1. Boise, ID June 11, 2014 NTTG Quarter 2 Public Stakeholder Meeting

2. 2

3. Q2 NTTG Public Stakeholder Meeting Boise, ID June 11, 2014 NTTG Biennial Study Plan for 2014-2015 Regional Planning Cycle

4. This presentation is intended to: 1.Provide an overview of the NTTG Biennial Study Plan for the 2014-15 Regional Planning Cycle to Stakeholders 2.Review comments to the study plan that were submitted by Stakeholders during the review period 4 2014-2015 Study Plan

5. I.Introduction II.Study Objectives III.General Schedule and Deliverables IV.Study Assumptions and Representation A.Major Study Assumptions and System Representation 1.Study Assumptions 2.Analysis Tools 3.Regional Plan Evaluation 4.Transmission Needs Driven by Public Policy Requirements B.Transmission Planning Study Methodology 1.Request and Evaluate Data 2.System Conditions to Study 3.Power Flow Databases 4.Steady-State (N-0), and Contingency (N-1, N-2) Analysis 5.System Performance (Reliability) Criteria 5 2014-2015 Study Plan - Outline

6. IV.Study Assumptions and Representation (cont.) C.Methodology for Comparison of Results 1.Alternative Projects 2.Cost Allocation Analysis V.Robustness of Initial Regional Plan VI.Allocation Scenarios VII.Impacts on Other Regions VIII.Requests for Public Policy Considerations IX.[Draft / Final] Regional Transmission Plan 6 2014-2015 Study Plan - Outline

7. I.Introduction ●The study plan outlines the study process that the NTTG will follow to develop the ten-year Regional Transmission Plan (RTP) for the biennial planning cycle covering years 2014-2015 ●This study plan will rely on the loads, resources, point-to-point transmission requests, desired flows, constraints and other technical data that were submitted in Quarter 1 of the Regional Planning Cycle, and will be considered in the development of the Regional Transmission Plan II.Study Objective ●The objective of the transmission planning study is to produce the NTTG Regional Transmission Plan, through the selection of projects that yields a transmission plan that is more efficient or cost effective than other options, in compliance with Attachment K– Regional Planning Process 2014-2015 Study Plan 7

8. III.General Schedule and Deliverables ●Quarter 1: Gather data; including L&R data, new transmission projects (sponsored, unsponsored and merchant), PTP transmission requests, and transmission needs driven by public policy requirements and considerations from stakeholders ●Quarter 2: Evaluate data received from stakeholders and resolve concerns. Develop the Biennial Study Plan for Steering Committee approval ●Quarters 3 and 4: Utilizing the submitted data, perform technical screening studies to evaluate the Initial Regional Plan and Alternative Projects ●Quarter 5: Stakeholder review and comment on the Draft Regional Transmission Plan. Changes submitted will be evaluated in preparation of the Draft Final Regional Transmission Plan ●Quarter 6: Perform Cost Allocations Studies and analysis ●Quarter 7: Stakeholder review, and Draft Final Regional Transmission Plan produced ●Quarter 8: NTTG Steering Committee approval and Regional Transmission Plan posted 2014-2015 Study Plan 8

9. IV.Study Assumptions A.Major Study Assumptions and System Representation 1.Study Assumptions The following data was submitted in response to the Q1 data request: ●Loads – forecasted for BAs internal to the NTTG footprint ●Resources – projected for each BA within NTTG footprint ●Transmission Projects – Full Funder Local Transmission Plan, Sponsored Project, Unsponsored Project, or Merchant Transmission Developer 2.Analysis Tools Two types of analysis tools will be utilized in the development of the power flow base cases: ●Power Flow – PowerWorld software will be used to evaluate transmission reliability under steady-state and facility outage conditions ●Production Cost – GridView software will be used to evaluate the range of production scenarios that may occur in the Western Interconnection 2014-2015 Study Plan 9

10. 3.Regional Plan Evaluation This study process will evaluate the Initial Regional Plan and Alternative Projects through the creation of Change Cases: ●Initial Regional Plan and Alternative Projects costs will be compiled for the tenth-year of the study period to be used in the Interconnection- wide power flow and production cost modeling ●A base case will be developed using the production cost model to determine those hours in the study year when load and resource conditions are likely to stress the transmission system within the NTTG footprint ●Using the base case, the Initial Regional Plan will be evaluated using power flow analysis to determine if it meets the system performance requirements and transmission needs associated with Public Policy Requirements 10 2014-2015 Study Plan

11. 3.Regional Plan Evaluation (cont.) ●Change Cases will be developed by the addition of an Alternative Project to the Initial Regional Plan. Each Change Case will also exclude one or more uncommitted projects in the Initial Regional Plan whose impacts are likely met by the Alternative Project incorporated in the Change Case ●As part of the development of Change Cases, the TWG will also determine if there are additional Alternative Projects that should be evaluated through inclusion in a Change Case ●Each Change Case will be evaluated to determine whether or not it meets the System Performance requirements and the transmission needs associated with Public Policy Requirements ●The TWG will then review each Change Case to determine if a modification of any Change Case should be developed and evaluated that would be more efficient or cost effective in meeting regional transmission needs 11 2014-2015 Study Plan

12. 3.Regional Plan Evaluation (cont.) ●Those Change Cases will then be further evaluated using three metrics for the study year: capital-related costs, energy losses, and reserves ●Those Alternative Projects in Change Cases which are more efficient or cost effective than the Initial Regional Plan based on the three metrics will be selected and combined into one or more additional Change Cases ●When necessary, these combined Change Cases will be re-evaluated to ensure each continues to meet the system performance requirements and transmission needs associated with Public Policy Requirements ●Using the three metrics, the Alternative Projects, if any, from the combined Change Cases that are determined to likely be more efficient or cost effective will be selected into the Draft Regional Transmission Plan 12 2014-2015 Study Plan

13. 4.Transmission Needs Driven by Public Policy Requirements ●Public Policy Requirements are those requirements that are established by local, state, or federal laws or regulations ●Local transmission needs driven by Public Policy Requirements are included in the NTTG Initial Regional Plan through the Local Transmission Plans of the NTTG Transmission Providers ●During this study cycle, no additional transmission needs, beyond those submitted by the transmission providers, were submitted to satisfy Public Policy Requirements ●A full listing of applicable Public Policy Requirements for the NTTG footprint is included in Study Plan - Attachment 1 2014-2015 Study Plan 13

14. B.Transmission Planning Study Methodology 1.Request and Evaluate Data A nalysis of the NTTG transmission system requires a full model of the Western Interconnection due the number of regional transmission ties and span of energy trading markets. Consequently, NTTG study efforts will rely on the data collection and validation work of WECC and its committees Once the WECC TEPPC database is received, it will be reviewed and modified to assure conformance with the Initial Regional Plan 2.System Conditions to Study The NTTG analysis will extend beyond the traditional focus of snapshotting winter and summer peaks by examining all hours of the year for situations where available resources and forecasted loads across the Western Interconnection result in the highest stress in the NTTG footprint (e.g. peak loads, high transfers with other regions) 14 2014-2015 Study Plan

15. 2.System Conditions to Study (cont.) The WECC TEPPC 2024 common case production cost model will be analyzed to identify specific hours for power flow analysis. This TEPPC base case includes 22 new transmission projects called the Common Case Transmission Assumptions (see next slide) Using the TEPPC 2024 common case production cost model with the GridView production cost software, the TWG will identify the hourly data for several system conditions, such as: a.peak coincident NTTG summer load condition; b.peak coincident NTTG winter load condition; c.conditions with maximum coincident NTTG net export; d.conditions with minimum coincident NTTG export; and e.additional system conditions as needed to meet the needs of specific areas of the NTTG footprint 15 2014-2015 Study Plan

16. 16 2014-2015 Study Plan

17. 3.Power Flow Databases a.Base Cases The base cases representation for the various system conditions to be simulated will be derived from the TEPPC 2024 case. The TWG will import the data for each system condition into the power flow program and create base cases for each of the study conditions b.Change Cases The TWG will add any Alternative Projects and remove any non- committed transmission facilities from the base cases, as appropriate, in order to create Change Cases for the respective base cases. These Change Cases will be used for comparison purposes in evaluating the more efficient or cost effective Regional Transmission Plan 17 2014-2015 Study Plan

18. 4.Steady State (N-0), and Contingency (N-1, N-2) Analysis Power flow steady-state (N-0) and contingency (N-1, credible N-2) analysis will be performed using the procedures outlined in the WECC System Review Work Group – Data Preparation Manual, including using a governor power flow for loss of generation contingencies 5.System Performance (Reliability) Criteria The viability of specific transmission projects will be evaluated using power flow software to demonstrate compliance with NERC and WECC system performance criteria. Additionally, system specific performance criteria for NorthWestern Energy and PacifiCorp will also apply 18 2014-2015 Study Plan

19. C.Methodology for Comparison of Results 1.Alternative Projects Each of the Change Cases will be evaluated for the study year using the same system performance criteria as is used for the cases which model the Initial Regional Plan. The study results of these Change Cases will be compared against results from studies that model the Initial Regional Plan The following analysis criterion will be used to determine if a Change Case is more efficient or cost effective solution for the NTTG footprint than the Initial Regional Plan: a.System Performance Analysis The Change Case must meet all system performance criteria defined above. If not, modifications may be made to transmission facilities until the case meets the system performance criteria 19 2014-2015 Study Plan

20. 1.Alternative Projects (cont.) b.Capital Related Costs The TWG will validate all project submitted costs with the TEPPC Transmission Capital Cost Calculator (MS Excel spreadsheet) If the submitted costs vary from the Calculator output by 20%, the Project Sponsor will be contacted to resolved differences. However, if the difference cannot be resolved, the TWG will determine the appropriate cost to apply in the study process A reduction in the annual capital related costs from the Initial Regional Plan to a Change Case captures the extent that uncommitted project(s) in the Initial Regional Plan can be displaced (either deferred or replaced) while still meeting all regional transmission needs and system performance requirements 20 2014-2015 Study Plan

21. 1.Alternative Projects (cont.) c.Energy Losses Power flow software will be used to compare losses before and after a project is added to the system. A reduction in losses after a project is added represents the benefit. The energy loss valuation will be based on average energy price for the study year d.Reserves The reserves analysis will evaluate a number of capacity sharing opportunities among the various combinations of Balancing Areas. The reserve metric will be accessed on a Balancing Area basis and is based on the incremental load and generation submitted by the TPs The calculation will be performed using a spreadsheet which will consider the savings between each Balancing Area providing its own incremental reserve requirement and a combination of balancing areas sharing a reserve resource facilitated by uncommitted transmission capacity 21 2014-2015 Study Plan

22. 2.Cost Allocation Analysis The projects eligible for cost allocation that are incorporated with the Draft Regional Transmission Plan will be evaluated for cost allocation by the Cost Allocation Committee. Those entities affected by a change in Capital-Related Costs, Energy Losses and Reserves, as defined above, shall be identified for use in the cost allocation process There may be winners and losers when reviewing loss analysis, system performance, capital costs and reserves. NTTG will allocate the net benefits to TP’s 22 2014-2015 Study Plan

23. V.Robustness of Initial Regional Plan ●The robustness analysis will provide information regarding the Draft Regional Transmission Plan’s ability to reliably serve the transmission needs of an uncertain future ●The robustness analysis will use power flow analysis and input from production cost analysis as needed to test whether or not the 2024 Draft Regional Transmission Plan transmission system performance will remain acceptable assuming deviations from the base case assumptions ●The TWG will use its discretion to define the deviations from base case assumptions to test and may draw on assumptions used in change cases or allocation scenarios and will seek input from stakeholders through the Planning Committee 23 2014-2015 Study Plan

24. VI.Allocation Scenarios ●Following evaluation of projects by the Planning Committee, the Cost Allocation Committee, with stakeholder inputs, will evaluate allocation scenarios for those parameters that will likely affect the amount of total benefits and their distribution among Beneficiaries ●When developing the Draft Biennial Study Plan, the Planning Committee and Cost Allocation Committee will identify projects selected in the prior Regional Transmission Plan that will be reevaluated and potentially replaced or deferred ●NTTG cost allocation analysis will incorporate alternative scenarios (relative to the Initial Regional Plan), with regard to those assumptions and parameters that likely affect the estimated distribution of project benefits in determining the cost allocation of a transmission project 24 2014-2015 Study Plan

25. VI.Allocation Scenarios (cont.) ●To the extent feasible, the Cost Allocation Committee will look to the data underlying local transmission plans, integrated resource planning studies of LSEs within the NTTG footprint, the assumptions and the forecasts used to develop the alternative scenarios for each allocation metric ●The selected alternative scenarios may vary among the benefit metrics and will focus on those assumptions and parameters for a benefit metric that affect the distribution of benefits for that metric among Transmission Providers, LSEs, and/or IPPs 25 2014-2015 Study Plan

26. VII.Impacts on Neighboring Regions ●All Initial Regional Plan and Change Case Plan(s) power flow studies will monitor the BES voltage and thermal loading in NTTG’s neighboring planning regions (i.e., ColumbiaGrid, WestConnect and CAISO) to identify potential violations of NERC, WECC or neighboring planning regions system performance criteria ●Should a BES system performance criteria violation be observed in the neighboring region, in either the Initial Regional Plan or the Change Case Plan(s), the TWG will coordinate with the affected planning region to verify results and, if necessary, identify potential mitigation ●Assuming this is a new violation, the study will endeavor to alleviate the violation using acceptable mitigation options within the NTTG footprint 26 2014-2015 Study Plan

27. VII.Impacts on Neighboring Regions (cont.) ●If the violation in the neighboring planning region cannot be eliminated then the TWG will coordinate with the impacted planning region to determine if that region will resolve the violation through mitigation measures within the affected planning region at its expense ●Should the violations remain after all options for alleviation, both within the NTTG footprint and within the affected region, have been exhausted, then the Change Case or Initial Regional Plan will not be selected for the Draft Regional Plan ●NTTG foot print mitigation costs necessary to resolve criteria violations observed in neighboring planning region(s) will be quantified and added to the cost of the plan under study when selecting a project for the Draft Regional Transmission Plan 27 2014-2015 Study Plan

28. VIII.Requests for Public Policy Considerations Public Policy Considerations are those considerations that are not established by local, state, or federal laws or regulations. ●Public Policy Considerations will be separate scenarios analysis or sensitivity cases. The results of the analysis may inform the Regional Transmission Plan, but will not result in the inclusion of additional projects in the Regional Transmission Plan ●In Quarter 1 of the 2014-2015 Regional Planning Cycle, three requests for Public Policy Considerations were submitted to NTTG: 1.The Renewable Northwest Project (RNP) submitted a request to study the effects of retiring Colstrip units 1 and 2 and replace with Montana wind resources in the year 2020; 2.The RNP requested a study to consider the effects of retiring Colstrip units 1, 2, 3 and 4 and replace with Montana wind in 2027, and 3.The Northwest Energy Coalition requested a study to reduce the output at various coal plans in Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado and replace with various renewable resources. No year was specified. 28 2014-2015 Study Plan

29. ●After deliberation, the TWG is recommending the following: The Planning Committee should proceed only with the proposal from RNP to retire Colstrip units 1 and 2 and replace with Montana wind resources in 2020 The reasoning for this recommendation is: 1.The RNP proposal to study the effects of retiring Colstrip Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 in 2027 are beyond the NTTG 10 year planning horizon and outside the scope of the Regional Planning Cycle 2.The Northwest Energy Coalition request has already been studied by the WECC Transmission Expansion Planning Policy Committee (TEPPC) ●Since NTTG would use the same base case (as proposed by the submitter) and the same modeling techniques, different results would not be expected ●Additionally, by re-doing the study and no additional information would be gained to inform the Regional Transmission Plan 29 2014-2015 Study Plan

30. ●Following the public stakeholder comment period and discussion during the Quarter 2 Public Stakeholder meeting, a final determination concerning Public Policy Considerations will be voted on by the Planning Committee at the June 13, 2014 Planning Committee meeting 30 2014-2015 Study Plan

31. IX.[Draft/Final] Regional Transmission Plan [Report] ●The Planning Committee shall produce a Draft Regional Transmission Plan by the end of Quarter 4 ●The projects selected into the Draft Regional Transmission Plan are determined according to the study methodology outlined in the study plan, and ●The projects selected into the Draft Regional Transmission Plan for cost allocation will be determined according to the Cost Allocation process previously described 31 2014-2015 Study Plan

32. Study Plan Comments Submitted by Stakeholders ●Once the NTTG Biennial Study Plan for the 2014-15 study cycle was submitted to stakeholders for review, the only comments received were from NorthWestern Energy and PacifiCorp ●As these comments identified only formatting and readability improvements, all of the recommended changes were made to the study plan 32

33. Q2 NTTG Public Stakeholder Meeting Boise, ID June 11, 2014 Order No. 1000 2 nd Regional Compliance Update

34. NTTG FERC Order 1000 Regional Filing Status 34 9.16.13 NTTG TO’s filed revised Attachment K’s to comply with FERC’s Regional Order 1000 4.17.14 FERC Issued Order on NTTG Filing 6.16.14 NTTG 2 nd Compliance Filing Deadline

35. Enrollment Process 35 Removed obligation of a non-public utility to file a reciprocity OATT with FERC, and replaced it with –the obligation to adopt and post an OATT, or in the case of a NJ, its unfiled OATT or other agreement, with the same provisions as other full funders. Requiring a non-public utility not –take any action within the NTTG Steering Committee or other committees that prevents a public utility from complying with its OATT, and –include a provision in its OATT or other agreement(s) that conflicts with a provision in the Attachment K of the respective NTTG public utilities.

36. General Requirements The date, time and location of all public committee meetings will be posted on the NTTG website not less than seven (7) days prior to the meeting. Meeting materials will be posted prior to the meeting. 36

37. Identification of Unsponsored Projects: Q1 Attachment K already provides stakeholders with the opportunity to submit an unsponsored project during Quarter 1. During Q1 Planning Committee may also identify an unsponsored project for consideration in the Regional Transmission Plan (RTP), which may be based upon a stakeholder project submitted with incomplete data. 37

38. Identification of Unsponsored Projects: Q2 Biennial Study Plan includes Unsponsored Projects –Included in the prior RTP, –submitted by stakeholders, and –identified by the Planning Committee using their best judgment data available at the time 38

39. Identification of Unsponsored Projects: Q3-Q4 PC utilizes each Alternative Project in one or more Change Cases and, using the criteria..., determine if a Change Case is a more efficient or cost-effective solution for the NTTG Footprint than the Initial Regional Plan based upon the methodology set forth in Attachment K “Alternative Projects” includes unsponsored projects identified by the Planning Committee and projects submitted by stakeholders 39

40. Identification of Unsponsored Projects: Q5 Stakeholders may submit comments during the Quarter 5 review of the Draft RTP that include identification of a new unsponsored project. The Planning Committee will consider the new unsponsored project, to the extent feasible, so long as consideration of the new unsponsored project will not delay the development of the RTP. If the Planning Committee determines that it is infeasible to consider the new unsponsored project without delaying the plan, then the project will be noted in the RTP and carried forward for consideration in the following Regional Planning Cycle. 40

41. Identification of Unsponsored Projects Clarify that any unsponsored project in the Final RTP may be resubmitted as a Sponsored Project by a pre-qualified Project Sponsor for consideration in the following Regional Planning Cycle for purposes of cost allocation. 41

42. Public Policy Consideration Public Policy Consideration NTTG will post 1.transmission needs driven by Public Policy Requirements (PPRs) and Public Policy Considerations (PPCs) that were or were not considered, 2.along with an explanation of why particular transmission needs driven by PPR's and PPC's were or were not considered 42

43. Qualification Criteria Project sponsor qualification requirements now require parties planning to use a 3rd party contractor to –identify who it intends to use, and when it plans to enter into an agreement with the 3rd- party contractor, and –provide any changes to 3rd party contractor information during Q5 43

44. Qualification Criteria Removed financial qualification criterion requiring a transmission developer to –Demonstrate in lieu of an investment grade credit rating, that it or its parent company has been in existence for five years and has had positive working capital for the past three years 44

45. Information Requirements 45 Clarify that the K's already allow the PC to consider whether to include, at its discretion, a project that resembles an unsponsored project that has been submitted with insufficient data. –Revisions not required: PC will attempt to remedy insufficient data, but if not remedied, may use the incomplete data from a sponsored project to propose an unsponsored project

46. Evaluation Process Clarify definition of “monetized non- financial incremental costs” –Incremental costs associated with an Alternative Project that are not directly evaluated and measured in dollars of changed revenues, expenses or capital investments; Since non-financial in nature, will be monetized by applying an appropriate index or conversion factor to convert the units into a dollar value 46

47. Cost Allocation for Unsponsored Projects An unsponsored project may be resubmitted in the next cycle as a sponsored project for purposes of cost allocation, if the pre-qualified sponsor elects to resubmit the project; Unless the sponsored project qualifies as a ‘committed’ it will be subject to re-evaluation – same as other projects 47

48. Ownership Rights Those arrangements where an entity has rights in transmission facilities or a transmission path, owned by another entity, which are based upon a % of the facility or path's rated capacity and the rights remain thru the in- service life of the facility or path 48

49. NTTG FERC Order 1000 Filing Status 49 Regional Order 1000 2 nd Compliance Filing due June 16, 2014 Interregional Order 1000 Filed on May 10, 2013 – FERC Rule pending

50. Round Table –Stakeholder Comment Period Q3 Stakeholder Meeting (Tentative) – September 16, 2014 in Bozeman, Montana –Q3 analysis update 50