1. Integrated Capacity Analysis Working Group
December 13, 2016
Webinar
drpwg.org

2. Agenda Time Topic 9:00-9:15 9:15-9:30 9:30 – 10:30 10:30-10:45
Introduction and update on timelines
9:15-9:30
B. Overview of potential integration of work from national labs (LLNL/LNBL/SLAC)
9:30 – 10:30
C. Final discussion on interim long-term refinement report
10:30-10:45
D. Comments on proposed prioritization of long-term topics
10:45 – 11:00
D. January Work Plan and Final Demo A Report Review
11:00-11:15
E. Wrap Up and Adjourn

3. ICA and LNBA Working Group Background
ICA and LNBA WG Purpose - Pursuant to the May 2, 2016, Assigned Commissioner’s Ruling (ACR) in DRP proceeding (R ), the Joint Utilities are required to convene the ICA and LNBA WG to:
Refine ICA and LNBA Methodologies and Requirements
Authorize Demonstration Project A and Project B
CPUC Energy Division role
Oversight to ensure balance and achievement of State objective (ensure adequate stakeholder representation in consensus statements, keeping WG activities on track with Commission expectations/needs, demonstration project results review, quality control on deliverables)
Coordination with both related CPUC activities and activities in other agencies (IDER CSF WG, CEC and CAISO interagency matters, interconnection/Rule 21/SIWG, other proceedings that may impact or be impacted by locational value calculation such as AB 350/IRP and LTPP/TPP/RPS)
Steward WG agreements into CPUC decisions when necessary
More Than Smart role
Engaged by Joint Utilities to facilitate both the ICA & LBNA working groups. This leverages the previous work of MTS facilitating stakeholder discussions on ICA and LBNA topics.

4. Update on Timelines Date Short Term Long Term Dec. 12
First round of edits for interim LT report due
Dec. 13
Webinar
Dec. 15
Second and final round of edits for interim LT report due
Dec. 16
IOU Final Demo A report due*
Interim LT report due*
Jan. 6
In-person meeting
Determine schedule for discussions up to Q2 2017
Begin LT refinement discussions
Jan. 11
First draft circulated
Jan. 17
First round of edits due
Jan
Second draft circulated
Jan. 20
Jan. 27
Second and final round of edits due
Jan. 31
Report submitted
* Targeted internal deadline

5. DER Siting and Optimization tool to enable large scale deployment of DER in California High-Level Project Summary
Need for robust distribution planning tools
Potential Outcomes
DER penetration patterns and operational strategies
identify sites with economic potential for microgrid and DER
Focus on a variety of use cases, such as:
address policy incentives and value of DER as grid assets
consider network constraints in the DER location challenge
evaluate impacts of DER on the bulk electric grid system
California as starting point for wider application (e.g NY)
Project Description
Prototype framework for integrated distributed resource planning and optimization tool able to identify DER adoption patterns, microgrid sites, and evaluate DER impacts on the distribution and transmission grid.
Project Participants
LBNL, LLNL, SLAC, NREL, BNL, ANL +
CPUC, PGE, SCE, External Advisory Committee
11/30/ /1/2016

6. DER Siting and Optimization tool to enable large scale deployment of DER in California
Model Integration
Behind-the-Meter
Mapping & Visualization
Planning Analytics
Loads
DER Adoption
GIS Mapping
Heatmaps
Statistical Summaries
Forecasting and Predictive Analytics
API Call
DER-CAM
DER Dispatch
Disaggregation
Nodal results
DER Mix
LNBA and ICA calculations
Queue Mngmt.
Filtering
Aggregation
Timeline
DER Dispatch
Forced directed graph representation
T&D Co-Simulation
GridLab-D
GridDyn
GridLab-D
11/30/ /1/2016

7. Timeline and Next Steps
A demonstration to the DRP working groups is feasible towards the end of Q The demonstration can facilitate additional collaboration on:
Data collection and utilization (short term)
Big data analytics integration (longer term)
Exploration of a variety of scenarios/use cases (longer term)
The project is due September 2017 with an expected extension to December 2017 (due to late start).
Discussion:
How can this framework benefit DRP? What insights can inform the long-term refinement of the DRP?
Data sharing (old vs. new – demonstrate capabilities vs. actual results)
At what stage the technology can be useful to the IOUs?
11/30/ /1/2016

8. Draft Interim Long-Term Refinement Report
Environment Council, Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC), PG&E, Vote Solar submitted comments.
Topics for additional discussion:
3.2.e: Method for reflecting the effect of potential load modifying resources on integration capacity
3.2.f: Development of ICA validation plans, describing how ICA results can be independently verified
ICA for DERs serving high load conditions
ICA and streamlining interconnection process
Purpose by end of webinar:
Discussion should clarify:
Based on comments, should this still be an issue that merits further discussion in 2017? Is it out of scope, belongs to another proceeding/Track 3, etc.?
Which recommendations have consensus? If there is not consensus, report will mark as “one opinion of some WG members”
Can some topics or questions be consolidated into other sections of the report?
Recommendations for simplifying the report, highlighting recommendations upfront, etc.?
By EOB 12/13, MTS will provide a second version of the report for a second round of comments, due 12/15.

9. 3.2.e Method for reflecting the effect of potential load modifying resources on integration capacity
Summary of Discussion Questions for Further Refinement
Reframe original topic to: “method for quantitative assessment of the potential impocts of distributed load-modifying resources on integration capacity
It is recommended that the scope of ICA be expanded to include non-engineering analyses (ex: econometric modeling)
It is recommended that the IOUs or any distribution system operator perform an assessment of how ICA results can help determine the potential for DERs to provide grid services (defined in IDER)
It is proposed that all DERs are classified as load-modifying resources
A list of characteristics of ideal load modifying resources should be created
Recommendations and further questions for refining ICA methodology:
Include probabilistic modeling approaches
Does using hourly profiles optimize integration capacity or add unnecessary complexity? Can the WG make a recommendation?
Map resource impacts on key indicators of ICA, including but not limited to thermal levels, steady state voltage, voltage fluctuation, operational flexibility, and protection limits
Assess potential impacts of new and existing load modifying resources on ICA
Determine how to integrate grid engineering and non-grid engineering analysis

10. 3.2.e Method for reflecting the effect of potential load modifying resources on integration capacity
Questions:
Should non-engineering and/or economic modeling be included in ICA methodology? How does the use of non-engineering analysis improve means of reflecting load modifying resources? (#2)
Should all DERs be classified as load modifying resources? Would other classification of resources (ex: resources responding to ISO/DSO needs) be preferable? (#4)
Can the WG make a specific recommendation with regards to hourly effectiveness vs. computational complexity? (#6.b)
Proposed changes:
Multiple sections can be reworded to better tie back to relation to load modifying resources
Simplify #2
Determine if Scope of #3 fits into the ICA WG tasks
Determine how “load modifying resource” is defined
#5 is duplicative of work IOUs are already doing, proposal to remove
Rephrase #6.c and #6.d so that the WG itself is not conducting the analysis, but instead providing recommendations to the results

11. 3.2.f. Development of ICA validation plans, describing how ICA results can be independently verified
Summary of Discussion Questions for Further Refinement
The WG would like to verify:
Input data
ICA methodology
ICA tools
The WG would like to discuss levels of uncertainty within the ICA results, including acceptability of uncertainty levels and opportunities to reduce uncertainty
Potential data sets used for third-party analysis and validation include: 1) IEEE 123, 2) IEEE 8500, 3) PG&E 12 representative feeders, 4) others
Who should conduct the validation work? National labs, independent expert, utilities, etc.
Will validating ICA methodology be done for interconnection use case, or all 3 use cases?

12. 3.2.f. Development of ICA validation plans, describing how ICA results can be independently verified
Questions
Can 1) input data include additional “value stack” of DER (including system values) beyond ancillary services?
Should the underlying code used to create the ICA tools be designed to ensure broad-ranging data flexibility or application to other tools? What IT burden does this create?
How many reference points should be used for ICA validation? IEEE 123, IEEE 8500, PG&E 12 representative feeders, others, etc.?

13. ICA and streamlining interconnection process
Summary of Discussion Questions for Further Refinement
Evaluate accuracy and appropriateness of assumptions about load and load shape underlining hosting capacity calculations
Understand assumptions about utility and DER equipment technical functions with regards to hosting capacity calculations
Developing ICA with capabilities to support streamlined interconnection
How can utilities’ proposed technology-agnostic load/generation profile be refined to accommodate portfolios of DER combinations that are both load and generation? Can a technology agnostic profile be accomplished by using a net-generation/load curve rather than a gross-generation load curve? How would the ICA accommodate project designs for self (i.e., non-export) or “smart” supply?
How can ICA data be formatted to allow for ease of analysis by customers, third-parties, and other stakeholders?
What is the appropriate frequency at which ICA is updated (near real time, etc.)?
What other data should be included in the ICA maps to help facilitate interconnection?
What are the steps required for achieving full interconnection automation?

14. ICA and streamlining interconnection process
Questions
What level of discussion should be included in ICA methodology refinement and for Rule 21 Parties?
Is the goal of ICA to reach full interconnection automation, and what are the steps required for achieving that if so?
Proposed changes:
Consolidation of topic into other sections
Move 4.a (building technology-agnostic profiles using a net generation/load curve) as a methodology refinement recommendation in the short term final report (3.1.b – DER portfolios)
4.b mirrors suggestions in data access and application program interface comments.

15. ICA as a foundation for DERs serving high load conditions
Summary of Discussion Questions for Further Refinement
The WG is interested in continuing discussions on how DERs may satisfy peak load conditions as informed by ICA data through increased granularity. Increasing granularity would allow the development of DER solutions that could serve both peak load conditions and provide stability during low-load conditions.  
One WG proposal asks for the consideration of four additional ICA profiles which include occupancy and temperature-driven load patterns: 1) weekday load, “hot” weather conditions; 2) weekday load, “cold” weather conditions; 3) weekend load, “hot” weather conditions; and 5) weekend load, “cold” weather conditions.  

16. ICA as a foundation for DERs serving high load conditions
Questions:
What is the role of additional ICA profiles, do the results significantly drive efficient DER solutions, and is the request reasonable in regards to requiring additional data analysis?
Proposed changes:
Because current methodology already provides peak load ICA, suggest deleting the first statement

17. ICA Long-Term Discussion Topics: Proposed Prioritization
In January 2017, the WG should work to develop a schedule to discuss long-term refinement topics that takes into consideration
Coordination or influence of any other CPUC related proceedings, Track 3 workshops, etc.
Influence to current ICA methodology as IOUs begin full implementation of ICA across DPAs
Time and analysis required, involvement of non-WG members, etc.

18. ICA Long-Term Discussion Topics: Proposed Prioritization
Rationale
ACR
Tier 1: Early to middle Q1 2017:
ICA and streamlined interconnection
ICA methodology and final recommendations from the ICA Working Group within the final WG report can serve as the basis for a new Rule 21 proceeding. Long-term refinements to the ICA methodology focused specifically on the interconnection use case will occur within the ICA WG in parallel.
Computational efficiency
Continued evaluation as IOUs consider expansion of ICA to all circuits within service territories.
3.1.d
Comparative analysis
Expansion of comparative analysis to more than one circuit and test more complicated circuits, as IOUs consider expansion of ICA to all circuits within service territories.
3.1.e
Data access
Data discussion focused on understanding IT requirements to address market sensitive information, data sharing, and automated data analysis.
3.2.b, 3.2.d
Interactive maps
Discussion focused on understanding IT requirements and benefits of increasing data directly visualized onto ICA maps.
3.2.c

19. ICA Long-Term Discussion Topics: Proposed Prioritization
Tier 2: middle Q1 to early Q2 2017:
Integration of ICA into growth scenarios for decision making purposes
Refine how growth scenarios are implemented, understand how use cases for growth scenarios may impact ICA results, and make recommendations on incorporation of ICA into growth scenarios. Conversations will occur after February 2017 CPUC workshop on growth scenarios as part of Track 3 efforts.
Independent validation of ICA
Proceeding in coordination with Track 3 efforts, and following comparative analysis discussion with an agreed-upon dataset and results for parties to compare and validate.
3.2.f
Method for reflecting the effect of potential load modifying resources on integration capacity
Begin development of methodology to include resource reliability and uncertainty factors into ICA, model resource impacts on ICA indicators, assess impacts of load-modifying resources, and include non-grid engineering analysis within ICA methodology
3.2.e
Definition of quality assurance and quality control measures
3.2.g
ICA in peak load conditions
Continue discussion of ICA that allows DERs to serve peak load conditions, while maintaining grid stability during low-load conditions

20. Review of IOU Demo Project Report and Developing WG ST Final Report
Purpose:
The final Demo reports are due Dec. 31, 2016 (and may be available as early as Dec. 16).
The next WG meetings are scheduled for Jan. 6 and Jan. 20.
Given the limited time for WG members to review IOU final Demo reports, it is suggested that the ICA WG pre-assign volunteer lead(s) for report sections. The volunteer(s) would be responsible as the lead author of the final WG report for WG recommendations on that particular section, receive input and comments from other WG members, and lead discussions on that topic for the two WG meetings in January.
MTS will continue to coordinate and facilitate WG input into the final report.

21. Review of IOU Demo Project Report and Developing WG ST Final Report
Background and Objectives (common report)
Selected DPAs
Methodology
Evaluation of power system criteria to determine DER capacity (common report)
Results
Findings in the context of different scenarios
Comparative assessment
Between two methods
Comparison among IOUs (common report)
Map display
Smart inverter functionalities
DER portfolio
Demo A lessons learned (common report)
Computational Efficiency
Consistency between methods
ORA 12 success criteria
Recommendations for:
Initial deployment (next 12 months)
Long term improvements (2+ years)

22. Review of IOU Demo Project Report and Developing WG ST Final Report
Background and Objectives (common report) (covered in IOU interim reports)
Selected DPAs (covered in IOU interim reports)
Methodology (review)
Evaluation of power system criteria to determine DER capacity (common report)
Results (review)
Findings in the context of different scenarios
Comparative assessment (review)
Between two methods
Comparison among IOUs (common report)
Map display (review)
Smart inverter functionalities performed on single circuit (review)
DER portfolio (covered in IOU interim reports)
Demo A lessons learned (common report)
Computational Efficiency (review)
Consistency between methods (review)
ORA 12 success criteria (review)
Recommendations for: (review)
Initial deployment (next 12 months)
Long term improvements (2+ years)