1 R Phase I Resource Adequacy Workshop presentation March 30, am to 5 pm California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Ave San Francisco, CA Courtyard Room and WebEx Copies of the agenda are available in the back of the room Restrooms are at the other end of the auditorium, and there is a cafeteria near the main lobby.

2 WebEx information Meeting Number: Meeting Password: energy Go to link: S=MI&LD=1&RD=2&ST=1&SHA2=jySO1w0aAEvT0JNZp wIlHls-8gplxNEy1QZi8HJDD/w=&RT=MiM0 Teleconference information: participant passcode:

Purpose: Record Building –Presentations will be added to record –Parties can comment on this presentation in their April 9, 2012 comments 3

4 Introductions and Agenda 10:00 am -10:30 am - Introductions and announcements. 10:30 am – 12:00 noon – Energy Division Proposal o Gross Load versus Net Load o Inter-hour change o Statistical representation of “typical day” o Bucket percentages o Characterization of current fleet – bucket definitions o Question/Answer 12:00 noon – 1:15 pm – Lunch

Cont. 1:15 pm – 2:45 pm – Further explanation of CAISO Proposal o CAISO Presentation o Question/Answer 2:45 pm – 3:00 pm – Break 3:00 pm – 4:15 pm – Additional Issues o Resource Adequacy for Distributed Generation o RPS/RA coordination o Question/Answer 5

Cont. 4:15 pm – 4:45 pm – Questions and wrap-up o Next Steps o Comment Schedule o Overall Question/Answer 6

7 Dates, 2012Phase I proceeding Schedule Jan 13Parties file proposals on Phase 1 issues; Energy Division issues staff proposals on Phase 1 issues Jan 26-27Energy Division workshops March 3CAISO publishes draft 2013 LCR report March 23Energy Division workshop report March 30Energy Division Workshop April 9Parties file comments based on Energy Division workshop report, except for LCR study issues. Deadline for requesting evidentiary hearing. April 20Parties file reply comments MayCAISO publishes final 2013 LCR Report May 7Comments on final 2013 LCR Report filed with Commission May 14Reply comments on final 2013 LCR Report filed MayProposed decision issued by ALJ

Energy Division Proposal – Recap of where we are Redesign of MCC Buckets – current structure insufficient going forward Differentiate and limit based on dispatchability and consistent hours of operation Definitions – dispatchability, consistent hours of operation Analysis to set percentages – daily and hourly load variation, not load duration curves Impact of intermittent generation on interhour change in load Several open issues – definitions, classification of resources, how to set percentages 8

Revised proposal – supplemented information Definition of dispatchability Bucket percentages – set relative to analysis on patterns of hourly load change and impact of wind generation on interhour change Breakdown of current fleet – limits on current resources 9

Definition of Dispatchability Dispatchability – three characteristics –Ramp rate over 4 MW/min –Registered cooling time of less than one day or minimum start up time of less than 10 hours –Unit has contractual obligation to be available for CAISO dispatch –Individual unit specifications (ramp rate, registered cooling time, start up time) are confidential, but dispatchability is a binary question, and can possibly be noted as such for NQC list. Confirmation from legal staff required 10

Hours of consistent production This is a qualitative metric, and is technology specific, not drawn from data. There is some room to dispute classification Broadly speaking, some steam units, nuclear units, and solar units have relatively stable and long generation profiles, while peakers, DR, and wind do not. Resources are either erratic or limited to a few hours in the day. 11

Notation on NQC list Two new fields to be added – Dispatchability and consistent production. Units count at NQC, there is only one number for each resource, and NQC is still calculated under current rules. Classifications can be appealed and discussed with ED staff – same as process for NQC calculations. 12

Bucket Percentages Bucket 1 – analysis of Gross Load versus Net Load Bucket 2 versus Bucket 3 – Analysis of hourly baseload versus flexible percentages as they differ each month – recommend percentages for buckets that are stable throughout the year, not monthly 13

Gross Load versus Net Load Gross Load – hourly load from 2009 and 2010, months of April, May, July, August, and October. Load data drawn from CAISO OASIS system. Net Load – Gross Load adjusted for corresponding hourly generation from wind facilities. Wind generation taken from CAISO settlement quality meter data, and is confidential. 14

Steps to Analysis –creation of “Typical” shapes Create 3 shapes for each month and each year (2009 and 2010) –Average –Median –90 th percentile 9 shapes created overall for each month. Compare interhour change in Gross Load and interhour change in Net Load curves 9 more shapes created from interhour change data. 15

Steps to Analysis – Interhour change shapes Create shapes for interhour change in Typical day –HE2 – HE1 = interhour change from HE1 to HE2 –Interhour change in Gross Load minus interhour change in Net Load = change in interhour change due to added wind affects. This calculation done for each hour of each day of each month Create 3 shapes for 2009 (30 days of data) and 3 more shapes for 2010 data (30 days of data for each month). Create 3 shapes for composite date (60 days of data). 9 total shapes created. 16

Difference in Interhour Change Created 9 curves to represent a “typical” amount of difference in Interhour change between Gross Load and Net Load values. 17

August –average, median, 90 th percentile 18

Base load versus Peaking needs 19

Results of Analysis – walk through August is peakiest month Flexible needs highest in August “Typical” needs run at 45% of peak Percentage represents ratio of lowest value in month (10 th percentile for all month) divided by the highest hourly value (90 th percentile for each hour of day) to create an hourly flexibility needs curve 20

Current NQC list Ramp rate/startup time quantitative analysis Technology based qualitative analysis Breakdown of NQC list 21

Breakdown of current fleet – from 2012 NQC List 22 Bucket Name Resources in each bucket * NQC of each bucket in the fleet (MW) Percentage of total NQC of the fleet 4 Combined Cycle Gas Turbines, Geothermal, Pumped Storage, Firm Imports26,47852% 3 Nuclear Plants, Solar facilities, Combined Heat and Power, Steam Turbines11,17022% 2 Combustion Turbines, Demand Response, Energy Storage, Dispatchable Hydro13,36826% 1 Wind, Run-of-river Hydro1,0152% TotalAugust 2012 Net Qualifying Capacity List51,079

Other topics for the day Resource Adequacy for Distributed Generation RPS/RA coordination 23

24 Thank you! For Additional Information: Megha Lakhchaura Donald Brooks Procurement and Resource Adequacy Phone: (415) (415)