1. Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba Energy Project
Update for the NM-SPG
May 5, 2005

2. MISO Generator Interconnection Requested mid-Oct 2004
PROJECT G477
Queue Number
For first unit of 530/550MW in Spring 2010
Project location is Cliffs-Erie property (old LTV mining site) north of Hoyt Lakes, MN
POI is proposed as Forbes 230KV bus
For network resource service

3. Phase I MISO Feasibility Study Completed mid-March 2005
Preliminary screening study of the generator interconnection to the existing system
Includes powerflow, transfer capability, and short circuit analysis but no stability analysis
2009 summer peak powerflow model including:
A-W Project
Proposed area generators higher in the MISO queue
Mesaba Unit 1
Forbes 230kV POI
345kV outlet line and 345/230kV autotransformer at Forbes
Study Participants: ATC, GRE, MH, MP, OTP, Xcel

4. MISO Feasibility Study Results
No fatal flaws or insurmountable problems with interconnection to Forbes 230kV bus
Some transfer capability exists
could be as lower as 90MW
or over 300MW
Six Forbes 115kV breakers over-duty

5. MISO Feasibility Study Modeling Issues
How higher queued generators are represented
i.e. generator upgrades- transmission system changes to mitigate adverse impacts
Manitoba Hydro system high voltage in base case
How power delivery was sinked into Xcel control area
A number of existing underlying system facilities ( kV) are near or over their ratings in the base case
Need to be evaluated and resolved whether MEP proceeds or not

6. Phase II MISO System Impact Study (SIS)
Rigorous powerflow, short circuit and stability analysis
Studied for both peak and off-peak load under a variety of severely stressed conditions
Consistent with applicable Reliability Standards
Includes new Deliverability Analysis

7. Phase II MISO System Impact Study (SIS)
Kick off meeting set for May 11 at MISO St. Paul Offices
Same study participants
PTI continuing as MISO contractor

8. Phase II MISO System Impact Study (SIS)
Excelsior’s desired outcome----
that the study process continues beyond just the identification of potential problem areas caused by the project interconnection and/or operation at full output
to the development of a robust regional solution(s) so that the likely purchasers of long term power from the project (load serving entities in MN) can designate the project as a new network resource and
have some confidence that sufficient facilities will be put in place to minimize the potential for unit output being constrained.

9. Questions?? Feedback??