Nevada Power & Sierra Pacific Power d/b/a NV Energy

Nevada Power & Sierra Pacific Power d/b/a NV Energy 1

1. Welcome Introductions 2. 2012 TRANSMISSION RATE CASE 3. STAKEHOLDER PLANNING STUDIES SWAT/SPPG Study Results 4. INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN UPDATE 5. Customer and Stakeholder Input 6. Additional Items/Closing 2

3

Two rate cases one for Nevada Power Company, one for Sierra Pacific Power Company ON Line costs are not in these cases. Expected completion latter half of 2013 ROE 11.04% Loss studies performed little change Updated rates for Sch. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11 & NITS 4

Schedule Description Current Rate Measuremen t Rate Basic Rate Firm Point to Point Service $2.84 KW per Basic Rate Basic Rate Non-Firm Point to Point Service Network Integration Transmission Service $2.84 KW per $2.84 KW per 1 Scheduling $246.27 MW per 2 Reactive Supply $100.97 MW per 3 Regulation $6.38 KW per 5 Spinning Reserve $6.38 KW per 6 Supplemental Reserve $4.66 KW per 11 Generator Regulation $6.38 KW per Proposed Rate $3.74 $3.74 $3.74 $167.56 $338.40 $9.60 $9.60 $7.88 $9.60 5

Schedule Description Current Rate Measureme nt Rate Basic Rate Firm Point to Point Service $1.40 KW per Basic Rate Basic Rate Non-Firm Point to Point Service Network Integration Transmission Service $1.40 KW per $1.40 KW per 1 Scheduling $111.90 MW per 2 Reactive Supply $158.05 MW per 3 Regulation $6.45 KW per 5 Spinning Reserve $6.45 KW per 6 Supplemental Reserve $3.04 KW per 11 Generator Regulation $6.45 KW per Proposed Rate $2.51 $2.51 $2.51 $70.92 $506.48 $7.76 $7.76 $8.06 $7.76 6

Proposed Transmission rate increase: North [South] $2.84 [$1.40]/ KW per to $3.74 [$2.51]/ KW per Key drivers: Net transmission plant up 17% [40%] Billing determinants down 2% [4%] Operating costs up Depreciation expense up Vegetation management cost up A&G allocation up WECC dues up Joint utility project O&M up 7

Adjustments General Plant and A&G costs currently recovered in the rate for Schedule 1 "Scheduling" will be recovered in Transmission Rates. Schedule 1 rate decreased 32% [37%] from $246.27 [$111.90]/ MW per to $167.56 [$70.92]/ MW per because these costs are now recovered through the Transmission Rate Schedule 2 Reactive increased from $100.97 [$158.05]/ MW per to $338.40 [$506.48]/ MW per due to new generation [and reactive payments to LV Power]. 8

Schedule 3 Regulation and Schedule 5 Spinning Reserve increased from $6.38 [$6.45]/ kw per to $9.60 [$7.76]/kW per due to new generating units. Schedule 6 Supplemental Reserve increased from $4.66 [$3.04]/ kw per to $7.88 [$8.06]/ kw per. 9

Last Transmission case 2007 ER07-1371 [2003 ER03-1328] Last Ancillary Services case 2003 - ER03-37 2012 Case Filing date: October 2012 Effective date: Request January 1, 2013 10

SWAT/SSPG 2012 Study Results 11

Three studies were requested in response to requests from the Nevada Energy Assistance Corporation - a SSPG stakeholder. The studies requested are as follows: 1. A new 345/230 kv 1000 MW tie line from Northern Nevada to Northern California. This study is similar to last year s SSPG request but the resource mix and topology for this study differs from the 2011 request. 2. A new 500 kv tie line for 750 1000 MW delivered from Northern Nevada into Southern California via a new line paralleling the existing Pacific DC line. 3. A new 345 kv tie line for 600 MW delivered from Northern Nevada into Southern California via a new line to the IPP DC line in Utah. 12

High capacity factor of N. NV Geothermal energy No need for following resources Short distance from California Potential expedited in-service date The SSPG expects these projects will be highly competitive with other projects included in the TEPPC 2010 Study Report and 2011-12 study programs. Expected Completion by TEPPC Q4 2013 13

Eastern terminus of LMUD Interconnection from 2011 SSPG Study Project constructed at 345 kv 14

Project constructed at 500 kv 15

Project constructed at 345 or 500 kv 16

High priority assigned by TEPPC SSPG performed the reliability studies for the requested studies SSPG reliability studies are feasibility focused studies with some stability studies not comprehensive NERC TPL studies. SSPG coordinated with LADWP for Case #2 and Case #3 LADWP provided technical support for the capability of the IPP DC line Studies were completed in October submitted to WestConnect on November 5, 2012 17

18

The ON Line Project is in service. All three project shared a common pool of renewables in addition to their specific portfolios 98 MW of additional wind proxy generation was included on Alturas (north of Viewland) 200 MW of proxy renewables were added on the Humboldt Midpoint 345 kv line For the East Project 510 MW of NEAC renewables were added inside NVEN s system at Robinson Summit, Gonder and Dixie Valley The proposed renewable portfolio for the North study assumed that typically one-third of the proposed 1000 MW capacity would be injected at Westwood outside of the Sierra system. 539 MW of renewables were added inside NVEN s system For the south Project 510 MW of renewables was connected via Esmeralda. (Without a strong tie to Tracy 345 kv, not all of the NVEN renewable resources can make it to Esmeralda. 19

The East Path study demonstrated that approximately 700 MW of export could be made from the Robinson Summit (Robinson) bus via a 345 kv tie line to the IPP NV Energy has performed Transmission Service Requests studies that demonstrate that reinforcements would be necessary between Valmy and Robinson when NV Energy is using these facilities to transmit its renewable resources from the NV Energy northern system to the NV Energy southern system via the ON Line Project. Reinforcements from Valmy to Robinson and/or Gonder were not modeled in the case. The case used for this NEAC study was not stressed sufficiently to require such reinforcements. 20

Some WECC Paths did exceed a change in power flow of 10 % or more, post-contingency. The change in flow for those Paths was generally less than 20%. The outage of the IPP DC line was no more severe than it was in the base case. It would be important to study the SSPG East Path with the NV Energy Falcon to Robinson transmission line in stressed conditions and with WECC Path C and WECC Path 35 stressed in both north to south and south to north directions. 21

The internal NV Energy line from Oreana to Viewland performed well in support of the North Path and in support of power delivery from Valmy to the Reno/Tracy area. For a Valmy-Tracy N-2 outage east of Oreana, some operational conditions may need to be avoided or planned load dropping may be necessary if adequate replacement generation is not available at Tracy. 22

Power flows in the 600 MW range would be feasible from Esmeralda and Amargosa to SCE. The inclusion of the Esmeralda tie to Anaconda Moly resulted in susceptibility to out-of-step conditions for the Tonopah Solar Energy generator (that is currently under construction near Anaconda Moly). The out of step condition for the Tonopah Solar Energy Generator was mitigated by the placement of a phase shifter at ANM. The PV generation at Amargosa also exhibited a susceptibility to over frequency tripping. The Antelope 500 kv substation is a strong source. Interaction with immediate neighboring paths was insignificant for the outages related to the South Path to Antelope. Additional studies would be required between California Transmission Planning Group (CTPG) or similar entities to study the effect on the Southern California area in much greater detail. 23

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) Status 24

HOT WEATHER ENERGY PERCENT PEAK PERCENT PEAK PERCENT Year (GWH) GROWTH (MW) GROWTH (MW) GROWTH 2011 21,659 5,530 2012 21,816 0.7% 5,557 0.5% 5,792 2013 21,754-0.3% 5,505-0.9% 5,738-0.9% 2014 21,866 0.5% 5,483-0.4% 5,715-0.4% 2015 22,147 1.3% 5,529 0.8% 5,763 0.8% 2016 22,577 1.9% 5,603 1.3% 5,840 1.3% 2017 22,850 1.2% 5,679 1.4% 5,919 1.4% 2018 23,171 1.4% 5,757 1.4% 6,001 1.4% 2019 23,486 1.4% 5,833 1.3% 6,080 1.3% 2020 23,900 1.8% 5,918 1.5% 6,169 1.5% 2021 24,215 1.3% 5,999 1.4% 6,253 1.4% 25

HOT WEATHER ENERGY PERCENT PEAK PERCENT PEAK PERCENT Year (GWH) GROWTH (MW) GROWTH (MW) GROWTH 2011 8,728 1,513 2012 8,814 1.0% 1,569 3.7% 1,630 2013 8,975 1.8% 1,585 1.0% 1,647 1.0% 2014 9,580 6.7% 1,661 4.8% 1,726 4.8% 2015 9,994 4.3% 1,708 2.8% 1,774 2.8% 2016 9,653-3.4% 1,680-1.6% 1,745-1.6% 2017 9,817 1.7% 1,711 1.8% 1,777 1.8% 2018 9,891 0.8% 1,732 1.2% 1,799 1.2% 2019 10,010 1.2% 1,754 1.3% 1,822 1.3% 2020 10,107 1.0% 1,759 0.3% 1,827 0.3% 2021 10,159 0.5% 1,772 0.7% 1,841 0.7% 2022 10,244 0.8% 1,798 1.5% 1,868 1.5% 26

27

Combined Loads in Control Area of NPC, Boulder City, CRC- BMI, City of LV SB211, LVVWD, Lincoln, Overton, East Side / Newport, SB 211, Valley Electric, City of Henderson PEAK PERCENT YEAR (MW) GROWTH 2011 711 2.7% 2012 731 2.7% 2013 749 2.4% 2014 768 2.4% 2015 786 2.3% 2016 804 2.3% 2017 826 2.6% 2018 848 2.6% 2019 865 2.0% 2020 906 4.4% 28

1. 2012 IRP filed June 2012 (Docket 12-06053) 2. Planning period: 2013 2032 3. PUCN draft Order December 20, 2012 29

ON Line Transmission Project 30

NW (BPA) ID-NW (#14) COI (#66) CA (PG&E) PGE-SPP (#24) ALTURAS (#76) SPPC ID-SPP (#16) IN/PAV- GON (#32) ID (IPC) UTAH (PAC) C (#20) MDW- LBNS (#15) ON Line NPC RB-HA (#35) Cry-HA (#77) TOT 2B (#78/79) CENT/S. CUTPLANE CA/AZ (SCE/LA/WAPA/APS) Figure 1: ON Line versus major WECC Paths 31

SCOPE 235-mile 500 kv transmission line Robinson-Harry Allen Robinson Summit 500/345 kv substation Falcon-Gonder Fold Series compensation on the existing Falcon Gonder 345 kv line Harry Allen Terminal SPPC and NPC Balancing areas will be consolidated post ON- Line 32

Wind Induced Vibration Issues In early December 2011 high sustained winds damaged several tubular guyed V towers (tower construction suspended) Two Independent Studies agree retrofitting structures w/helical strakes will reduce vibration Budget revised from $510 million to $552 million In-service date of the project has been delayed to December 31, 2013 33

1. 2010 IRP filed July 2010 (Docket 10-07003) 2. Planning period: 2011 2013 3. Sierra 2 nd Amendment filed August 13, 2012 (Docket 12-08009) 34

Bordertown to Cal Sub 120 kv Line 1. The project was approved by the PUCN in 2007 and includes the construction of a 345/120 kv transformer at Bordertown Substation and a new 120 kv line from Bordertown substation to California Substation. 2. Project would provide additional transmission support to the West Reno transmission system for outages of a North Valley Road transformer and N-1-1 outages of the 120 kv transmission system. 3. To date Sierra has not obtained the required permits for this line and permitting work is continuing. The in-service date for this project has been moved from 2012 to 2016. 35

Customer and Stakeholder Input on Transmission Study Plan Customer and Stakeholder Proposals for Transmission Study Plan Customer and Stakeholder Planned Projects 36

37