1. DRAFT Installed Capacity Requirement (ICR) and Related Values for the 2014/15 Forward Capacity Auction (FCA5) Maria Agustin

2. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 2 Objective of this Presentation Present the ISO New England recommended Installed Capacity Requirement (ICR), Local Sourcing Requirements (LSR) and Maximum Capacity Limit (MCL) for the 2014/15 Capacity Commitment Period. Share the results of ICR scenarios studied. Review load, capacity and transmission assumptions used to simulate the New England bulk power supply system for calculating the ICR and Related Values, if necessary.

3. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 3 2014/15 ICR Schedule PSPC review of assumptions – Oct 28 - Dec 9, 2010 PSPC review of ISO recommendation of ICR values – Jan 6 &13, 2011 RC review/vote of ISO recommendation of ICR values – Jan 18, 2011 PC review/vote of ISO recommendation of ICR values – Feb 4, 2011 File with the FERC – by Mar 4, 2011 FCA5 – Jun 6, 2011

4. DRAFT ICR Scenarios of Tie Benefits Case 1: ISO Proposed Methodology with New Brunswick import at 700 MW and Cross-Sound Cable (CSC) at 0 MW and internal constraints modeled Case 2: ISO Proposed Methodology with New Brunswick import at 1,000 MW and CSC at 330 MW and internal constraints modeled Case 3: Existing Tie Benefits Methodology with New Brunswick import at 1,000 MW and CSC at 330 MW; no internal constraints modeled © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 4

5. DRAFT Why these Scenarios were Chosen Case 1 represents the methodology filed at the FERC with New Brunswick & CSC interfaces modeled with their import capability as determined by recent ISO Transmission Planning studies Case 2 represents the methodology filed at the FERC but noting that protests may be filed to model the New Brunswick & CSC interfaces at 1,000 MW & 330 MW Case 3 represents the existing tie benefits methodology in the event that the FERC requires additional time to review the proposed Tie Benefits Calculation Methodology © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 5

6. DRAFT ISO Proposed ICR Values The ISO proposes the ICR and Related Values associated with the Case 1 Scenario for the 2014/2015 FCA. These values reflect the tie benefits that are calculated according to the methodology that was filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on December 30, 2010. For a copy of the FERC filing, please see: http://www.iso-ne.com/regulatory/ferc/filings/2010/dec/er11-2580-000_12-30-10_tie_benefits.pdf © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 6

7. DRAFT ISO Recommended ICR and Related Values (MW) for 2014/2015 * Total Resources for New England excludes HQICCs © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 7

8. DRAFT Comparison of ICR Values (MW) - FCA5 Versus FCA4 © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 8 * Total Resources for New England excludes HQICCs

9. DRAFT Effect on ICR of Assumptions © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 9

10. DRAFT ICR Scenarios © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 10 ALCC is the Additional Load Carrying Capability used to bring the system to the 0.1 Reliability Criterion.

11. DRAFT LRA/MCL Load Zone Determination LRA and MCL has only been calculated for the three load zones which have previously been identified as import or export constrained. © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 11

12. DRAFT LRA Scenarios - Connecticut © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 12

13. DRAFT LRA Scenarios –NEMA/Boston © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 13

14. DRAFT LSR for Connecticut & NEMA/Boston Zones LSR is set by the TSA, which is higher than the LRA for both Connecticut and NEMA/Boston Zones Connecticut –LRA = 7,434 MW –TSA = 7,478 MW –LSR = 7,478 MW NEMA/Boston –LRA = 2,549 MW –TSA = 3,046 MW –LSR = 3,046 MW © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 14

15. DRAFT MCL Scenarios – Maine © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 15

16. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 16 Questions?

17. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 17 Assumptions for the ICR Calculation for the 2014/15 FCA

18. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 18 Modeling the New England Control Area The New England ICR are calculated using the GE MARS model –Internal transmission constraints are not modeled. All loads and resources are assumed to be connected to a single electric bus. –Internal transmission constraints are addressed through Local Sourcing Requirements and Maximum Capacity Limits.

19. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 19 Assumptions for the 2014/15 ICR Load Forecast –Load Forecast distribution Resource Data –Existing Qualified Generating Capacity Resources –Existing Qualified Intermittent Power Capacity Resources –Existing Qualified Import Capacity Resources and Known Sales –Existing Qualified Demand Resources (DR) Resource Availability –Generating Resources Availability –Intermittent Power Resources Availability –Demand Resources Availability Load Relief from OP 4 Actions –Tie Reliability Benefits HQICCs Maritimes New York –5% Voltage Reduction

20. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 20 Load Forecast Data Load forecast assumption from the 2010 CELT Report Load Forecast The load forecast weather related uncertainty is represented by specifying a series of multipliers on the peak load and the associated probabilities of each load level occurring –derived from the 52 weekly peak load distributions described by the expected value (mean), the standard deviation and the skewness.

21. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 21 Load Forecast Data – New England System Load Forecast Probability Distribution of Annual Peak Load (MW) Monthly Peak Load (MW) – 50/50 Forecast There is a distribution associated with each monthly peak. The distribution associated with the Summer Seasonal Peak (July & August) is show below:

22. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 22 Resource Data – Existing Qualified Generating Capacity Resources (MW) Winter Generation values shown for informational purposes, only summer values are modeled. Intermittent Resources have both summer and winter values modeled.

23. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 23 Resource Data – Existing Qualified Import Capacity Resources Imports modeled with tie line forced outage rates of 3% for HQ Phase II, 1 % for Highgate and 0% for New York ties. Total EFORd is the weighted average using the Summer Capacity. The VJO contracts are modeled with delist bids to reflect the value of the firm contract. MRI III.12.7.2(c) states that all Existing Import Capacity Resources backed by a multiyear contract to provide capacity in the New England Control Area shall be modeled in the ICR calculation

24. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 24 Resource Data – Known Sales (MW) Modeled as removed capacity from the resource supplying the export.

25. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 25 Resource Data – Existing Qualified Demand Resources (MW) The DR capacity modeled in the ICR is the Summer Existing Qualified DR Capacity by Load Zone for FCA5. The Qualified Capacity rating of DR includes the Transmission and Distribution (T&D) Loss Adjustment (Gross-up) of 8%.

26. DRAFT Resource Data Used in the LRA Calculation (MW) © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 26

27. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 27 Availability Assumptions - Generating Resources Forced Outages Assumption –Each generating units Equivalent Forced Outage Rate on Demand (non-weighted EFORd) modeled –Based on a 5-year average (September 2005 – August 2010) of generator submitted Generation Availability Data System (GADS) data –NERC GADS Class average data will be used for immature units Scheduled Outage Assumption –Each generating unit weeks of Maintenance modeled –Based on a 5-year average (September 2005 – August 2010) of each generators actual historical average of planned and maintenance outages scheduled at least 14 days in advance –NERC GADS Class average data will be used for immature units

28. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 28 Availability Assumptions - Generating Resources Assumed summer MW weighted EFORd and Maintenance Weeks are shown by resource category for informational purposes. In the LOLE simulations, individual unit values are modeled.

29. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 29 Availability Assumptions - Intermittent Power Resources Intermittent Power Resources are modeled as 100% available since their outages have been incorporated in their 5-year historical output used in their ratings determination.

30. DRAFT Availability Assumptions - Demand Resources DR Performance analysis calculated for the FCA4 ICR Applied to Existing Qualified DR for FCA5 © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 30

31. DRAFT Transmission Interface Limits Modeled in LRA © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 31 CT Import updated to reflect the impact of the Greater Springfield Reliability Project Boston Import does not reflect the permanent de-list of the Salem Harbor station Maine-New Hampshire transfer limit does not reflect the impact of the Maine Power Reliability Project as it has not been certified to be in-service prior to FCA5

32. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 32 OP 4 Assumptions - Tie Reliability Benefits Modeled with Forced Outage assumptions of 3% for Québec, 1% for Maritimes, and 0% for New York due to tie line availability.

33. DRAFT OP 4 Assumptions - Action 6 and 8 Voltage Reduction (MW) 1.5% OP 4 Appendix A assumption developed by ISO Operations Calculated as (Peak Load MW – Passive DR MW) * 1.5% © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 33

34. DRAFT Tie Benefit Scenarios Summary of ICR Resources (Summer MW) © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 34 Notes: Generating Resources is the summer Qualified Capacity values. Intermittent Power Resources have both the summer and winter capacity values modeled. Demand Resources is the Summer Qualified value which includes the Transmission & Distribution gross-up. Import Resources are modeled with the value of the firm VJO contract reflected. OP 4 Voltage Reduction includes both Action 6 and Action 8 MW assumptions. Minimum Operating Reserve of 200 MW is the minimum Operating Reserve requirement for transmission system security.

35. DRAFT © 2011 ISO New England Inc. 35 Questions?