transmission models), which effectively reduces minimum local need in the SDG&E sub-area to 620 MW (1,028 MW minus 408 MW). Thus, SDG&E has identified in this Track 4 a minimum need for new local resources in the San Diego sub-area of between 620 MW and 1470 MW by 2022. Of the 620 MW minimum need, SDG&E’s procurement strategy holds 70-120 MW open to be filled with demand response and/or energy storage resources (consistent with ISO for operational characteristics that address local reliability needs). For the remaining need, SDG&E requests authority to procure 500-550 MW of long leadtime supply-side resources, including conventional generation and/or renewable resources. Redondo Beach performed its own technical studies, using power flow analysis. Redondo Beach claims that its studies used the same inputs and assumptions as the ISO. Redondo Beach recommends procurement of 1,140 MW in the LA Basin and 753 MW in the SDG&E area. For the LA Basin, Redondo Beach recommends all procurement be from preferred resources based on its studies. SCE responds that, while Redondo Beach claims that their proposal is the only solution that addresses both the Western LA Basin sub-area as well as the greater SONGS area, the record shows that Redondo Beach only studied the Western LA Basin and did not perform a study to analyze the impacts on the greater SONGS study area. We do not agree with SCE that Redondo Beach’s study is incomplete in this regard. However, significant parts of Redondo Beach’s studies rely on interpretations of N-1-1 contingencies that are at odds with the ISO’s studies; we have already determined that we will defer to the ISO on this point. While we consider Redondo Beach’s recommendations along with those of other parties, we will rely on the ISO study (as modified herein) as the better analytical tool.
transmission models), which effectively reduces minimum local need in the SDG&E sub-area to 620 MW (1,028 MW minus 408 MW). Thus, SDG&E has identified in this Track 4 a minimum need for new local resources in the San Diego sub-area of between 620 MW and 1470 MW by 2022. Of the 620 MW minimum need, SDG&E’s procurement strategy holds 70-120 MW open to be filled with demand response and/or energy storage resources (consistent with ISO for operational characteristics that address local reliability needs). For the remaining need, SDG&E requests authority to procure 500-550 MW of long leadtime supply-side resources, including conventional generation and/or renewable resources. Redondo Beach performed its own technical studies, using power flow analysis. Redondo Beach claims that its studies used the same inputs and assumptions as the ISO. Redondo Beach recommends procurement of 1,140 MW in the LA Basin and 753 MW in the SDG&E area. For the LA Basin, Redondo Beach recommends all procurement be from preferred resources based on its studies. SCE responds that, while Redondo Beach claims that their proposal is the only solution that addresses both the Western LA Basin sub-area as well as the greater SONGS area, the record shows that Redondo Beach only studied the Western LA Basin and did not perform a study to analyze the impacts on the greater SONGS study area. We do not agree with SCE that Redondo Beach’s study is incomplete in this regard. However, significant parts of Redondo Beach’s studies rely on interpretations of N-1-1 contingencies that are at odds with the ISO’s studies; we have already determined that we will defer to the ISO on this point. While we consider Redondo Beach’s recommendations along with those of other parties, we will rely on the ISO study (as modified herein) as the better analytical tool.
89008104.docx