1. Economic Planning Study June 23, 2014

2. In this presentation  Major changes from last meeting  Results: 2010, 2014, 2019  Finish analyst  Next steps  Other Modeling Issues

3.  Transmission expansion to accommodate 2019 and 2024 have been added  Modeling of Pump Storage was configured in the same manor as the WECC 2024 case  Final WECC modeling will be based on CG 2010 backcast  Helms and Castaic PS are modeled with staged full cycle efficiencies  Hydro Assumptions:  2014: In CA only used 2001 Hydro for PLF/HTC units  2019 Plus: Used WECC 2024 Hydro assumptions Major Changes

4. Key drivers for back cast: Lowered Colstrip effective fuel cost Generation at Colstrip and flow on Path 80 impact this Path Backcast – Path 8

5. Backcast – Path 65 & 66 Difference in PDCI from 2010 actual 0618b -86 aMW 0502a 14 aMW Difference in COI from 2010 actual  0618b: 262 aMW  0502a: 84 aMW

6. Difference from 2010 actual 0618b: 176 aMW 0502a: 98 aMW Backcast – Path 65 & 66 PDCI+COI

7. Reduction in PNW Exports to CA from 2010 backcast: 2014: -668 aMW 2019: -1,367 aMW Forecast – Path 65/66 PDCI+COI Incremental change in export Winter: Load shape driven No major impact to Apr & May A late spring run-off cost be an issue in the PNW By 2019 a -2,000 aMW drop in Jul-Sep

8. Forecast – Path 65/66 PDCI+COI Observation Preriod: March Min export hour at 7 am A distinct morning and afternoon ramp shifts to a prolong afternoon ramp Observation Period: April Min export hour 7-8 am 2010 Backcast has a morning ramp to 1,500 MW and a afternoon ramp of 1,000 MW

9. Forecast – Path 65/66 PDCI+COI Observation Period: August Lower water availability moves the min export hour to 9-10 am Observation Period: October 2014 and 2019 miss the CA morning peak then ramps up ~1,400 MW for the afternoon peak

10.  Incorporate feedback  Locked phase angle to model Phase Angle Regulation (PAR)  Include CA AB32 import cost in 2019  Include current hurdle rate from backcast?  Determine why uneconomical units running (Clark CC)?  CFE: Maintain 2010 load into future years?  Alberta too? Finish Analyst

11.  Recommended Starting Point  Start with CG current 2019  Implement AB 32  Retire CA OTC with LMS and quick start CC  Include other re-power projects  Do we use WECC’s latest renewable shapes?  Develop scope of study Next Step

12. Other Modeling Issues

13.  Review WECC 2024 Hydro operations  WECC 2024: Pancake Wheeling  Hydro Modeling in GridView  Modeling issues: Load – Wind – Solar  Compare average hourly weekday flow to CA on COI + PDCI

14.  Posted 2024 hourly Hydro operation for all Hydro in WECC  Posted on CG Web site for this meeting  Note size of spreadsheet 135 MB  Review Hydro Operation  If you have any concerns please address them to me Review WECC Hydro Modeling

15. Hydro Review Dash Board

16.  Currently WECC 2024 base case is using OASIS tariff rate as an exit fee from BAs  The exception: A Palo Verde (working) and MidC Hub (to do) is modeled without an exit fee WECC Pancake Wheeling RTC aMWPath 8COI+ PDCI WORNet CA Actual 20101,3412,6375,0337,670 w/Pancaking9831,9184,3696,287 w/o Pancaking1,2102,3774,8677,244 Impact of Pancaking -227 -19% -459 -19% -498 -10% -957 -13% Impact to CA with $5/MMBtu gas and a 8.0 Market Implied HR $335 M/year A billion dollars every three years

17.  Modeling Hydro in GridView:  Fixed Hourly shape  Proportion Load Following (PLF)  Hydro-Thermal Coordination (HTC)  Both PLF and HTC use a load shape to dispatch against. We have to primary options:  Load: Regional load  Load – Wind – Solar: Regional load – fixed hourly shapes Hydro Modeling in GridView

18. March 2024 The use of “Load – Wind – Solar” significant change in hourly generation Hourly gen below 922 MW (110% of min capacity= 838 MW): LD: 37 hours (Off-Peak) LD-Wind-Solar: 142 (Both On and Off-Peak) Increase volatility in daily generation as seen in the following table: Issues with Load – Wind - Solar

19. Conceptually we know Hydro will be dispatched with wind and solar generation taken into consideration Concern: The daily change in generation with the use Load – Wind – Solar will exceed discretionary operating range for power generation? –If we use Load – Wind - Solar: Does GridView need a daily generation limits when allocating Hydro energy within a month? –Recommend: “Min Daily Gen” and “Max Daily Gen” as a percent of monthly average daily generation. If so, what’s a reasonable operating range?  What method should we use? Issue with Load – Wind - Solar

20.  From WECC 2024 model: Average hourly weekday export from PNW on COI + PDCI and hourly LMP by month  Spreadsheet is posted on CG Web site for this meeting  Can the PNW Hydro be operated in this manor? Will PNW Shape Exp to CA Note: The WECC dataset need additional work (Version 0.002)

21.  Review WECC 2024 modeled results  Direct your concerns to Kevin Harris  Pancake wheeling: Contact WECC directly is you want to state you opinion  What method should we use in Hydro dispatch: “Load” or “Load – Wind – Solar”?  Your thoughts on hourly shape of PNW export to CA Open Questions

22. Questions? Kevin Harris harris@columbiagrid.org (503) 943-4932 Paul Didsayabutra didsayabutra@columbiagrid.org (503) 943-4956

23. Appendix

24. Proportional Load Following (PLF): –Dispatches Hydro against a proportional load shape based on the user set “K Load Following” Hydro-Thermal Coordination (HTC): –PLF is preformed first –Hourly prices for HTC are the previous days prices –Preference price is the median price –Up to 50% of the daily energy can be re-dispatch based on preference price –The re-dispatch is based on HTC method: Rectangle: Up/Down scalar are constant for all scaled hours Triangle method: Up/down scalars are proportional to the relative change of hourly clearing price to the preference price –User set “P Value” controls the magnitude of the change Hydro Modeling in GridView