Skip to content

Revise transmission mappings#5263

Open
krivard wants to merge 34 commits into
mainfrom
revise-transmission-mappings
Open

Revise transmission mappings#5263
krivard wants to merge 34 commits into
mainfrom
revise-transmission-mappings

Conversation

@krivard

@krivard krivard commented May 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Overview

Closes #4658

(really: brings #4859 into main)

What problem does this address?

@dd921 contributed a nice PR mapping supporting_structure_type free-form text to enums in #4859, but the mappings themselves needed a little QA zhuzh before we could deploy them in PUDL.

What did you change?

Changes from #4859, plus:

  • ferc1 package data: supporting_structure_*_categories.yml files updated with remaps from @zaneselvans and me (catalysters can view the extensive worksheet we used for labeling & analysis)
  • FERC1 data source documentation updated with description of how the maps were generated, the design decisions we made, the weird edge cases we found, and remaining mysteries

Documentation

Make sure to update relevant aspects of the documentation:

  • Update the release notes: reference the PR and related issues.
  • Update relevant Data Source jinja templates (see docs/data_sources/templates).
  • Review and update any other aspects of the documentation that might be affected by this PR.

Testing

How did you make sure this worked? How can a reviewer verify this?

  • Materialized out_ferc1__yearly_transmission_lines_sched422 and ancestors and verified no* uncategorized values warning appeared
  • pixi run docs-build and view results

* okay it appears but the only values it flags are the empty string and the literal n/a so that seems fine actually

To-do list

  • Run pixi run prek-run to run linters and static code analysis checks.
  • Run pixi run pytest-ci locally to ensure that the merge queue will accept your PR.
  • Review the PR yourself and call out any questions or issues you have.
  • For PRs that change the PUDL outputs significantly, run the full ETL locally and then run the data validations using dbt. If you can't run the ETL locally then run the build-deploy-pudl GitHub Action manually and ensure that it succeeds.

@krivard krivard moved this from New to In progress in Catalyst Megaproject May 20, 2026
Comment on lines +329 to +332
FUEL_CATEGORIES: dict[str, Path] = {
"categories": Path(
importlib.resources.files("pudl.package_data.ferc1") / "fuel_categories.yaml"
)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

using explicit Path() here makes all these yaml categories entries consistent, but only the SUPPORTING_STRUCTURE ones are new in this PR

"""

PLANT_TYPE_CATEGORIES_HYDRO: dict[str, set[str]] = {
PLANT_TYPE_CATEGORIES_HYDRO: dict[str, dict[str, set[str]]] = {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

unrelated opportunistic type hint correction

Comment thread src/pudl/metadata/fields.py Outdated
Normalize column descriptions
@krivard krivard self-assigned this May 20, 2026
@krivard krivard added the ferc1 Anything having to do with FERC Form 1 label May 20, 2026
zaneselvans and others added 3 commits May 20, 2026 14:25
* Set up a devcontainer for PUDL.

* Simplify devcontainer pixi tasks

* Add devcontainer section to dev_setup docs

* Update devcontainer docs and release notes

* Remove unnecessary setup in postCreateCommand

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Kathryn Mazaitis <1158666+krivard@users.noreply.github.com>

* Make coding agent usage of devcontainer obvious in docs

---------

Co-authored-by: Kathryn Mazaitis <1158666+krivard@users.noreply.github.com>
@krivard krivard marked this pull request as ready for review May 20, 2026 18:26
Comment on lines +158 to +161
.. _ferc-structure-type-material:

Supporting Structure Types & Materials
--------------------------------------

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@zaneselvans looking especially for feedback on the source docs below; does this feel like it will give data users enough information to decide whether to use our type & materials columns vs doing that handling themselves? is it too much information?

i had originally planned to put the regexes in here too but chickened out (they are perhaps unsurprisingly not super legible). what do you think?

@krivard krivard requested a review from zaneselvans May 20, 2026 18:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ferc1 Anything having to do with FERC Form 1

Projects

Status: In progress

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Standardize FERC 1 transmission (Schedule 422) supporting_structure_type column

3 participants