Study Results California In-State Net-Short California Out-State Net-Short California Out-State Net-Short w SWIP N This slide deck contains results from the 2011 TEPPC Study Program. This study shows the results of moving renewable resources inside and outside of California and there transmission impacts.

2022 PC2 In-State CA RPS Net-Short Sensitivity Central Question: What is the impact on transmission congestion and generation dispatch of replacing out-of-state resources assumed in the California (CA) renewable resource portfolio in the 2022 Common Case with additional in-state resources? Change to starting input assumptions: Loads – None Transmission System – None Generation – 6,201 GWh of out-of-state CA RPS resources replaced by in-state renewables

2022 Common Case In-state vs. Out-of-state CA Net-short Resources Net short calculation: RPS requirement (33% of eligible retail sales) = 88,268 GWh less Existing renewables as of 12/31/2010 = 42,826 GWh Net short = 45,442 GWh In-state net-short resources = 33,889 GWh, or 74% of total net-short resources

Strategy for Removing Out-of-State Resources Utilized CA CPUC modified cost-constrained resource stack Did not adjust TEPPC under-construction resources Did not adjust CPUC discounted core resources Resulting out-of-state resources replaced: 1,787 MW for 6,201 GWh New in-state/out-of-state split by energy: 87%/13% Net Zero

Strategy for Adding In-state RPS Resources Utilized CA CPUC modified cost-constrained resource stack Selected only in-state resources Portfolio mix of additional in-state resources: 1,078 MW for 6,201 GWh Net Zero

Resulting Load/Generation Balance Out-of-state CA RPS resources removed from analysis, replaced by additional in-state RPS resources No deficits resulted Load Gen

2022 CA In-State Net Short Results – Changes in Total Annual Generation No change in CO2 No change in production cost

2022 CA In-State Net Short Results – Changes in Generation by State Removed (wind)

Small change in Region-to-Region Transfers

Small Changes to CA Imports/Exports

Small Changes in Transmission Utilization Most Heavily Utilized Paths Increases in U90 Relative to Common >5% Case Indicated in Red P01 Alberta-British Columbia P03 Northwest-British Columbia P08 Montana to Northwest P11 West of Crossover P10 West of Colstrip P29 Intermountain-Gonder P27 IPP DC Line P60 Inyo-Control P26 Northern-Southern California P61 Lugo-Victorville *NEW* P47 – Southern New Mexico P45 SDG&E-CFE

2011 Study Program Results PC2 In-State CA RPS Net-Short Sensitivity Questions? Focus of plan will be on common case. Spend time on it here.

2022 PC3 Out-of-State CA RPS Net-Short Sensitivity Central Question: What is the impact on transmission congestion and generation dispatch of replacing in-state resources assumed in the California (CA) renewable resource portfolio in the 2022 Common Case with additional out-of-state resources? Change to starting input assumptions: Loads – None Transmission System – None Generation – 11,168 GWh of in-state CA RPS resources replaced by out-of-state renewables

Strategy for Identifying In-state RPS Resources to Replace Utilized CA CPUC modified cost-constrained resource stack Did not adjust TEPPC under-construction resources Did not adjust CPUC discounted core resources Resulting in-state resources that could have been replaced: 4,720 MW for 15,709 GWh 11,168 GWh (3,265 MW) of resources shifted for an in-state/out-of-state split (by energy) of 50%/50% More than in-state sensitivity (still net zero though)

Strategy for Identifying Additional Out-of-state RPS Resources to Add Utilized CA CPUC modified cost-constrained resource stack Select only out-of-state resources Portfolio mix of additional out-of-state resources: 4,710 MW for 11,168 GWh Net Zero Deliverability of Resources Assume all unbundled RECs have already been spoken for in the CPUC cases, and all firming/shaping has been taken advantage of Deliverability assumptions for incremental out-of-state resources (OOS): Assume resources are scheduled into CA or dynamically transferred directly to CA Incremental OOS resources are assigned to a CA load area so that the resources will count towards CA’s load/generation balance during PROMOD’s commitment and dispatch steps Transmission has been added to assist in the deliverability (SWIP N and TransWest in two separate cases; PC3b and PC3c)

Resulting Load/Generation Balance In-state CA RPS resources removed from analysis, replaced by additional out-of-state RPS resources No deficits resulted Load Gen

2022 CA OOS Net Short Results – Changes in Total Annual Generation ? 18% increase in dump energy No change to co2 or production cost

Observed Large Generation Shift

Significant Changes in Region to Region Transfers w/ SWIP N. More imports into California generally makes sense CA N to S – On next slide as Path 26

Observed Key Changes in Transmission Utilization Most Heavily Utilized Paths Increases in U90 Relative to Common >5% Case Indicated in Red P01 Alberta-British Columbia P03 Northwest-British Columbia P08 Montana to Northwest P11 West of Crossover P10 West of Colstrip SWIP N P66 COI *NEW* P29 Intermountain-Gonder P27 IPP DC Line P60 Inyo-Control P26 Northern-Southern California P47 – Southern New Mexico P45 SDG&E-CFE

SWIP North Utilization COI 837 aMW 42% Average Utilization (2,000 MW limit) More transfers from NW into Idaho

Questions or thoughts on this study?