or identified customers responsible to bear the costs of the project.

Walla Walla to McNary 230 kV (Energy Gateway Segment A)

Exclusion: The Walla Walla to McNary (Energy Gateway Segment A) was originally included in the 2024 CCTA list approved by TEPPC. During the review of the draft 2024 CCTA report, new information was provided by the project sponsor that the project was not under construction and did not have a strong financial commitment since it was customer driven. The RPCG by recommendation from the project sponsor removed this project from the 2024 CCTA list.


Categorization of Projects As part of the PIP survey, project sponsors were asked to identify the transmission projects’ primary and secondary purpose. Stakeholders have asked for a greater understanding as to why transmission projects are proposed. As part of the data gathering, it was suggested the RPCG could not only update the transmission projects, but answer stakeholder questions related to transmission development. This information has been solicited to help develop a high-level understanding related to what is driving the industry to expand the transmission system. The RPCG, with stakeholder involvement, identified five primary reasons to develop transmission projects. All of the CCTA projects listed a specific “primary purpose” of the project. A general summary of this information, as well as a description of the primary purpose reasons, are presented in Figure 3. Figure 3: Primary Purpose of CCTA Projects

Project sponsors supplied their primary and secondary reasons for transmission development. The RPCG did not investigate the veracity of the submissions. Project sponsor feedback to the PIP questions related to the primary and secondary purpose of the project was generally that many projects meet several categories and it is often difficult to choose just one purpose for a project.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

Economic driven Policy driven Reliability driven Tariff driven

Num

ber o

f Pro

ject

s

Primary Purpose of RPCG CCTA Projects as Reported by Project Developers

(22 Total Projects in List)

Appendix A - 14

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Outreach Activities The following is a list of SCG/RPCG sponsored meetings and links to their respective WECC meeting pages, which help document the RPCGs outreach activities. The purpose of these meetings was to engage and encourage comments from interested parties related to the process of identifying the 2024 CCTA. SCG Meeting February 26, 2013 (began 2024 CCTA process) SCG Meeting March 12, 2013 (webinar – discussion of criteria) SCG Meeting April 3, 2013 (webinar – discussion of criteria) SCG Meeting July 8, 2013 (webinar – development of CCTA) SCG Meeting August 2, 2013 (webinar – review of draft projects) SCG Meeting August 9, 2013(webinar – update from project developers) SCG Meeting August 29, 2013(webinar – review of draft projects) SCG Meeting September 5, 2013(webinar – review of draft projects) SCG Meeting September 10, 2013(webinar –questionable projects discussion) TEPPC Meeting (SLC) November 6 - 7, 2013 (2024 CCTA approval) RPCG Meeting February 13, 2014 (webinar – review of 2024 CCTA report)

http://www.wecc.biz/committees/BOD/TEPPC/130226/default.aspx?InstanceID=1http://www.wecc.biz/Lists/Calendar/DispForm.aspx?ID=5193http://www.wecc.biz/committees/BOD/TEPPC/Lists/Calendar/DispForm.aspx?ID=203http://www.wecc.biz/Lists/Calendar/DispForm.aspx?ID=5481http://www.wecc.biz/Lists/Calendar/DispForm.aspx?ID=5508http://www.wecc.biz/Lists/Calendar/DispForm.aspx?ID=5578http://www.wecc.biz/Lists/Calendar/DispForm.aspx?ID=5596http://www.wecc.biz/Lists/Calendar/DispForm.aspx?ID=5633http://www.wecc.biz/Lists/Calendar/DispForm.aspx?ID=5672http://www.wecc.biz/committees/BOD/TEPPC/131107/default.aspx?InstanceID=1http://www.wecc.biz/Lists/Calendar/DispForm.aspx?ID=5883

Appendix B - 15

Appendix B – Letter to Project Sponsors Below is the original letter and reminder notice sent to project sponsors to update the PIP.

Original Letter May 17, 2013 TO: Transmission Project Sponsors

RE: TEPPC Request for Transmission Project Information The WECC Regional Transmission Expansion Planning (RTEP) process, led by WECC’s Transmission Expansion Planning Policy Committee (TEPPC), recently began its next planning cycle which will culminate in another Interconnection-Wide Transmission Plan in 2015. This is not to be confused with the 2013 Plan currently in development, which is based off analysis from the previous two years. One of the initial activities of the next planning cycle is to create a set of starting point assumptions for load, generation, and transmission – the TEPPC 2024 Common Case, which is a publically available production cost model dataset. WECC is reaching out to transmission project sponsors and others to ensure complete and accurate information is available for this planning cycle.

You are receiving this letter because your project was identified by the Regional Planning Coordination Group (RPCG) as being of regional significance based on information in the WECC Transmission Project Information Portal (Portal). In lieu of a separate questionnaire, the Portal has been modified to include revised and additional questions. Your responses will allow the RPCG to assist TEPPC in determining if your project will be included in the TEPPC 2024 Common Case as a base input assumption (assumed in-service in 2024) and to better understand how to include your project in various TEPPC study cases. Please follow this link to the Portal and respond to the questions for your project. The added or modified Portal questions are listed for your reference on the next page. Project Portal responses and are due June 10th, 2013. The information contained in the Portal as of this date will be forwarded to the RPCG and used for the remainder of the TEPPC 2012 Study Cycle. If you have specific questions about the purpose of the new questions, or would like help in understanding the intent of a specific question and how it might apply to your project, please contact Dan Beckstead ([email protected]). If you have any issues accessing the Portal, completing the form, or if your project has been cancelled and needs to be removed from the Portal, please contact Kirha Quick ([email protected]). Lastly, if you would like your project to be visible on the WECC Project Portal map, send a Google .KML file with an approximate line routing directly to Kirha. We appreciate your time and thank you in advance for your prompt response. This transmission project information is critical to TEPPC’s mission and your participation in this voluntary public process is appreciated and valued. Best regards, Keegan

http://www.wecc.biz/committees/BOD/TEPPC/Pages/RTEP.aspxhttp://www.wecc.biz/committees/BOD/TEPPC/Pages/TEPPC_Home.aspxhttp://www.wecc.biz/committees/BOD/TEPPC/Pages/TEPPC_Home.aspxhttp://www.wecc.biz/committees/BOD/TEPPC/Pages/SCG.aspxhttp://www.wecc.biz/committees/BOD/TEPPC/Pages/SCG.aspxhttp://www.wecc.biz/PLANNING/TRANSMISSIONEXPANSION/MAP/Pages/default.aspxhttp://www.wecc.biz/PLANNING/TRANSMISSIONEXPANSION/MAP/Pages/default.aspxhttp://www.wecc.biz/Planning/TransmissionExpansion/Transmission/Pages/default.aspxmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.wecc.biz/PLANNING/TRANSMISSIONEXPANSION/MAP/Pages/default.aspx

Appendix B - 16

WECC Transmission Project Information Portal Questionnaire

New/Modified Question Answers Project Name Project Type New

Upgrade Project Purpose Sponsoring Organization(s) Other Project Participant(s) The project line voltage(s): Select all that apply

450-kV AC >450-kV DC ≥450-kV DC

Estimated Transfer Capability/Rating (MW) Estimated In-Service Date Project Map URL:

Project Website URL:

Status in Most Recent RPG Plan

Conceptual Planned Under Construction

Which RPGs does the project terminate in (check all that apply)?

AESO BCPPG CAISO CCPG CG CTPG NTTG SIERRA SWAT

Which RPG planning process is the project participating in (check all that apply)?

AESO BCPPG CAISO CCPG CG CTPG NTTG SIERRA SWAT NONE

Has the project been included in an approved regional plan?

CAISO AESO ColumbiaGrid Other (FILL IN BLANK?)

Appendix B - 17

New/Modified Question Answers Has the project been studied in a regional or interconnection-wide planning forum (check all that apply)?

AESO BCPPG CAISO CCPG CG CTPG NTTG SIERRA SWAT TEPPC NONE

Has the project been studied using a power flow analysis program?

Yes No

In what study year (s) has the project been studied?

Has the project been analyzed using a production cost modeling tool?

Yes No

What phase of the WECC Path Rating process is the project in?

a. Phase 0 b. Phase 1 c. Phase 2 d. Phase 3 e. Phase 3 Complete f. The project has not entered the WECC

path rating process Have alternative routes and solutions been investigated?

Yes No

Have the transmission interconnection points been determined?

Yes No

Point of Origin

Point of Termination

Intermediate Points of Interconnection

General Route

Length in Miles

Conductor Size (MW)

Percent Compensation

Appendix B - 18

New/Modified Question Answers Estimated Cost

Does the project connect with a system(s) owned by others?

Yes No Not applicable

Has the project submitted the application for interconnection?

Yes No

If yes, does the project have interconnection agreements?

If yes, describe the nature of the interconnection agreements.

Although there are many reasons to propose a transmission project, what is the primary purpose for the transmission project?

Economic driven – Proposed to deliver lower cost resources or to relieve congestion.

Reliability driven – Proposed to provide reliable service to network load.

Tariff driven – Proposed to meet Open Access Transmission Tariff obligations such as point-to-point service or committed firm transmission service.

Policy driven – Proposed due to a policy or statutory requirement, directive, or goal.

For what other purposes is the project being proposed (check all that apply)?

Economic driven – Proposed to deliver lower cost resources or to relieve congestion.

Reliability driven – Proposed to provide reliable service to network load.

Tariff driven – Proposed to meet Open Access Transmission Tariff obligations such as point-to-point service or committed firm transmission service.

Policy driven – Proposed due to a policy or statutory requirement, directive, or goal.

The project is being used to fulfill a policy requirement (CAISO only).

Yes No Not Applicable

The project is being used to fulfill a policy directive (outside of CAISO).


If yes, to either of the questions above, describe the requirement/directive and how the project fulfills it.

Is this project dependent upon another transmission project to be completed and used for its intended purpose(s)?

Yes No

Appendix B - 19

New/Modified Question Answers If yes, list the dependent project(s).

Is the project currently under construction (i.e., steel in the ground)?

Yes No

Has major equipment (e.g., transformers, towers, wire) been ordered for the project?

Yes No

If yes, please describe. If yes, provide the date.

Estimated Construction Schedule.

Does the project have a commitment for financing to construct the project?

Yes No

If yes, describe the nature of the financing and construction commitments.

For projects with multiple sponsors, does the project have executed participation contracts that commit the parties to construct the project?


If yes, provide the date of contract execution.

If yes, provide % of the total project cost that has an executed contract.

Has the project been included in an integrated resource plan (IRP)?


If yes, provide the date of the IRP and an electronic link, if available.

If the IRP has been reviewed by state regulators, provide a brief description of the status and/or results of that review.

If the IRP has been approved or acknowledged by state regulators, provide electronic links to the relevant orders.

Does the project have Right-of-Way (ROW) contracts with landowners?

Yes No

Appendix B - 20

New/Modified Question Answers If yes, what is the percentage or line mileage of ROW obtained?

Have appropriate regulatory agencies approved cost recovery?

Yes No

If yes, provide the date.

If yes, what agency provided the approval?

Does the project have executed transmission service agreements that commit the project developer to construct the project?

Yes No

If yes, provide the date of contract execution.

If yes, provide % of line capacity under agreement.

If there is generation associated with the project (i.e., contracted), has the generation project been identified in an LSE procurement process and/or have contracts for the generation been signed?


Does the project have executed participation contracts with other parties that commit the parties to construct the project?

Yes No

Does the project require federal EIS and/or similar state environmental or siting process?

Yes No

Has (have) the application(s) been filed? Yes No

Has (have) the application(s) been accepted or deemed complete?

Yes No

Have formally noticed public meetings (or equivalent) been completed?

Yes No

Current status of federal EIS and/or equivalent state environmental process.

a. Not applicable b. Not started c. Scoping started d. Draft started e. Draft complete f. Final complete g. Record of decision or order received

Have major federal and/or state environmental permits been issued?

Yes No

Appendix B - 21

New/Modified Question Answers If you responded "No" and the project does not require federal EIS and/or similar state or environmental or siting process, please complete the following questions: Does the project require any county/town level environmental permitting?

Yes No

Has the application been filed? Yes No

Has the application been accepted or deemed complete?

Yes No

Have formally noticed public meetings (or equivalent) been completed?

Yes No

What is the current status of county/town level environmental permitting?

a. Not applicable b. Not started c. Scoping started d. Draft started e. Draft complete f. Final complete g. Record of decision or order received

Have county/town level permits been issued? Yes No

Provide any further information or detail about the project for consideration in WECC's Regional Transmission Expansion Planning (RTEP) process.

Project Contact Name Project Contact Email Project Contact Street Address Project Contact City Project Contact Country Project Contact State/Province Project Contact Zip Project Contact Phone Number Project Contact Name (2) Project Contact Email (2) Project Contact Street Address (2) Project Contact City (2) Project Contact Country (2) Project Contact State/Province (2) Project Contact Zip (2) Project Contact Phone Number (2)

Appendix B - 22

New/Modified Question Answers Project Status Cancelled

Completed Open Planned Suspended

Date of Last Update

Appendix C - 23

Appendix C – WECC Project Information Portal The evaluation of projects in the PIP was performed on projects and project information as of 10/24/2013. The table below presents some basic information for 98 projects in the PIP evaluated on the CCTA process. All information in the PIP is located on the WECC web site. Project Name Sponsoring

Organization(s) Project Voltage(s)

Estimated In-Service Date

Primary Purpose

Currently under construction?

2022 CCTA?

Completed, Cancelled, or Suspended

2024 CCTA?

Abel-Ball Salt River Project 200–300-kV AC 4/15/2020 Reliability driven

No

Bighorn-Eldorado NV Energy >450-kV DC 12/31/2018 Policy driven

No

Boardman-Hemingway 500 kV (B2H)

Idaho Power Company >450-kV AC 12/31/2018 Reliability driven

No Yes Yes

Canada – Northern California Transmission Project – Avista Corporation 500/230-kV AC Interconnection

Avista Corporation 200–300-kV AC; >450-kV AC

1/1/2015 No Cancelled

Canada/Pacific Northwest-Northern California

BC Hydro >450-kV AC; >450-kV DC

1/1/2021 Economic driven

No Cancelled

Cascade Crossing Portland General Electric >450-kV AC 1/1/2023 Tariff driven

No Yes Cancelled

Cedar Mountain Loop-in of Moenkopi-Yavapai 500-kV Line

Arizona Public Service Company

>450-kV AC 12/31/2011 Tariff driven

Yes Completed

Centennial II (Amargosa-Northwest)

NV Energy >450-kV AC 12/31/2020 Policy driven

No

Centennial II (Harry Allen - Eldorado)

NV Energy >450-kV AC 12/31/2020 Economic driven

No

http://www.wecc.biz/Planning/TransmissionExpansion/Map/Pages/default.aspx

Appendix C - 24

Project Name Sponsoring Organization(s)

Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

Centennial II (Northwest - Harry Allen)


No

Centennial West Clean Line

Clean Line Energy Partners LLC

>450-kV AC 1/1/2019 Economic driven

No

Central Ferry - Lower Monumental (Little Goose Area Reinforcement)

Bonneville Power Administration


No Yes Yes

Chinook TransCanada Energy ≥450-kV DC 9/30/2021 Economic driven

No

Delaney-Palo Verde 500-kV Line



Yes Yes Yes

Delaney-Sun Valley 500-kV Line


>450-kV AC 5/1/2016 Reliability driven

Yes Yes Yes

Desert Basin - Pinal Central

Salt River Project 200–300-kV AC 4/15/2014 Reliability driven

Yes Yes

Devers - Colorado River 500-kV (DCR) Transmission Line Project

Southern California Edison (SCE)

>450-kV AC 1/31/2014 Policy driven

Yes Yes Yes

ECO 500/230/138kV-Substation

San Diego Gas & Electric 450-kV AC

12/31/2014 Policy driven

Yes

Gateway Central Project – Mona to Oquirrh 500 kV (Energy Gateway Segment C)

PacifiCorp >450-kV AC 5/31/2013 Tariff driven

Yes Yes Completed

Appendix C - 25


Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

Gateway Central Project – Populus to Terminal 345-kV (Energy Gateway Segment B)

PacifiCorp 300–450-kV AC 1/19/2010 Reliability driven

Yes Completed

Gateway Central Project, Sigurd - Red Butte 345-kV Line

PacifiCorp 300–450-kV AC 6/1/2015 Reliability driven

Yes Yes Yes

Gateway South Project – Segment #1 (Mona-Crystal 500 kV)

PacifiCorp >450-kV AC 12/31/2050 No Cancelled

Gateway South Project – Segment #2 (Aeolus-Mona 500 kV)

PacifiCorp >450-kV AC 12/31/2022 Reliability driven

No Yes Yes

Gateway West Transmission Project Segment 1A – Windstar to Jim Bridger 230 kV, 500 kV


No Yes Yes

Gateway West Transmission Project Segment 1B – Jim Bridger to Southeast Idaho (Bridger – Populus single circuit 500 kV)


No Yes Yes

Appendix C - 26


Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

Gateway West Transmission Project Segment 1C – Southeast Idaho – South Central Idaho (Populus – Midpoint 500 kV)

PacifiCorp and Idaho Power


No Yes Yes

Gateway West Transmission Project Segment E – South to Southwest Idaho (Midpoint – Hemingway 500 kV)

PacifiCorp and Idaho Power


No Yes Yes

Great Basin HVDC Great Basin Energy Development, LLC

450-kV AC 5/1/2015 Reliability driven

Yes Yes Yes

Hemingway-Captain Jack 500 kV Transmission Line

PacifiCorp >450-kV AC 10/4/2050 No

Appendix C - 27


Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

High Plains Express Transmission Project

Black Hills Corporation; Colorado Springs Utilities; Public Service Company of New Mexico, Public Service Company of Colorado (Xcel Energy); Salt River Project; Tri-state Generation & Transmission; LS Power; Western Area Power Administration; Colorado Energy Office; New Mexico Renewable Energy Transmission Authority; and Wyoming Infrastructure Authority

300–450-kV AC; >450-kV AC

12/31/2030 Economic driven

No

Hoodoo Wash Loop-in of Hassayampa-North Gila 500-kV #1 Line



Yes Completed

Hughes Transmission Project:

Basin Electric Power Cooperative

450-kV AC 6/1/2018 Reliability driven

No Yes Yes

Interior to Lower Mainland Transmission (ILM) Project

BC Hydro ≥450-kV DC 1/31/2015 Reliability driven

Yes Yes Yes

Juan de Fuca HVDC Sea Cable

Sea Breeze Pacific Juan de Fuca Cable, LP

200–300-kV AC 12/15/2015 Economic driven

No

Appendix C - 28


Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

Juan de Fuca II HVDC Cable

Sea Breeze Pacific Regional Transmission System, Inc. (SBP-RTS)

450-kV AC 12/31/2018 Economic driven

No

Lassen Double-Circuit 230-kV line

Lassen Municipal Utility District

200–300-kV AC 6/1/2018 Reliability driven

No

Lucky Corridor Transmission Project

Lucky Corridor, LLC 200–300-kV AC 10/1/2016 Economic driven

No

Montana Alberta Tie-Line

Enbridge Inc. Montana Alberta Tie Ltd. MATL LLP

200–300-kV AC 8/20/2013 Yes Yes Completed

Montana to Washington (BPA Side)


>450-kV AC No

Morgan-Sun Valley 500-kV Line



No Yes Yes

Mountain States Transmission Intertie (MSTI) (Townsend-Midpoint 500 kV)

Northwestern Energy >450-kV AC 12/31/2017 Economic driven

No

Appendix C - 29


Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

Navajo Transmission Project Segment #1 (Four Corners - Marketplace 500 kV)

Dine Power Authority 450-kV AC 11/29/2017 Reliability driven

No

North Gila- TS8 230-kV Line


200–300-kV AC 6/1/2016 No

NorthernLights TransCanada Energy >450-kV DC 1/1/2015 Yes Cancelled Northwest Transmission Line

BC Hydro 450-kV AC 12/31/2013 Economic driven

Yes Yes

Palm Valley-TS2-Trilby Wash 230-kV Line



No

Path 27 Upgrade ( Intermountain DC Line)

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power

450-kV DC 8/8/2011 Economic driven

Yes Completed

Path 42 Upgrade Project (SCE's Scope of Work)

SCE 200–300-kV AC 4/30/2014 Policy driven

No

Path 54 Upgrades-Coronado to Silver King 500-kV increase to 1494MW

Salt River Project

Appendix C - 30


Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

Path 55 – Brownlee East Increase to 1915 MW

Idaho Power 450-kV AC 12/31/2017 Economic driven

No Yes Yes

Pawnee-Daniels Park Public Service Company of Colorado


No

Pawnee-Smoky Hill Public Service of Colorado 300–450-kV AC 6/1/2013 Policy driven

Yes Yes Completed

Pinal Central – Sundance 230-kV Line



No

Pinal Central-Tortolita Tucson Electric Power Co. >450-kV AC 6/1/2016 Reliability driven

Yes Yes Yes

Pinal West-Pinal Central-Browning (SEV)

Salt River Project >450-kV AC 4/15/2014 Reliability driven

Yes Yes Yes

Renewable Zone 4 to Harry Allen


No Suspended

RTI Dixie-Oreana NV Energy 300–450-kV AC 12/12/2015 Policy driven

No Suspended

San Francisco Bay Area Bulk Transmission Reinforcement

Pacific Gas & Electric ≥450-kV DC 1/1/2013 No Cancelled

Appendix C - 31


Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

San Luis Rio Colorado (SLRC) Project

North Branch Resources, Generadora del Desierto, SA de CV, and Western Area Power Administration


No

San Luis Valley-Calumet-Comanche

Public Service of Colorado and Tri-State G&T

200–300-kV AC; 300–450-kV AC

12/31/2030 Reliability driven

No Yes Suspended

South Orange County Reliability Enhancement (SOCRE)

San Diego Gas & Electric 450-kV AC 12/31/2016 Economic driven

No

Sun Valley – Trilby Wash 230-kV Line



No

Sunrise Powerlink San Diego Gas & Electric >450-kV AC 6/1/2012 Economic driven

Yes Yes Completed

Appendix C - 32


Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

SunZia Southwest Transmission Project

Southwestern Power Group II, MMR Group, Salt River Project, Tucson Electric Power, Shell Wind Energy, and Tri-State Generation & Transmission Association


No

Talega-Escondido / Valley-Serrano 500-kV Interconnect

Nevada Hydro Company, Inc.


No

Tot 7 Expansion Public Service of Colorado 200–300-kV AC; 300–450-kV AC

12/31/2021 Reliability driven

No

TOT3 Archer Interconnection Project

Tri-State G&T 200–300-kV AC; 300–450-kV AC

6/30/2016 No

TOT3 Upgrade Project – Miracle Mile – Ault Upgrade

Western Area Power Administration

Appendix C - 33


Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

WECC - Eastern Interconnect DC Tie Upgrade Project

21st Century Transmission, LLC a subsidiary of Energy Capital Partners, LLC


No

West Coast Cable Project

Sea Breeze Pacific West Coast Cable, LP

450-kV AC 2/28/2012 Tariff driven

Yes Yes Completed

West of McNary Reinforcement Project Group 2 (Big Eddy - Knight)



Yes Yes Yes

West Side Tie NV Energy >450-kV AC 12/12/2018 Policy driven

No Suspended

Western Spirit Clean Line

Western Spirit Clean Line LLC Clean Line Energy Partners LLC

300–450-kV AC 1/1/2018 No

Westside Tie 345/500 kV

NV Energy 300–450-kV AC; >450-kV AC

12/12/2023 Policy driven

No Suspended

Wyodak South 230-kV line

Black Hills Power

Appendix C - 34


Project Voltage(s)


Primary Purpose


2022 CCTA?


2024 CCTA?

Zephyr DATC (Duke-American Transmission Co.)

≥450-kV DC 12/31/2020 Economic driven

No

Appendix D - 35

Appendix D - Comparison to the 2022 CCTA The 2024 CCTA has additional and many of the same projects as the 2022 CCTA. Since development of the CCTA, transmission projects have been completed and cancelled/suspended. The 2022 CCTA included 30 projects; the 2024 CCTA includes 22 projects.

New Projects within the Project Information Portal The following projects are new additions:

• Desert Basin – Pinal Central • Northwest Transmission Line

2022 CCTA Projects in service: • Gateway Central Project – Mona to Oquirrh 500 kV • Pawnee – Smoky Hill • Midway Waterton • Montana Alberta Tie-Line • Sunrise Powerlink • Tehachapi Renewable • West of McNary Reinforcement Project Group 1 (McNary - John Day)

2022 CCTA Projects cancelled or suspended: • Cascade Crossing • San Luis Valley-Calumet-Comanche

2022 CCTA Projects that have been renamed: • SWIP South (Robinson Summit to Harry Allen) -> One Nevada Line (ON Line)

Appendix E - 36

Appendix E – Exceptions: Boardman-Hemingway, Gateway West and Gateway South During the RPCG review of individual projects for inclusion in the 2024 CCTA, three projects were brought into question. The Boardman-Hemingway, Gateway West, and Gateway South projects were all considered to be new projects close to inclusion. All three projects required federal EIS and/or similar state environmental or siting process. The Boardman-Hemingway and Gateway South projects were considered to be in the “draft started” phase. Originally the projects did not meet the EIS threshold specified in Criterion 4 for new projects. Also during the RPCG review of the projects, the Gateway West and Gateway South projects’ financial indicators were reviewed and considered to be less certain. A meeting was held on September 10, 2013 to provide more information to RPCG members from the project sponsors. After the webinar, the RPCG decided to put all three projects up for vote. The vote instructed RPCG members to cast votes to include or exclude the projects in the 2024 CCTA. After all votes were received, consensus was reached by the RPCG to include all three projects. The voting process and details can be seen in the emails shown below. From: Henderson, Susan F [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 4:24 PM To: TEPPC SCG [RPCG] Cc: Henderson, Susan F Subject: SCG [RPCG] Vote on 2024 CCTA and Charter Dear SCG [RPCG] representatives: I am reaching out to the SCG [RPCG] voting representatives on two issues that require a vote. Voting can be completed through email, which is the purpose of this email. All votes must be received by close of business Friday, September 27, 2013. The voting SCG [RPCG] representatives are as follows: * Gary DeShazo - California Independent System Operator * Rich Bayless - Northern Tier Transmission Group * Paul Didsayabutra- Columbia Grid * Steve Metague- California Transmission Planning Group * Phil Sanchez - Sierra Subregional Planning Group * Patrick Harwood - Southwest Area Transmission * Jeff Hein - Colorado Coordinating Planning Group (appointed 9/19/13) * Jason Doering - Albert Electric System Operator * John Rich - British Columbia Coordinating Planning Group 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions The first issue relates to the 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions (CCTA). As you may remember, the SCG [RPCG] is responsible for developing a list of transmission assumptions from the Transmission Information Project Portal that have a high probability of being constructed within the 10-year study timeframe. It is intended to be used by TEPPC for studies used to develop its 10-year interconnection-wide transmission plan.

Appendix E - 37

To make the process open, transparent, and repeatable a process was established to assist with the determination of a project. The SCG [RPCG] strives to reach consensus on transmission projects that are included within the CCTA; however, sometimes consensus cannot be achieved. This is the case for three transmission projects that are being reviewed for inclusion in the 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions. The three projects under review are: * Boardman-Hemingway * Gateway West * Gateway South A presentation with information on all the projects is attached for your use. While the projects are not shown as dependent upon each other in the Portal, the information obtained by the SCG [RPCG] from Project Sponsors and the Portal suggests they are. All three are in a similar status regarding inclusion into the 2014 CCTA. The charter states that if consensus cannot be reached, decisions made by the SCG [RPCG] will be made by a majority vote of the full SCG [RPCG]. Voting will be made by the official representatives or their designated alternate. Please cast your vote to include or exclude the project on the CCTA list. Again, the three projects up for consideration are Boardman-Hemingway, Gateway West and Gateway South. In addition, please provide any reasoning to make the decision so that it may be documented in the SCG [RPCG] CCTA report. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Susan Henderson, chair, at [email protected] or Rich Bayless, vice chair, at [email protected]. Sincerely Susan Henderson Xcel Energy SCG [RPCG] chair

Appendix E - 38

From: Henderson, Susan F [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 4:02 PM To: TEPPCSCG Cc: Hein, Jeff Subject: Results of the voting for the CCTA Good afternoon to all. I wanted to share the results of the voting for the both the SCG [RPCG] Charter and the 2024 Common Case Transmission Assumptions (CCTA). Votes were received from all subregional groups except Sierra. Reminders to vote were sent to SPG representatives. 2024 CCTA results The three projects under review were Boardman-Hemingway, Gateway West, and Gateway South. The charter states that if consensus cannot be reached, decisions made by the SCG [RPCG] will be made by a majority vote of the full SCG [RPCG]. All that voted were in favor of including Gateway West (Windstar-Populus and Populus-Hemingway). The majority voted to include Boardman-Hemingway and Gateway South. The one vote to exclude Boardman-Hemingway and Gateway South (Aeolus-Mona) stated the “rationale is to stick as tightly as possible to the CCTA criteria that the SCG [RPCG] established. From the documentation provided, the Boardman-Hemingway and Gateway South (Aeolus-Mona) appear to be new transmission projects that do not yet have a completed draft EIS. Therefore, they do not meet the implementation indicators for the current CCTA.” Therefore, by majority vote it is SCG [RPCG]’s recommendation to include all three projects to the CCTA with the exception noted. Susan Henderson, P.E. Xcel Energy | Responsible By Nature Manager – Regional Transmission Planning 1800 Larimer Suite 600, Denver, CO 80202 P: 303.571.7575 C: 303.947.9133 F: 612.318.4766 E: [email protected]

mailto:[mailto:[email protected]]mailto:[email protected]

Glossary - 39

Glossary AC: Alternating Current - A type of electrical current, the direction of which is reversed at regular intervals or cycles in the U.S. the standard is 120 reversals or 60 cycles per second. AESO: Alberta Electric System Operator. Backbone facility: Backbone transmissions are those facilities that provide network connectivity that are 345kV or above for most of the Western Interconnection, but in certain western regions that voltage may only be 230kV. BCCPG: British Columbia Coordinated Planning Group. CAISO: California Independent System Operator. CCPG: Colorado Coordinated Planning Group. CCTA: Common Case Transmission Assumptions. Congestion - A condition that exists when transmission system constraints prevent the dispatch of lowest cost resources to meet system loads. CTPG: California Transmission Planning Group. DC: Direct Current - A type of electricity transmission and distribution by which electricity flows in one direction through the conductor. DOE: U.S. Department of Energy - The federal agency designed “to advance the national, economic, and energy security of the United States; to promote scientific and technological innovation in support of that mission; and to ensure the environmental cleanup of the national nuclear weapons complex.” EIS: Environmental Impact Statement. Electric Load - An end-use device or customer that receives power from the electric system. Generation - The process of producing electricity by transforming other forms or sources of energy into electrical energy; measured in kilowatt-hours. IRP: Integrated Resource Plan - A plan developed by an electric power provider, sometimes as required by a public regulatory commission or agency, that defines the short and long term capacity additions (supply side) and demand side management programs that it will undertake to meet projected energy demands. MW: Megawatt - One thousand kilowatts, or 1 million watts; standard measure of electric power plant generating capacity.

Glossary - 40

NTTG: Northern Tier Transmission Group. Path - Path, or Transmission Path, is a single or set of transmission lines with an established rating. There are 66 WECC-rated paths in the Western Interconnection. Paths are analogous to the term “flowgate” used in other parts of North America. PIP: Transmission Project Information Portal. PCM: Production Cost Model - An analytic representation of an electrical generation and transmission system used to determine the most efficient dispatch of generation to meet system loads within the reliability constraints on power system operations. ROW: Right of Way - A corridor of land on which electric lines may be located. The Transmission Owner may own the land in fee, own an easement, or have certain franchise, prescription, or license rights to construct and maintain lines. RPCG: Regional Planning Coordination Group – Coordinates regional planning activities of mutual interest—previously the Subregional Planning Group (SPG) Coordination Group (SCG). SCG Foundational Projects List - The SCG facilitated the preparation of and developed the criteria for the SCG Foundational Transmission Projects List. The list identified projects having a high probability of being in-service by 2020. These projects provide an assumed minimum transmission system starting point for TEPPC’s future planning studies, and are included as inputs into the 2011 WECC 10-Year Regional Transmission Plan. SIERRA: Sierra Subregional Planning Group. SPG: Subregional Planning Group - An organization that coordinates planned transmission system changes within a defined geographical area in the Western Interconnection. WECC currently recognizes nine SPGs in the Western Interconnection: Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO), British Columbia Coordinated Planning Group (BCCPG), California Independent System Operator (CAISO), Colorado Coordinated Planning Group (CCPG), ColumbiaGrid, California Transmission Planning Group (CTPG), Northern Tier Transmission Group (NTTG), Sierra Subregional Planning Group (SSPG), and Southwest Area Transmission (SWAT). SPSC: State-Provincial Steering Committee - The SPSC consists of appointees from each state and province in the Western Interconnection, and comprises one-third of the SPSG membership. The Western States’ Water Council and the Western Governors’ Wildlife Council are ex-officio members of the SPSC. The purpose of the SPSC is to provide input to Western Interconnection transmission planning and analysis. Stakeholder - A person or entity interested or wishing to participate in WECC’s planning activities. Study Case - A set of load, resource, and network topology conditions used to model the performance of the Western Interconnection transmission grid.

Glossary - 41

Study Program - A set of studies, developed under the provision of the TEPPC Transmission Planning Protocol, to be completed by TEPPC within that study year. Each Study Program is developed based on consideration and prioritization of all study requests received for that year. SWAT: Southwest Area Transmission. TEPPC: Transmission Expansion Planning Policy Committee - A WECC Board committee that conducts and facilitates economic transmission planning for the Western Interconnection. TEPPC activities include fulfilling transmission owner/operator and Subregional Planning Group planning requirements under FERC Order 890. TEPPC has a balanced membership comprised of individuals from WECC-member organizations and stakeholders. Transmission - An interconnected group of lines and associated equipment for the movement or transfer of electric energy between points of supply and points at which it is transformed for delivery to customers or is delivered to other electric systems. Under construction: physically building the facility. WECC: Western Electricity Coordinating Council - The Regional Entity responsible for coordinating and promoting Bulk Electric System reliability in the Western Interconnection. Western Interconnection - The interconnected electrical system that encompasses the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia, the northern portion of Baja California (Mexico), and all or portions of the 14 western states in between.

Executive SummaryAcknowledgementsThe RPCG would like to thank all stakeholders who have dedicated their time, effort and resources contributing to this work.

BackgroundCommon Case Transmission Assumptions (CCTA)Purpose of the CCTADevelopment of the 2024 CCTAThe CCTA ProcessCriterion 1: Regional SignificanceCriterion 2: Construction StatusCriterion 3: Financial IndicatorsCriterion 4: Implementation Status IndicatorsCriterion 5: Project Dependency

2024 CCTA Projects1. Under Construction (Criterion 2)2. Not under construction, but met CCTA selection Criterion 3, Criterion 4, and Criterion 5.

CCTA Process Exceptions

Categorization of ProjectsAPPENDICESAppendix A – Outreach ActivitiesAppendix B – Letter to Project SponsorsOriginal LetterWECC Transmission Project Information Portal Questionnaire

Appendix C – WECC Project Information PortalAppendix D - Comparison to the 2022 CCTANew Projects within the Project Information Portal2022 CCTA Projects in service:2022 CCTA Projects cancelled or suspended:2022 CCTA Projects that have been renamed:

Appendix E – Exceptions: Boardman-Hemingway, Gateway West and Gateway South

Glossary

subregional planning group coordination group (scg)in 2012, the subregional planning group (spg)...

Documents