Base Case
Draft – For Comment
Rocky Mountain States
Sub-Regional Transmission Study
December 9, 2003
Report Overview
 Objectives
 Modeling approach and limitations
 Key assumptions
 Draft base case results
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
2
Base Case Objectives
 Focus on congestion issues that impact serving load in
the RMATS sub-region
 Assess the current system
• Existing system, plus new, viable investment already in progress
• Identify incidence and duration of congestion
• Estimate the resulting congestion costs
• Include several load, gas price, and hydro sensitivities
• Review plant performance
 Illuminate opportunities for cost-effective projects
• Estimate the incremental value of expansion on congested paths
 Identify potential modeling modifications
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
3
Modeling Approach
 Modeled with ABB Market Simulator
•
•
•
•
Production cost model
West-wide scope with a particular focus on the RMATS region
Detailed transmission representation
Calculates nodal / bus prices
 LP dispatch optimization is based on:
• Variable O&M
• Fuel cost
• Transmission constraints
 Impact of hydro and wind generation
• Treated as a fixed dispatch to the system
• After hydro and wind dispatch, the net load is passed to thermal dispatch
• LMP differences are dampened as hydro is included
 Single test year – 2008
• Existing system with incremental resources and transmission
• All results presented in 2004 nominal dollars
 Sensitivities to come (January): loads, gas prices, hydro conditions
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
4
Modeling Limitations
 Modeling assumes a single, seamless west-wide market
with no rate or loss pancaking, and no contractual
impediments to trade
 Not modeled:
• Must-run generation
• Unit commitment
• Transmission wheeling and loss charges
• Generator forced outages
• Contractual / tariff constraints
• Bid behavior
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
5
Key Assumptions
Base Case Assumptions
Assumption
#
Subcommittee
Consensus
Assumption Description
1
Inflation rate

2.5% applied to fuel and variable O&M
2
Transmission topology

3
Transmission path ratings &
nomograms
Transmission additions
X
32 bubble topology, as provided by the RMATS Transmissions Additions Team. See
page 8.
As modeled by SSG-WI. Need additional nomagram information and modeling data
for new paths.
New transmission includes what is defined in the WECC 2008 LS case, as validated
by SSG-WI and evaluated by the RMATS Transmissions Additions Team. Base case
provides minimal additional transmission with minimal capital expenditure.
As provided by RMATS Load Addition Work Group (LAWG), based on WECC 2003
Load Forecast with RMATS modifications for current load forecasts (post 2003 data
collection). See pages 9 and 10.
2008 US average wellhead set at $4.00 and $5.00 / MMBtu. Basis differential will
match the 5th NW Conservation and Electric Power Plan. See page 18.
4

5
RMATS regional loads and average
annual load growth

6
Gas prices
X
7
DSM

DSM will be handled by comparing load forecast scenarios with the assumption that
lower load growth will be representative of DSM additions.
8
Existing thermal plants

9
Resource additions

10
Thermal plant lives

Existing thermal plants as modeled in the SSG-WI base case. See pages 12, 13, 19,
and 20. Any excess capacity is exported.
Includes plants sponsored by entities that have the ability to secure the proper
permits, financing and construction, with more than half of the generation subscribed
and with a description of associated transmission. See page 11.
Plants assumed to remain in operation
11
Hydro plant lives

All plants operating throughout study
12
Maintenance outages

13
Generator cost curves

Same assumptions as SSG-WI study; based on the TCA cost benefit study for RTO
West. See page 20.
All generators by class and vintage are assumed to have similar cost curves
14
Renewable resources

As modeled by SSG-WI, with additions per RMATS Resources Team. See page 14.
15
Wind modeling
X
Assumptions consistent with SSG-WI Study. Wind shaping will be subject to
subsequent revision.
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
7
System “Balloon” Diagram
32 Bubbles
Alberta
B.C. Hydro
LOAD 6656
Loss
201
Gen
7056
SI
200
Aquila
LOAD 7534
Loss
394
Gen
8159
SI
231
LOAD 595
Loss
16
Gen
682
SI
70
MONT
West of
Broadview
Mont - NW
MPC
LOAD 19455
Loss
870
Gen
24939
SI
4614
MPC Wyo
IDAHO
Idaho Montana
Borah
West
Sierra
PG & E
Mdpt
Boise
& Snake
KGB
WYO
Bhill
s
JB West
JB
LOAD 4156
Loss
49
Gen
3424
SI
-781
Monmt Ngtn
UT
N
UTAH
SWF
LOAD 14113
Loss
318
Gen
8106
SI
-6326
SW
Wyo
LRS
TOT1A
Bonz
UT
S
IPP
Wyo
Tot - 4A
Flaming
Gorge
Tot - 2C
SOCOLIF
Tot - 4B
IPC Wyo
Path C
Nevada
LADWP
Ywtl
BHB
Gonder - IPP &
Pavant
LOAD 3978
Loss
442
Gen
2312
SI
-2109
West of
Colstrip
Yellowtail
South
LOAD 1197
Loss
31
Gen
1012
SI
-217
LOAD 16272
Loss
721
Gen
15316
SI
-1676
Crs
Ovr
& Colsp
Bdvw
Northwest
Miles
City DC
West of
Crossover
Tot - 3
Col
W
Bonanza West
COLO
Tot - 5
IPP - Mona
Col
E
Tot - 2B
Tot - 2A
New
Mexico
WAPA L.C.
ImperialCA
LOAD 140
Loss
103
Gen
2982
SI
2738
LOAD 476
Loss
20
Gen
684
SI
187
Sandiego
LOAD 3015
Loss
45
Gen
1529
SI
-1530
Arizona
LOAD 9873
Loss
277
Gen
11919
SI
1769
Tot 2 Combined is
Tot 2a & Tot 2b & Tot 2C
Mexico -C
LOAD 1537
Loss
35
Gen
1571
SI
-1
Legend
SI = SCHEDULED INTERCHANGE
ALL VALUES ARE GIVEN IN MW
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
LOAD 2571
Loss
119
Gen
2352
SI
-337
8
RMATS
2008 BASE CASE
October 14, 2003
RMATS
Loads by Western Interconnect Region- 2008
Based on 2003 Load Forecast
Annual GWh with Coincidental Summer & Winter Peaks (GW)
Mexico - CFE
NWPP-Canada
Summer: 2.5
Winter: 2.3
Summer: 16.6
Winter: 20.3
14,425
California
130,743
Summer: 58.4
Winter: 57.0
309,324
177,493
136,828
144,990
Summer: 23.4
Winter: 20.3
Summer: 29.3
Winter: 26.5
RMATS
Summer Peak: 156 GW
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
Summer: 25.9
Winter: 32.5
RMATS
AZ, NM & S. NV
Load: 913,803 GWh
NWPP-US
9
Loads by RMATS Area - 2008
Based on 2003 Load Forecast
Annual GWh with Non-Coincidental Summer & Winter Peaks (MW)
State
Colorado
Colorado
Idaho
Idaho
Montana
Montana
Montana
Utah
Utah
Utah
Utah
Wyoming
Wyoming
Wyoming
Wyoming
Wyoming
Wyoming
Wyoming
Total
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
Area
Colorado- East
Colorado- West
Goshen
Idaho- West
Broadview
Montana Power
West of Colstrip
Bonanza
IPP
Utah- North
Utah- South
Black Hills
Jim Bridger
Laramie River
Wyoming- Central
Wyoming- North
Wyoming- South
Yellow Tail
Summer Peak
(MW)
8,878
871
1,275
3,025
295
1,107
74
49
1
4,818
537
851
1
531
304
425
423
1
23,353
10
Winter
Peak
(MW)
7,920
913
1,144
2,401
299
1,120
74
46
1
3,705
424
835
1
520
298
474
409
1
20,311
Energy
(GWh)
52,311
5,834
6,123
15,015
1,875
7,033
469
289
8
26,801
2,922
5,674
8
3,761
2,111
3,446
3,140
8
136,828
RMATS
RMATS Resources Additions
Capacity
(MW)
Facility
Location
Technology
Springerville Expansion
Arizona
Coal
400
Nebo
Utah
Gas- CCCT
147
Currant Creek
Utah
Gas- CCCT
525
Bennett Mountain
Idaho
Gas- SCCT
167
Pleasant Valley
Wyoming
Wind
144
Additional Colorado Wind Capacity
Colorado
Wind
23
Total
1,406
2008 RMATS Resource Allocation
Other, 227
Geothermal, 23
Wind, 508
Hydro, 4,629
Coal, 16,896
Total Capacity
Gas, 7,741
30,024 MW
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
11
Generation Capacity by Fuel Type (MW)- 2008
100,000
80,000
MW
60,000
40,000
20,000
Coal
Gas
Hydro
Wind
Other
Geother
mal
Nuclear
Western Interconnect
37,712
81,566
65,724
2,958
2,508
2,069
9,262
RMATS
16,896
7,741
4,629
508
227
23
Fuel Type
WI Total:
201,799 MW
RMATS Total: 30,024 MW
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
RMATS
12
Capacity Factors By Fuel
Western Interconnect
RMATS
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
13
Renewable Resources
2008 Wind
Plant
Bus Name
Area
Albrt_Wd
AltmntWD
CO_Wind 1
CO_Wind 2
NM_Wind
NW_Wind
Plvy_Wind
SnGrgnWd
SolanoWd
Thch_Wd1
Thch_Wd2
Wy_Wind
Total MW
LANGDON2
TESLA
LAMAR CO
LAPORTE
BLACKWTR
MCNARY
RAILROAD
DEVERS
VACA-DIX
OMAR
ANTELOPE
MINERS
Alberta
PG & E
Colorado- East
Colorado- East
New Mexico
North West
Utah-North
So. Cal
PG & E
So. Cal
So. Cal
Wyoming- South
Capacity
(MW)
150
200
160
63
200
650
144
350
200
400
300
141
2,958
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
14
Hydro Generation Is Consistent with SSG-WI
Hydro Generation (GWH)
300,000
Rocky Mtn
AZ-NM
250,000
200,000
California
California
NW
Canada
NW
Canada
150,000
California
NW
Canada
NW US
100,000
NW US
NW US
50,000
0
Wet
Median
Dry
Sensitivity
(January)
Current
Run
Sensitivity
(January)
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
15
Western Interconnect - Net Position
Nameplate – Load (MW)
16,000
MW
12,000
8,000
4,000
AZ
,
NM
&
S.
N
Ca
l ifo
rn
ia
M
ex
ic
V
o
-C
NW
PP
FE
-C
NW
PP
an
ad
a
-U
RM
AT
S
S
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
16
(2,000)
17
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
il h
Ta ut
w So
lo
el g- rth
Y in
m N o al
yo tr
W ing en
m C
yo gW in e r
m iv
yo R
W ie
m r
ra ge
La rid
B
m lls
Ji Hi
ck u th
la
B - So
h rth
ta
U No
hta
U
(1,000)
P
p
IP za tr i
an ols
r
on C
B of we
t
o
es P
W na
ta
on w
M vie t
ad s
ro We
B
ot
ah
Id en es
W
h
os o- t
G rad a s
o -E
ol
C ad o
or
ol
C
MW
RMATS- Net Position
Nameplate – Load (MW)
3,000
2,000
1,000
-
(3,000)
(4,000)
RMATS
Gas Prices
RAWG Proposal
Average US Wellhead price
Wellhead w/Fuel use (4%)
Henry Hub-Wellhead w/fuel use
Base case assumptions:
Price
$ 4.00
4.16
4.28
Basis
$ 0.16
0.28
AECO
East-side PNW
Northern CA
Station 2
Sumas - PNW
West-side PNW
3.83
4.23
4.46
3.93
4.15
4.52
(0.17)
0.23
0.46
(0.07)
0.15
0.52
San Juan
CO - PSColorado
4.02
4.38
0.02
0.38
Rockies
UT-PACE
Wyoming
Montana
Idaho
N. NV-Sierra
3.88
4.23
4.28
4.21
4.23
4.57
(0.12)
0.23
0.28
0.21
0.23
0.57
Permian
Arizona
New Mexico
S. Nevada
CA Border
Southern CA
4.11
4.43
4.35
4.44
4.44
4.49
0.11
0.43
0.35
0.44
0.44
0.49

The 2008 US Average Wellhead will be set at $4.00 /
MMBtu and at $5.00 / MMBtu for a sensitivity

The basis differential will be set to match the 5th
Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan

Currently, 2008 Henry Hub Gas Future Price
$4.70/MMBtu range (nominal $)
Gas Price Forecasts (2008)
$6.00
$5.50
$5.00
$4.50
$4.00
$3.50
$3.00
rn
he
ut
So
V
N
S.
M
N
Z
A
V
.N
N
T
C
A
NYMEX
ID
50/50
M
T
U
W
PN
O
C ide
t-s W
es N
W -P
as A
m
Su rn C
e
W
th
or PN
N ide
s
se
st- b
Ea Hu el u ce
ry /fu pr i
en w
H ead ead
h
lh ell
el
W SW
U
ve
A
STEP
RMATS
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
18
Typical Thermal Resource Values Are Used
Per Generation Technology / Age
Fuel Type
Gas/Oil
Gas/Oil
Gas/Oil
Gas/Oil
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
Diesel
Gas/Oil
Technology
Steam
Steam
Steam
Steam
SCCT
CCCT
SCCT
SCCT
CCCT
Steam
Steam
Steam
Steam
Fluid Bed
CCCT
Size
<100 MW
>100 MW
<100 MW
>100 MW
<70 MW
>70 MW
<100 MW
>100 MW
<100 MW
>100 MW
Vintage
Pre 1960
Pre 1960
Post 1960
Post 1960
Pre 1985
Pre 1985
Post 1985
Post 1985
Post 1985
Pre 1960
Pre 1960
Post 1960
Post 1960
Heatrate VOM $/MWh
12,500
$5.00
11,500
$5.00
10,500
$5.00
9,500
$3.00
13,500
$8.00
9,300
$5.00
9,500
$5.00
10,500
$5.00
7,250
$2.00
12,000
$4.00
11,000
$2.00
11,000
$3.00
10,500
$2.00
10,500
$2.00
11,000
$12.00
7,000
$2.00
Post 2001
Note: - KLG Judgement
Peakers
Cycling plants
Aero-derivitives, Optimized for SC
Larger Units, Optimized for CC
Combined Cycles
For peakers, it is assumed that the
maintenance is deferred until a
set number of hours is reached.
Baseload plants are assumed to
be staffed & running.
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
19
Maintenance Outages
Values consistent with SSG-WI study
(% year, very approximate)
Combined Cycle
7%
CT
7%
Coal Plant
10%
Steam Oil/Gas
10%
Nuclear
12%
Geothermal
10%
Wind*
14%*
*Built into provided spread sheet that was provided to modelers
for hourly pattern. Most likely maintenance outages.
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
20
Draft Base Case Results
Draft Base Case Results
 Determined location of expected loads and resources
• “New” 2008 resources in RMATS are mostly gas-fired CCCTs in a region
where the dominant capacity by fuel type is coal
 Defined the boundaries of transmission usage and their associated
costs
• Area LMPs show transmission limitations and development opportunities.
•
See chart on page 24.
Top 5 congested paths:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Idaho – Montana
IPP DC line
TOT 2C
Combined PACI and PDCI
Brownlee East
See charts on pages 27-31
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
22
Draft Base Case Results (continued)
• Clearing prices seen in certain RMATS areas signal the need for increased
transmission to alleviate transmission congestion and levelize / stabilize the
prices: (See table on page 26)
– Lowest LMP for load average prices were at WAPA LC and Yellow Tail
– Lowest LMP for generator average prices were at WAPA LC, IPP, Bonanza, Utah
South, COw, BDVw, LRS
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
23
Idaho - Montana Duration Curve
Interface Flow
ID AHO - MONTANA
200
150
100
50
M W
0
-50
-100
-150
-200
-250
-300
-350
0
10
20
30
40
50
Time
60
70
80
90
100
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
24
IPP DC Duration Curve
Interface Flow
IP P DC LINE
2000
1500
M W
1000
500
-0
-500
0
10
20
30
40
50
Time
60
70
80
90
100
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
25
TOT 2C Duration Curve
Interface Flow
TOT 2C
300
200
M W
100
0
-100
-200
-300
0
10
20
30
40
50
Time
60
70
80
90
100
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
26
Combined PACI & PDCI Duration Curve
Interface Flow
Combined PACI & PDCI
7500
5000
M W
2500
0
-2500
-5000
0
10
20
30
40
50
Time
60
70
80
90
100
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
27
Brownlee Duration Curve
Interface Flow
BROWNLEE EAST
1750
1500
1250
M W
1000
750
500
250
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
Time
60
70
80
90
100
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
28
RMATS Interface Path Expansion Values
• “Expansion values” represent the value of the next MW of additional transmission
• “Expansion values” represent the value of the next MW of additional transmission
capacity
capacity
• Calculated as:
• Calculated as:
• The difference in marginal nodal / bus price at each end of the path
• The difference in marginal nodal / bus price at each end of the path
• Over a 1-year period (2004$)
• Over a 1-year period (2004$)
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
29
Base Case Next Steps
 RMATS participants to provide comments on
this draft
 Obtain additional information on nomograms
and new paths to monitor
 Get final consensus on transmission additions
 Finalize gas price assumptions
 Clarify wind shaping assumptions
 Run gas price, load and hydro sensitivities
(January)
 Finalize and present base case
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
30
Appendix
2008 LMP Prices
32 Bubbles
Clearing Prices $/MWH
Alberta
B.C. Hydro
LOAD 6656
Loss
201
Gen 7056
SI
200
Aquila
LOAD 7534
Loss
394
Gen 8159
SI
231
LOAD 595
Loss
16
Gen 682
SI
70
MONT
West of
Broadview
Mont - NW
MPC
LOAD 19455
Loss
870
Gen 24939
SI
4614
MPC Wyo
IDAHO
Idaho Montana
Borah
West
Sierra
PG & E
Mdpt
Boise
& Snake
WYO
Bhill
s
JB West
JB
LOAD 4156
Loss
49
Gen 3424
SI
-781
Monmt Ngtn
UT
N
UTAH
LOAD 14113
Loss
318
Gen 8106
SI
-6326
SW
Wyo
SWF
Tot - 4A
LRS
TOT1A
Bonz
UT
S
IPP
Wyo
Flaming
Gorge
Tot - 2C
SOCOLIF
Tot - 4B
IPC Wyo
Path C
Nevada
LADWP
Ywtl
BHB
Gonder - IPP &
Pavant
LOAD 3978
Loss
442
Gen 2312
SI
-2109
West of
Colstrip
Yellowtail
South
KGB
LOAD 1197
Loss
31
Gen 1012
SI
-217
LOAD 16272
Loss
721
Gen 15316
SI
-1676
Crs
Ovr
& Colsp
Bdvw
Northwest
Miles
City DC
West of
Crossover
Tot - 3
Col
W
Bonanza West
COLO
Tot - 5
IPP - Mona
Col
E
Tot - 2B
Tot - 2A
New
Mexico
WAPA L.C.
ImperialCA
LOAD 140
Loss
103
Gen 2982
SI
2738
LOAD 476
Loss
20
Gen 684
SI
187
Sandiego
LOAD 3015
Loss
45
Gen 1529
SI
-1530
LOAD 2571
Loss
119
Gen 2352
SI
-337
Arizona
LOAD 9873
Loss
277
Gen 11919
SI
1769
Tot 2 Combined is
Tot 2a & Tot 2b & Tot 2C
Area
NEW MEXI
ARIZONA
NEVADA
WAPA L.C
MEXICO-C
IMPERIAL
SANDIEGO
SOCALIF
LADWP
IPP
PG AND E
NORTHWES
B.C.HYDR
AQUILA
ALBERTA
IDAHO
YLW TL
MPC
SIERRA
WYO
SW WYO
BONZ
UT N
UT S
COL E
COL W
BHB
B HILL
LRS
JB
KGB
BDVW
CRSOVRCO
Load Avg
Price
$40.31
$39.94
$40.49
$39.69
$41.24
$42.18
$43.31
$43.46
$42.91
$0.00
$42.90
$41.28
$41.23
$41.22
$37.73
$41.34
$39.94
$40.47
$41.72
$40.35
$40.31
$40.42
$40.67
$40.53
$40.68
$39.95
$40.34
$40.38
$40.12
$0.00
$41.22
$40.58
$40.60
Gen Avg
Price
$39.42
$39.27
$40.29
$39.78
$40.83
$42.62
$42.31
$44.46
$46.37
$39.95
$43.15
$40.95
$41.52
$40.43
$37.56
$40.23
$41.38
$40.06
$41.35
$39.98
$40.38
$39.66
$40.71
$39.92
$40.65
$39.53
$0.00
$40.07
$39.74
$40.34
$41.22
$39.94
$40.27
Mexico -C
LOAD 1537
Loss
35
Gen 1571
SI
-1
RMATS
Legend
SI = SCHEDULED INTERCHANGE
2008 BASE CASE
October 14, 2003
ALL VALUES ARE GIVEN IN MW
RMATS
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
32
Western Interconnect Expansion Values
Interface
SILVER PEAK - CONTROL 55 KV
WOR - PV to Devers
WOR -n- El Dor to Lugo
ALBERTA - BRITISH COLUMBIA
IDAHO - MONTANA
North of Miguel
SOUTHERN NEW MEXICO (NM1)
IPP DC LINE
INYO - CONTROL 115 KV TIE
TOT 2C
PAVANT, INTRMTN - GONDER 230 KV
Combined PACI & PDCI
BROWNLEE EAST
COI
Southern CA Imports
BRIDGER WEST
TOT 5
TOT 3
NORTHWEST - CANADA
ARIZONA - CALIFORNIA
TOT 7
CA INDEPENDENT - MEXICO (CFE)
PG&E - SPP
NW to Canada, East BC
EOR - HASSYAMP- N.GILA
INTERMOUNTAIN - MONA 345 KV
NORTHERN - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
PACIFIC DC INTERTIE (PDCI)
PATH C
Path 15 Borah W Summer
MONTANA - NORTHWEST
BONANZA WEST
Tot 2a, 2b, 2c Nomogram
BILLINGS - YELLOWTAIL
Imp.Valley to Miguel
TOT 2B2
TOT 2A
TOT 4B
BORAH WEST
MIDPOINT - SUMMER LAKE
NORTH OF SAN ONOFRE
IDAHO - NORTHWEST
SOUTHWEST OF FOUR CORNERS
TOT 1A
Rev Limit
-17
-9999
-9999
-720
-337
-9999
-1048
-1400
-56
-300
-235
-9999
-9999
-3675
-15200
-9999
-9999
-9999
-3150
-9999
-9999
-800
-150
-400
-9999
-1200
-3000
-3100
-1000
-9999
-1350
-9999
-1600
-400
-9999
-300
-9999
-9999
-9999
-400
-9999
-1200
-9999
-9999
Fwd
Limit
17
1550
2754
700
337
2000
1048
1920
56
300
440
7300
1750
4800
15200
2200
1675
1424
2000
5700
890
408
160
400
1273
1400
3400
3100
1000
9999
2200
785
1570
400
1560
265
690
680
2307
1500
2440
2400
2325
650
Average
Flow
Minimum
Flow
-4
1441
2266
510
-67
1606
885
1670
-30
21
352
3032
821
1847
13283
1799
1108
814
-377
4898
528
61
1
23
867
-300
231
-1266
188
1088
1321
337
-159
20
1291
9
-150
237
1476
537
1214
498
1203
80
-17
179
-508
-720
-337
411
293
-821
-57
-300
7
-4510
-82
-3555
2488
891
-966
-521
-3150
-270
-257
-727
-150
-400
-76
-1200
-3000
-3100
-750
-88
-41
-405
-1600
-391
296
-230
-947
-269
-74
-400
-592
-1200
-293
-787
Maximum
Flow
17
1550
2754
700
191
2000
1048
1920
25
300
440
7300
1750
4800
15200
2200
1675
1424
2000
5700
890
408
160
400
1273
1400
3400
3100
913
1816
2200
785
1570
400
1560
265
690
680
2307
1500
2440
1962
2325
650
Rev Direction
Fwd Direction
Total Expansion
Expansion Costs Expansion Costs Value
$77,829
$386
$78,215
$0
$68,801
$68,801
$0
$38,984
$38,984
$1,700
$30,974
$32,674
$30,558
$0
$30,558
$0
$12,951
$12,951
$0
$10,166
$10,166
$0
$8,639
$8,639
$8,000
$0
$8,000
$4,852
$2,846
$7,698
$0
$6,981
$6,981
$0
$6,178
$6,178
$0
$5,458
$5,458
$0
$3,077
$3,077
$0
$2,941
$2,941
$0
$2,871
$2,871
$0
$2,655
$2,655
$0
$2,134
$2,134
$14
$1,932
$1,946
$0
$1,706
$1,706
$0
$1,613
$1,613
$0
$1,523
$1,523
$1,334
$116
$1,450
$843
$540
$1,383
$0
$1,140
$1,140
$952
$135
$1,087
$44
$886
$930
$781
$28
$809
$27
$565
$592
$0
$471
$471
$0
$260
$260
$0
$252
$252
$252
$0
$252
$0
$237
$237
$0
$154
$154
$0
$117
$117
$0
$69
$69
$0
$64
$64
$0
$40
$40
$37
$0
$37
$0
$20
$20
$20
$0
$20
$0
$18
$18
$0
$10
$10
Yellow highlighting indicates RMATS interfaces
RMATS
All monetary amounts in nominal 2004 $
Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case
33