Limited Generation Profile Workshop #1 7:54 am - 3:35 pm Monday, November 7, 2022 | (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) pht2 Eamon Hoffman ET gary holdsworth sdg&e Prasanth Gopalakrishnan ASE/Kalkitech 6502****13 Dustin Dear Selene Brian Lydic Rottman, Mary Eva Wang TotalEnergies Antonio Nunez Jordan Smith Roni Mejia - SCE Kimberley Chong SDG&E Sky Stanfield Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates Cathy Le Josh Gerber Saeed Jazebi Denise Chan PG&E John Berdner Stephen Wurmlinger Cory Kienzle Jason Bobruk Mandee Figueroa SCE Maria Soria/SCE Yu Lister Alex Mwaura PG&E Stephan Barsun odet bonilla sce Glenn Skutt Fermata Energy Sherise Tyson Swetek Yochi Zakai, IREC, he/him Brad Heavner Katherine Wyszkowski Regnier, Justin 9512****96 Adrianna Magallanes- Chacon SDGE David Schiada Christian Eder, Fronius USA Omid Sarvian PG&E Steve Sherr Jan Strack phuoc Josh McDonald SCE Adrianna Magallanes-Chacon SDG&E Jamie Charles Will Wood Frances Cleveland Neil Echols Matt Belden SDGE Iman Matt Gonzales Vishal Singh Jordan 8583****43 Aliaga-Caro, Jose Jorge Chacon Yi Li SDG&E Dan Bedell - SDGE Dan Bedell Rustom Dessai Jordon Roger Salas SCE Fardin Sarraf Marissa Blunschi Michael Detmers PG&E Wilfredo Guevara - SDG&E Tracy Alexander Haga, Joseph Younes, Amin Albert Tapia WEBVTT 1 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:00:02.284 --> 01:00:03.424 All right Thank you. 2 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:04:45.724 --> 01:04:56.314 Okay, I think we can get started. Um, Joseph, could you bring up the, uh, energy division slides please. 3 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:05:07.414 --> 01:05:25.534 Thank you Joseph. All right. Uh, well, thank you. Everybody for joining, uh, today's from regeneration profile workshop. Uh, number 1 per solution. 5,211. the workshop is scheduled, uh, well, for today, between 90 am and 330 PM. 4 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:05:25.594 --> 01:05:28.414 Pacific Standard time next slide. 5 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:05:37.235 --> 01:05:37.925 Go ahead Mary. 6 Rottman, Mary 01:05:38.075 --> 01:05:56.435 Okay, great. Hi, I'm for those of you on new Mary. I just joined the group a few weeks ago, so I'm happy to be here. Uh, the logistics for today. I'm just gonna review. Most of these are the obvious, but, uh, 1st and foremost safety just let's make a note of your surroundings and. 7 Rottman, Mary 01:05:56.734 --> 01:06:16.864 Roots case, there's an emergency and of course, reach out to any of your fellow colleagues, or during this presentation, if you have any needs or emergencies during the call. Um, as usual, this meeting actually is being recorded it'll be made available on the. 8 Rottman, Mary 01:06:17.734 --> 01:06:20.704 Work, um, uh, website, um. 9 Rottman, Mary 01:06:21.965 --> 01:06:43.085 Going to talk about that a little bit later shortly. Um, and it's always this workshop is being recorded and the materials, as I said will be posted on the limited generation website. Um, and we're going to show that on slide 5. now, if you were forwarded an invitation and you didn't receive a direct. 10 Rottman, Mary 01:06:43.114 --> 01:06:54.364 From the energy division and would like to be added to the workshop distribution list. Please send me Mary an email. So it's and. 11 Rottman, Mary 01:06:54.370 --> 01:07:15.125 That ca dot. Gov, and I'll put you on a distribution list. Of course, this is a very we're expecting and hoping to be a very interactive workshop and we are encouraging participants to ask questions during the presentations, and also to facilitate that. We've got dedicated. Q. and a time slots. 12 Rottman, Mary 01:07:15.814 --> 01:07:36.304 Have been scheduled after each presentation, so a little housekeeping, uh, just to make it easy. Please keep yourself muted. Uh, we're not going to unless we have to mute everyone. And if you, uh, keep yourself muted, uh, when you're not speaking and then you can unmute yourself. Uh, when you want to speak, um. 13 Rottman, Mary 01:07:36.694 --> 01:07:57.814 Those of you that are calling in by telephone really? Your cell phone please use the mute button on your phone and then unmute yourself to speak. Um, if for some reason, you're very noisy and you're muted by our, um, host, uh, Joseph, uh, just press star, 66 to unmute. And if you want to raise your hand. 14 Rottman, Mary 01:07:57.819 --> 01:08:02.704 And at any time press, start 3 so there are any questions from anyone. 15 Rottman, Mary 01:08:07.865 --> 01:08:10.415 Pretty quiet next slide please. 16 Rottman, Mary 01:08:16.923 --> 01:08:19.774 Or, hey, are you going to list with the agenda? 17 Rottman, Mary 01:08:21.814 --> 01:08:22.653 Workshop goals. 18 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:08:24.213 --> 01:08:34.534 Uh, yeah, so, um, so this is today's agenda uh, I know it's very detailed. Uh, but, uh, we do have, uh. 19 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:08:35.944 --> 01:08:57.035 You know, 12 items to cover and we've got some buffer time at the, uh, end in case. We do run over uh, we do have, uh, 2 breaks scheduled, uh, to give us time to stretch and we do have, uh, you know, uh, our lunch also scheduled. So, uh, I'm not gonna read. 20 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:08:57.064 --> 01:09:11.224 Every item, but, um, everybody should have received the agenda these slides and should have received a more detailed doc document, uh, last week, uh, next slide. 21 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:09:22.234 --> 01:09:39.304 All right, so today's workshop goals, uh, you know, uh, we want to arrive at a consistent consensus proposal, or start 1, at least on the specifics of whether on high reductions or customers, uh, profile determined the process. 22 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:09:39.338 --> 01:09:59.674 To implement a reduction and address the retractable iterations to the general generation profile that it cannot be reduced below the lowest integrated capacity analysis, static grid, value, identified time of interconnection application. 23 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:10:01.115 --> 01:10:21.635 Uh, the agenda topics, uh, were drafted to hopefully lead a meaningful discussion to understand the current practices on how they would apply to the limited generation profile customers, or if notifications are needed for the ltp option uh, the, uh, presentation. 24 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:10:21.665 --> 01:10:42.785 The utilities proposals, but should not be taken as the final solutions as Mary mentioned is, is intended to be a interactive discussion and workshop number 2, coming up in late November that when I envision. 25 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:10:42.814 --> 01:10:52.114 That we'll be getting hashing out more of the details and coming up with a final proposal a previous slide previous. 26 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:10:56.404 --> 01:11:16.474 Can we go back 1 more slide? Thank you. So, uh, having said that stakeholders course are welcome to based on the information. Gathered here propose, uh, process. Uh, I would like to remind everybody that, uh, rule 21. 27 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:11:16.630 --> 01:11:30.725 We are an end user of the tool so, uh, discussion of changes to the are out of scope. So whenever does come up please. 28 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:11:33.305 --> 01:11:48.275 You know, be aware not to send not to center the discussion on what changes are needed because rule 21 cannot do anything with that information. Right now we're, we're just using the tool next slide. 29 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:11:51.994 --> 01:12:11.614 Uh, so this is the rule 21 uh, main page. The address is right there on the right hand side. Uh, we have created a, uh, designated by the red arrow here, uh, limited, generic profiles webpage. Uh, if you click on that. 30 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:12:12.155 --> 01:12:32.765 It'll take you to another page where you will have access to the workshop recording and all the materials, uh, from the workshops and the smarter we're working group meetings associated with a discussion of limited generation profiles. 1. 31 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:12:32.884 --> 01:12:35.374 That I've noticed is, um. 32 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:12:37.024 --> 01:12:42.484 And, excuse me, if I sneeze every once in a while I'm getting over a cold, um. 33 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:12:44.585 --> 01:13:05.135 Okay, thanks a lot. Uh, 1 thing I've noticed is if you do not see this rule 21 inter connection limited to their social profiles link on the right side of the page then. You're the width of your browser may not be large enough. Uh, cause. I've noticed if I narrow this down. 34 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:13:05.224 --> 01:13:26.344 This link, and this column here, uh, goes back to the bottom of the, uh, page of the webpage. So, uh, just wanted to, uh, mentioned that in case that you have your narrowing your, the width of your, uh, browser to allow multiple windows and you don't. 35 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:13:26.375 --> 01:13:29.945 It okay, next slide. 36 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:13:32.855 --> 01:13:53.075 Uh, just some quick announcements, uh, draft resolution e5230, uh, was mailed out for comments, uh, on October 28 comments are due on November, 17, and this, uh, draft solution is scheduled to be on the December. 1st, uh, 2022 Commission, voting meeting. 37 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:13:53.140 --> 01:14:14.105 Concerns, uh, uh, the 2nd, set of advice letters submitted by the utilities on March 30th, 2021, per 15 of 20,903 5. uh, if if adopted by the commission, it would approve in part modify and security on. 38 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:14:14.344 --> 01:14:22.984 Protect the topics and topics we've identified that need more clarity, uh, go back home. Oh, yeah. Thank you. 39 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:14:24.245 --> 01:14:45.245 More clarity, uh, since for that, we do have a record, you know, the workshops are limited to half day workshops to meet and confirm and go over the steps. Uh, 1 of the protested, uh, topics was quarterly reportings. So that is. 40 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:14:45.334 --> 01:15:04.984 Up for discussion, uh, you know, up for discussion so the justification to use gross nameplate rating, uh, for the rule, 21 screens, instead of the limited export profile um, and just some clarification clarifications. 41 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:15:06.724 --> 01:15:17.794 So, I will not go into detail. You can read the, uh, resolution, uh, for any details. And again, this is still draft and has not been adopted by the commission yet. 42 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:15:19.234 --> 01:15:20.224 Next slide please. 43 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:15:22.984 --> 01:15:39.424 And these are just background materials on the, uh, ordering paragraphs in d4903. 5. I do not plan to read them out loud since, uh, I assume everybody here is now familiar with these. 44 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:15:41.854 --> 01:15:46.684 So, um, is there a next slide or do we begin. 45 Rottman, Mary 01:15:49.475 --> 01:15:50.675 There's the next steps. 46 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:15:51.125 --> 01:15:52.805 Okay, uh, that's for later. 47 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:15:54.544 --> 01:16:06.664 Okay, for the end. So okay, so I think we can, uh, hand this over, uh, to the utilities unless Mary or Justin have anything else to say. 48 Regnier, Justin 01:16:10.264 --> 01:16:29.614 Letting, everybody know, just a quick intro for the utilities to take over let's say, noted on the slides that everything that you just have in the slides is is their assertion, but it may not be determined by the commission yet. So, we should bear that in mind everybody who has a proposal that fits. 49 Regnier, Justin 01:16:29.674 --> 01:16:50.434 Language of the decision is encouraged to bring that forward here. This will, as I mentioned that we have more of a record on the 2nd set of advice letters. We had less of a record on this letter device letters. We need to build a record in order to be able to dispose of these, and everybody has helped them not as much appreciated. I definitely appreciate all the hard work, but let's say. 50 Regnier, Justin 01:16:51.035 --> 01:17:11.945 Mary and stakeholders in the I use to get this all together today. I would ask that everybody who's presenting, stay on camera let's say, and I are both getting over cold so we may be in and out, but that's the rationale for our being in the background. A bit with no further ado, like to turn it over and hope for a productive conversation. 51 Rottman, Mary 01:17:18.004 --> 01:17:18.694 Okay. 52 Rottman, Mary 01:17:21.425 --> 01:17:24.785 Okay next upgrade. So hey, and Ronnie. 53 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:17:27.604 --> 01:17:30.004 Good morning. Everyone can can you hear me. 54 Rottman, Mary 01:17:31.234 --> 01:17:35.404 Yes, that's great. I wasn't sure if you were muted it, you're on your phone. Great. 55 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:17:36.364 --> 01:17:36.934 Perfect. 56 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:17:39.575 --> 01:17:59.885 So, thank you, everyone appreciate, uh, the introductions, uh, given by both will say Justin so let's go ahead and, uh, dive into this presentation. Um, so, Mary, if you can, uh, next. So, as I mentioned, uh, the reason why. 57 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:17:59.915 --> 01:18:16.685 We are, uh, meeting today is, uh, to address some of the issues, uh, identified a resolution 85,211 and that's what this workshop is going to intend to address and, uh, be about. So, if we can go to the next, uh, next slide here. 58 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:18:18.694 --> 01:18:35.944 i'm not gonna rehash this i think the first few slides is about the uh the agenda and i think uh jose has done a really good job at going through that so um if we can maybe uh go to the beginning of the i think it's the six slider 59 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:18:42.484 --> 01:18:58.624 Okay, there you go. So, as Jose actually very well summarized resolution in 5,211, uh, which, uh, identified some issues, uh, that, uh, they weren't. 60 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:18:59.434 --> 01:19:20.224 Required us to address, uh, for the specific topic of discussion, which is the limited generation profile specifically, uh, to, in compliance with, uh, uh, 16 and some of the issues that have been identified, uh, in within the resolution. 61 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:19:20.555 --> 01:19:41.225 Being, uh, compliance with 16, uh, the issue number 2, which, uh, dives into the specifics of, of how whether, and how reduction of profiles are going to be determined and so on. And, uh, as we go through this, uh, presentations. 62 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:19:41.525 --> 01:20:02.555 We will be addressing each of the topics at hand here and, uh, and then you will have opportunities to, uh, ask questions as, uh, as we go along. So, just wanted to kind of level set and show, uh, kind of as a refresher. Some of the issues that that. 63 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:20:02.584 --> 01:20:10.444 Been addressed, uh, that had been raised and we want to address them in this, uh, this workshop next next slide. 64 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:20:14.765 --> 01:20:33.575 Again, uh, wanted to kind of highlight some key, uh, key items, uh, with regards to the, uh, resolution 15, which allows, uh, D, or, uh, uh, to submit an profile with their application. Uh, they, uh. 65 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:20:33.604 --> 01:20:44.854 Acquire customers to limit their profile allows utilities to alter the profile if safety and reliable concerns warranted open. 66 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:20:44.859 --> 01:20:50.824 16 highlight, uh, whether and how reduction of profiles are determined. 67 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:20:51.935 --> 01:21:00.245 To kind of a brief there of, uh, what the are talking about here. So if we can go to the next slide. 68 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:21:05.224 --> 01:21:22.924 So, here, I just wanted to highlight how the, uh, complied with issue 1 as required by the, by the decision. We submit a vice letters in which we identify our specific process that we're going. 69 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:21:22.930 --> 01:21:44.075 Point to that follow, which I think Jose had highlighted that a draft resolution had been issued where it is now open for comments. And we'll, uh, we'll be further addressed in in the next workshop but wanted to identify that we had a we have. 70 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:21:44.104 --> 01:21:53.014 File and a draft, the solution has been issued regarding this. So let's go ahead and go to the next slide. 71 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:22:01.024 --> 01:22:16.444 So, regarding 16, uh, the next issue that, uh, we needed to address, uh, from the decision is issue number 2 and that's, uh, specifics of whether, and how reduction of, uh, are determined. 72 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:22:18.154 --> 01:22:39.034 In order to comply with this, uh, with this re, ordering paragraph, uh, submit advice letters in which we defined some of the factors that would be utilized, uh, to do this. And, um, as as we go through the slides here, we are going to. 73 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:22:39.094 --> 01:22:56.764 Dive deeper into some of the, uh, uh, re, defining, you know, how, how? And, and, uh, we are going to accomplish that and what are the circumstances are variables that will, uh, cause a specific, uh, to be reduced. 74 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:22:58.954 --> 01:23:00.064 What are the next slide? 75 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:23:04.715 --> 01:23:22.775 Here I, uh, this slide I wanted to briefly touch on, uh, show a pictorial representation of, uh, just to illustrate the concept and, uh, if conditions arise, uh, where a profile needs to. 76 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:23:22.804 --> 01:23:43.444 The, uh, curtailed, um, it it would not be below the as shown unless, uh, conditions, which will be discussing letters lives occur. So, this example, we have, uh, the green line, which is our yearly value. 77 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:23:44.105 --> 01:23:48.155 Um, the red line shows, uh, the monthly. 78 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:23:48.185 --> 01:24:09.305 With the 10% buffer, uh, for added safety, uh, the red step curve shows, the control operating limits, uh, the dash, I guess BlackLine that you see there. Um, the 2 megawatt Mark is the, uh, nameplate profile of the customer. And then the. 79 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:24:09.334 --> 01:24:30.454 Line shows, uh, the, uh, limited, uh, profile that the customer, uh, would have submitted as part of their application and, uh, just to tear off as far as, uh, an instance where a profile might, uh, be read. 80 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:24:30.459 --> 01:24:51.364 Used here wanted to give an example, for example, if in the month of July or August, the profile for a customer was 2 megawatts and for, uh, if there is a potential concern with reliability, I overloads on the system or other, uh, impacts. 81 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:24:52.444 --> 01:25:12.754 And we would, uh, then reduce the generation profile of that specific customer down from the 2 megawatt value. Uh, not to be below the, um, if you can click 1 more time, um, Mary, or, let's see. Um. 82 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:25:12.785 --> 01:25:15.575 To be below that minimum s. G. 83 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:25:16.054 --> 01:25:36.724 so just wanted to kind of illustrate this here um and one one highlight that we wanted to make here is that uh the the uh the process allows us to uh the ability to do this uh to the nature of uh limited generation profile 84 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:25:37.504 --> 01:25:51.694 Uh, projects as opposed to non projects where, uh, there is no lower minimum, uh, and therefore we would need to, uh, do something to ensure that we can maintain that 2 megawatt. If it was a, uh, non project. 85 Rottman, Mary 01:25:54.664 --> 01:25:59.554 Um, and if I may just break in quickly, I'm Scott. Did you have a question that you wanted to bring up? 86 Sky Stanfield 01:26:01.774 --> 01:26:04.234 Thanks, Mary, you time that perfectly I was just raising my head. 87 Sky Stanfield 01:26:06.364 --> 01:26:26.074 Thank you. Um, so the question I have, it relates to this slide and I just wanted to get some clarity on. I think it was essentially relates to the notes on the right hand side when we're talking about reducing a generator to the minimum. 88 Sky Stanfield 01:26:26.224 --> 01:26:47.224 Value it seems to me, like, it should be the potential to reduce to the limited export value that matches the, not the nameplate rating of the of the system, but rather the limited export amount. 89 Sky Stanfield 01:26:47.824 --> 01:27:08.374 And I wanted to confirm if that's a shared understanding, because it suggests you're referring to the nameplate there instead of what could be a diff, we have the limited generation profile. And then we have just the basic, basic limited generation amount or export value. That could be the system could be limited to. 90 Sky Stanfield 01:27:08.380 --> 01:27:10.325 Too that's that's more static. 91 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:27:10.625 --> 01:27:29.525 Right. So, I think, uh, in this, in this example, it just so happens that the, uh, the, the, the project here is, uh, 2 megawatts right? Which would have been the, the nameplate range, but if we take the the black line and say, we go to, like, say, 3 megawatts right? Then they're limited profile would have been like, maybe. 92 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:27:29.734 --> 01:27:38.644 You know, 2.5, maybe, you know, that the, the, this below the step curve there, which would then would have been below the name play, right? 93 Sky Stanfield 01:27:39.304 --> 01:27:50.554 Right. Okay. So if you had a system that ultimately was limited, so you had nameplate of 3 megawatts just restate that back. 94 Sky Stanfield 01:27:51.035 --> 01:28:01.145 But the s g minimum is 2.5 as long as you're still limiting the export to 2.5, you wouldn't be reduced beyond that. 95 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:28:03.725 --> 01:28:24.335 Unless unless, uh, because if you, if you look at the, uh, the, the, the graph here, right there, the system conditions, uh, landed to be that we can have 2.5. right? But as you progress throughout the, the, uh, the months here in. 96 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:28:24.634 --> 01:28:45.664 In April, you can see that for that same circuit. Uh, the profile can go below that 2.5. right? Which, you know, uh, and so are similarly in October. So it is possible that, uh, maybe in the month of January, we could have a condition similar to April. 97 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:28:45.754 --> 01:28:52.954 And therefore, we may have to go down right to a lower number. And that that would be a. 98 Sky Stanfield 01:28:53.374 --> 01:29:05.014 Yeah, let me just ask this a different way. I think I, I didn't I stumbled that a little bit. So if whatever you're reducing down to is, the lowest amount you're allowed to reduce down to is what? The minimum. 99 Sky Stanfield 01:29:05.410 --> 01:29:26.525 Value would be, but it's is that marked to the, the limited export of the system, or to the nameplate of the system. So, even cause the system could be designed to have behind the meter, you know, charging are discharging to, uh, to just the minimum. I see. 100 Sky Stanfield 01:29:26.559 --> 01:29:33.214 Key value, even though the total nameplate is greater than that, especially if you're a solar plus storage. So that's going to be pretty common when. 101 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:29:36.964 --> 01:29:39.064 Towards do you know. 102 Jorge Chacon 01:29:41.794 --> 01:29:42.064 Running. 103 Jorge Chacon 01:29:42.124 --> 01:30:01.504 I think, then, the next slide goes a little bit into the reductions, maybe if we can move to the next slide and try to address this question with a little bit more understanding of temporary reductions versus potential long term future grit reductions, as a result of future great conditions. 104 Sky Stanfield 01:30:02.644 --> 01:30:12.634 Oh, okay. Before we do that I also had 1 other question just on that slide. Is this profile that you guys are showing an actual profile from a point on Edison system. 105 Jorge Chacon 01:30:14.644 --> 01:30:22.954 Yeah, the short answer is coming to that, and it is now we haven't received a single request to know whether this profile. 106 Jorge Chacon 01:30:23.014 --> 01:30:24.604 I mean, this, this is an example. 107 Sky Stanfield 01:30:24.844 --> 01:30:27.124 No, but, I mean, the profile. 108 Jorge Chacon 01:30:30.215 --> 01:30:33.455 It may have been a a profile that. 109 Roger Salas SCE 01:30:35.974 --> 01:30:39.634 These are simulation only so no, it is not a not a specific. 110 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:30:41.289 --> 01:30:46.054 and that is to say before we move on to the oh how did you have another question 111 Sky Stanfield 01:30:47.614 --> 01:30:50.404 No, my hand, sorry. 112 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:30:50.464 --> 01:31:02.104 So, uh, yeah, so I guess this, I don't know if this was answered already, but when I looked at this slide is, uh, you know, that the. 113 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:31:02.734 --> 01:31:23.584 Name played profile the, uh, black dash line and the, uh, blue line. My interpretation was that right now we're not, uh, the Pro, this customer would choose to be a 2 megawatt everywhere, but then. 114 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:31:23.614 --> 01:31:43.114 Cause I ca, was lower in April. The limited generation profile submitted at the time of application would take a dip there and also it dip in August and October. I just wanted to make sure that that's what the correct correct interpretation. 115 Roger Salas SCE 01:31:44.765 --> 01:32:05.705 Yeah, this is Roger 1 more thing, I think, to skies. I'm not sure who answered the question we're talking about export, you know, I think in this, in this assumption is that nameplate this is a generic facility that has no load. It's just basically a dedicated in front of the meter type of system and so that's why being named played versus export scan of synonymous here. 116 Sky Stanfield 01:32:06.575 --> 01:32:06.965 Okay. 117 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:32:07.325 --> 01:32:07.595 All right. 118 Sky Stanfield 01:32:07.595 --> 01:32:08.675 Thanks, Roger. That's helpful. 119 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:32:08.825 --> 01:32:10.055 Yes, it is. Thank you. 120 Jorge Chacon 01:32:15.994 --> 01:32:18.574 All right, Jose, so, I think to answer your question. 121 Jorge Chacon 01:32:20.285 --> 01:32:41.135 This was a customer, the customer would be looking at the values that are published and be arriving effectively the, the blue line to submit as part of their own a connection request. So the IC would be requesting limited profiles. 122 Jorge Chacon 01:32:41.165 --> 01:33:00.395 In a connection request the middle, if, for example, the project size was 1 megawatt as a hypothetical, then it would be, you know, the customer would have no need necessarily to submit a limited Jim profile and we simply submitted in or connection requests for the project of 1 megawatt, which will be evaluated. 123 Jorge Chacon 01:33:03.364 --> 01:33:10.234 Uh, the conference room at the gym, because there's no limitation on this particular example. 124 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:33:10.714 --> 01:33:17.374 Okay, thank you. All right. Awesome. Thank you. Roger that, uh, your clarification there made this, uh, you know. 125 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:33:18.004 --> 01:33:20.944 Understandable and sky has another question. Go ahead. 126 Sky Stanfield 01:33:21.934 --> 01:33:38.824 Yeah, I think I think the slides we're spending a little time on, because it kind of helps us see what we're talking about. Um, I just wanted to ask for clarity purposes. You guys in this example, you're proposing that the customer limited it's generation profile to to megawatts. 127 Sky Stanfield 01:33:38.974 --> 01:33:58.564 But they could have proposed a profile that, for example, went up to 2.8 in March, right? And you guys just chose to limit it to or is there any, any reason that you chose to not have the profile increase beyond that minimum. 128 Roger Salas SCE 01:34:00.245 --> 01:34:02.735 I can answer that I can answer the. 129 Jorge Chacon 01:34:02.735 --> 01:34:03.155 The head, right? 130 Roger Salas SCE 01:34:03.845 --> 01:34:08.525 This is an example of a 2 megawatt project. Customers really need to move our project. 131 Sky Stanfield 01:34:09.305 --> 01:34:09.725 [...] [...]. 132 Roger Salas SCE 01:34:09.725 --> 01:34:17.255 Community Chicago project, they would be limited to the steps in red then they need to stay below the steps in rights. 133 Sky Stanfield 01:34:17.615 --> 01:34:17.945 Right. 134 Roger Salas SCE 01:34:17.975 --> 01:34:21.245 It could have basically on the March or April, say my. 135 Roger Salas SCE 01:34:21.274 --> 01:34:41.944 It is 1.5. that will be perfectly acceptable. This is just an example of what we are showing for understanding purposes, only that a customer needs to submit a profile that looks like this. They could also chose. They could also choose to say, I'm wondering I'm going to go to 1.5 and in May if they wanted to. 136 Roger Salas SCE 01:34:42.514 --> 01:34:57.004 Because even though they're not required to, they could have done that also if they wanted to but they couldn't go more than 2 minutes because that's the, that's the gym generation. Nameplate ready. They cannot go more than that because that's the, the size of the generator. 137 Sky Stanfield 01:34:57.004 --> 01:35:03.544 Itself right, but if we could have done, that's helpful. That's why I was assuming I just want to confirm that we could have done. 138 Sky Stanfield 01:35:03.549 --> 01:35:08.494 Hypothetical where we had a project that was up to 2.52.8. 139 Roger Salas SCE 01:35:08.644 --> 01:35:09.034 That's right. 140 Sky Stanfield 01:35:11.915 --> 01:35:19.595 Limited export amount so that they could capture those periods when there, when more generation, um, was potential I just wanted to. 141 Sky Stanfield 01:35:19.655 --> 01:35:24.845 Confirm that that was not it was just your chosen chosen example not suggesting that. 142 Roger Salas SCE 01:35:25.415 --> 01:35:31.685 You can, you could just say generator that's 3 megawatts that brings the dash line up. And now you. 143 Roger Salas SCE 01:35:32.344 --> 01:35:34.684 More steps that you have to deploy that's all. 144 Sky Stanfield 01:35:34.744 --> 01:35:36.994 All right great thanks, Robin. I appreciate that. 145 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:35:40.414 --> 01:35:59.944 Thank you, thank you Scott. So, I think, uh, so, um, I think this is a good discussion, uh, within that this is why I wanted to show a pictorial example, because it kind of gives that, uh, you know, the, the, some of, uh, you a visual visual view of what we're. 146 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:35:59.974 --> 01:36:07.864 Be talking about today, so let's go ahead and move on to the next next slide. 147 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:36:20.704 --> 01:36:36.604 All right, so so this is where we, um, go ahead and dive into the, uh, some of the specifics, uh, to address the decision. Um, and, uh, the objective of this slide is to identify, uh, the variables. 148 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:36:37.834 --> 01:36:57.724 That, uh, drive, uh, safety and reliability risks. Um, generally, um, this, uh, falls into 2 categories. Uh, we've identified here in this slide, uh, temporary reductions and, uh, long term, uh, reduction. 149 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:36:59.525 --> 01:37:18.875 Um, under the temporary reductions, uh, scenario, uh, there could be emergency conditions where, uh, a, where the system could experience a loss of an element. I E, a contingency that was not, uh, that is unplanned. 150 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:37:19.174 --> 01:37:40.054 So, for example, if the there is an instance where a, uh, somebody's driving hits a pull on a specific circuit and, uh, for some reason that pole falls falls down, which then in turn causes, uh, a, uh, the loss of that circuit and. 151 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:37:40.084 --> 01:38:01.084 By causing a, an overload or voltage D. K in our system and the resulting solution could be I. E, tripping generation or reducing generation as needed to mitigate the, uh, the condition which results from this, uh, emergency. 152 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:38:01.264 --> 01:38:22.024 It could also be scenarios where we have planned maintenance and, uh, where, uh, we, uh, as we go through our, um, activities to ensure that we have a reliable grid, we do perform periodic maintenance on specific elements of the grid. 153 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:38:22.384 --> 01:38:43.504 And, uh, there might be instances when, uh, we may not be able to work on this elements hot. It may necessary necessitate us to perhaps the energize a circuit, a circuit, which then might create a, a, uh, a state in our system where we may need to either. 154 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:38:44.045 --> 01:39:04.655 Curtail or or trip generation, uh, so that we can perform that work and once that work has been completed, then the, uh, the system will come back to its normal state and we would, uh, then, uh, bring back everything to normal. So that would be. 155 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:39:04.659 --> 01:39:25.774 Some of examples of temporary reductions where this would occur, um, some examples of long term reductions, uh, that that, uh, we've highlighted here is, um, there might be instances where we. 156 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:39:26.194 --> 01:39:46.954 Might have projected, uh, you know, a certain, uh, load forecast in our studies. Uh, but then system conditions change and, uh, a customer decides to close their plant, which then, uh, would reduce the amount of load within our system. 157 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:39:46.984 --> 01:40:05.344 Which then can create a future, a great condition that will no longer be able to, uh, maintain the level of of, uh, capacity, uh, that was originally, um. 158 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:40:06.699 --> 01:40:27.454 Identified when the application process went through, uh, were when we went through the initial application process with the customer, therefore, uh, a, there, it could necessitate us to reduce the, uh, the limited generation profile sky was pointed out that. 159 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:40:27.935 --> 01:40:48.965 If, you know, the project is a 2.8 megawatt, but we only have a, uh, you know, 2.5 then perhaps it would have to go 2.5 or maybe even lower, uh, to the minimum that we've identified in the previous slide, which perhaps could be 1, uh, 1 megawatt or. 160 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:40:48.999 --> 01:41:10.144 Even more, uh, 1 megawatt, I think it was 11.1 megawatt. Um, there another instance could be where customers are also installing large amounts of non, uh, expert project, uh, which can also lead to a reduction of load, which can then also create. 161 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:41:10.174 --> 01:41:31.294 A new state within our systems that could decrease, uh, the, uh, the, the profile that we had originally identified in our studies. There are instances, uh, that we could have a permanent, uh, grid modifications, uh, that could also affect, uh, the. 162 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:41:31.299 --> 01:41:37.774 The initial state of the grid, which could then in turn. 163 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:41:38.435 --> 01:41:59.495 Ultimately impact the the profile that was initially identified and there, of course, there's certain expansions, uh, that would require us to take extended, uh, outages, uh, E, uh, we're installing a new duck bank reconfiguration or perhaps. 164 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:42:00.034 --> 01:42:20.644 Putting a, a brand new circuit that would necessitate us to maybe decouple some circuits and, and couple of them with others. And so therefore, uh, would require, uh, obviously the energizing. And and once the new circuit is built, which can take a. 165 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:42:20.674 --> 01:42:30.064 Uh, could have long lead times, but then require us to, uh, potentially, uh, uh, generation. 166 Jorge Chacon 01:42:34.264 --> 01:42:54.484 And in your earlier question, you know, about the difference between temporary reductions and long term that you can see here, is that under a temporary reduction if you have an emergency condition, the operators will take the action necessary. That would be equivalent to to the action taken for a non. 167 Jorge Chacon 01:42:54.604 --> 01:43:15.634 Project and that may necessitate a temporary reduction or a curtailment down to 0, whereas under the long term reduction, we either the reduction is limited to the reduction to the minimum value. So I know you were asking that question as far as. 168 Jorge Chacon 01:43:15.665 --> 01:43:36.785 How much you can reduce this paints the picture in terms of the expectations and the reductions those that are emergency conditions temporarily, in nature may be curtail down to 0, in the same way that a non project would be, would be impacted. And then under the long term is, is. 169 Jorge Chacon 01:43:36.994 --> 01:43:43.024 We would be looking towards, uh, limiting the reductions to within the minimum value. 170 Sky Stanfield 01:43:44.404 --> 01:43:57.934 Thanks for the temporary rejection. 1 makes sense to me. Do you want to speak a little bit to or clarify? So for the long term reductions what how would these apply or what would you do for a non. 171 Sky Stanfield 01:43:57.939 --> 01:44:03.334 Customer just a traditional old school, inner connection in those cases. 172 Jorge Chacon 01:44:05.644 --> 01:44:12.694 Uh, from an operator point of view of Roger, if you can speak to that, I don't know that I have the operational. 173 Roger Salas SCE 01:44:13.834 --> 01:44:18.994 Well, I, I would the 1st thing, I would start with, uh, sky and with myself and cameras. 174 Roger Salas SCE 01:44:19.234 --> 01:44:39.994 So, I'm speaking apologize for that. Um, is that, you know, I want to make sure, you know, that we're talking today about the, the projects, um, non SBP projects, right? We, I think we have a lot of discussion as to how Trina analogy projects. 175 Roger Salas SCE 01:44:41.404 --> 01:45:00.964 Uh, in other areas, but nevertheless, to answer your question, um, you know, they didn't mention we really haven't seen a lot of experiences as you've seen. I mean, we didn't plenty of data requests. So in theory in theory, I want to send a more prefaced. That was in theory, if there was a significant issue. 176 Roger Salas SCE 01:45:01.445 --> 01:45:22.505 Like this, and actually they create a safety concern I don't think we would say, like, well, we can actually tell I mean, I don't think we will be putting ourselves in that situation. We would probably ask the customer, right? We need you to curtail even, you know, we'll try to get you back as quickly as possible to where you are approved. But I don't think that we would be telling a customer you know, I don't think we were putting. 177 Roger Salas SCE 01:45:22.539 --> 01:45:43.294 Creating a safety conditions, because we cannot tell a project. The reality is we haven't seen that and honestly, I don't we don't expect to see that, but again, it has to do. We'll talk about a little bit more in the in the other slides to talk about. This is the, the minimum value of IC as compared to 12 values right? Perhaps that's the reason why we have seen it. We have not seen it. 178 Roger Salas SCE 01:45:43.834 --> 01:45:54.964 But to answer your question, how we would treat it if this was a safety issue, I think would really the same. It's just a response afterwards, I think would would be a little bit different. Sorry, Scott, you're on mute. 179 Sky Stanfield 01:45:57.785 --> 01:45:59.855 Sorry, it's good. Keeps me for interrupting you. 180 Sky Stanfield 01:46:03.154 --> 01:46:23.044 It makes sense to me that you would treat it the same in terms of, like, a temporary reduction or, you know, an emergency type. So now, I think the question and 1st of all I want to acknowledge that. I hear you here. Are you saying this really hasn't come up in the historically and we've done a bunch of data requests on that? And that makes sense to me where the difference is is is so. 181 Sky Stanfield 01:46:23.314 --> 01:46:36.844 There's a temporary reduction to address safety and liability, but then there's a longer term question. Well, what would happen after that and that's kind of what I was getting at. And I think your answer is we haven't ever done it. So, we don't know yet, is that what I got from that. 182 Roger Salas SCE 01:46:37.294 --> 01:46:37.984 No, I. 183 Sky Stanfield 01:46:37.984 --> 01:46:44.314 You guys have a policy approach that you would take for those traditional generators again looking at. 184 Sky Stanfield 01:46:44.319 --> 01:46:51.904 The long term you might have to reduce for emergencies like, what would happen in terms of cost responsibility and actual. 185 Sky Stanfield 01:46:52.805 --> 01:46:54.515 Sort of restoration efforts. 186 Roger Salas SCE 01:46:54.665 --> 01:47:13.835 And I think we'll answer to another another slide, but I'll but I'll preface it by saying that or the ones for the projects. We do not have the ability to say you go down to to another value permanently. So, it's likely that we will have to do whatever we need to do. 187 Roger Salas SCE 01:47:14.104 --> 01:47:33.484 And upgrades wise to be able to bring them to their approve value, they may still have to go down to a given level. Because we have a safety condition that we need to address but we would for sure. Do some upgrades to get them to where they need to be? That's the big difference between the LGB projects and the management projects and the, and the. 188 Roger Salas SCE 01:47:33.724 --> 01:47:48.544 The the projects, they don't have that guarantee, we may may want to bring as long as we bring them down to to the value that is perfectly acceptable. The resolution is ruling, uh, or non SBP projects. We have to bring them back to where they approve. 189 Sky Stanfield 01:47:49.504 --> 01:47:50.284 Thanks, Roger. 190 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:47:52.654 --> 01:47:54.304 And, uh, Brett has. 191 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:47:55.624 --> 01:47:56.164 Question. 192 Brad Heavner 01:47:57.364 --> 01:48:15.904 Good morning Brad haven't heard from Telsa um, thanks for the presentation. Um, but this discussion just brings up a lot more questions. So, in the, the last bullet on this page, um, it seems to indicate that it will always be the goal to bring the customer to do the upgrades necessary. 193 Brad Heavner 01:48:15.995 --> 01:48:22.415 Bring the customer back to their approve generation levels in the interconnection agreement. Is that true? 194 Roger Salas SCE 01:48:24.454 --> 01:48:45.094 No, I don't I don't think that that's what the last bullet it's saying only saying that in the last bullet, what he's saying is specifically only for the projects, uh, and probably more more specific only for the last bullet, is that there's some projects where we need to take say, system of normals. 195 Roger Salas SCE 01:48:45.874 --> 01:49:06.724 That are, I will consider them a little bit longer than temporary and so it could be that we need to do a 6 month circuit normal during the winter time to do be be able to do an upgrade under those conditions. We may require a reduction of the LGB profile, as opposed to taking down to 0, which will be. 196 Roger Salas SCE 01:49:06.754 --> 01:49:27.454 That, you know, the 1st, you know, temporary reductions up on top, but nevertheless, at the end, when the system upgrades are completed and those system Margaret will be for other purposes, capacity upgrades, or whatever, once that's done, then for both the number fours very specifically, only for bullet number 4, they will probably go back to their original limits. 197 Roger Salas SCE 01:49:27.905 --> 01:49:41.375 Um, as opposed to the 334 bullets that you see there, those were, those could be a permanent changes in the grid and for those would be when you have the LGB value change permanently. 198 Brad Heavner 01:49:42.245 --> 01:49:48.365 Let me, let me ask you an example, would make it clear cause it still wasn't 100 clear to me. 2 industrial facilities side by side. 199 Brad Heavner 01:49:49.030 --> 01:50:01.715 1 of them has generation, the other 1 goes out of business and goes away. And so you want to reduce the generator to below the original to the static. 200 Brad Heavner 01:50:01.865 --> 01:50:19.715 Levels, um, as soon as you can, because that's 1 answer to the issue. Now, could it be that the ultimate if that takes care of the problem, then you're not going to plan any upgrades to bring them back. You're just that's the permanent solution. You leave them at the lower level. 201 Roger Salas SCE 01:50:19.895 --> 01:50:20.315 That's right. 202 Brad Heavner 01:50:21.844 --> 01:50:42.574 And then in response to sky's question, um, you said, it's never come up with their existing interconnection agreements without, is it not the case that there's not a tool that you have? You're not able to go after the interconnection agreement and say, sorry, your neighbor went out of business, you need to stop change the numbers in your inner connection. 203 Roger Salas SCE 01:50:45.244 --> 01:50:46.504 I don't understand your question, but. 204 Brad Heavner 01:50:46.534 --> 01:50:51.184 Isn't it the case that you don't have that tool right now? You don't you, you haven't gone back because you can't. 205 Roger Salas SCE 01:50:51.994 --> 01:51:03.754 No, I don't think that's the case. I mean, the reality is, you know, we have not heard, um, typically, this type of issues will come up to things like customer complaints or or or or. 206 Roger Salas SCE 01:51:03.785 --> 01:51:24.785 System, um, system conditions where we see things like high voltage then we do an investigation and we determine that it says, even project discussing the issue. We have not seen that type of condition. So so, no, I don't think so. I think we haven't experienced said for the non project, but that's. 207 Roger Salas SCE 01:51:25.355 --> 01:51:31.625 You know, we, we, we use the lowest value of the of the 24 months, 12 months, right? 208 Brad Heavner 01:51:32.015 --> 01:51:35.405 Well, in in my example, going back to my example, if it's not an. 209 Brad Heavner 01:51:38.404 --> 01:51:50.794 And the other 1 goes out of business, just based on load flow and capacity of the circuit. Are you able to go back to the generating facility and say we need to redo your interconnection agreement? 210 Roger Salas SCE 01:51:51.394 --> 01:51:56.854 Again, that's what I said earlier, not for the not LGB projects. We are not allowed to do that. 211 Brad Heavner 01:51:56.944 --> 01:51:57.244 Okay. 212 Roger Salas SCE 01:51:57.364 --> 01:52:09.424 What I said earlier is that if it was a real safety issue, where, you know, that other plan closed down, and now we're seeing 125 bullets on the line and we cannot fix that. 213 Brad Heavner 01:52:09.724 --> 01:52:10.744 It was immediate safety. 214 Roger Salas SCE 01:52:11.404 --> 01:52:18.484 Safety right, but but then for the non projects, we would probably do have to do system upgrades. 215 Roger Salas SCE 01:52:18.604 --> 01:52:35.224 Get them back to where they need to be, uh, based on the approve agreement for the non LTV projects that is different than the projects, which if that issue gets mitigated by reducing the profile down to the value, then then then maybe a permanent reduction. 216 Brad Heavner 01:52:35.584 --> 01:52:39.634 Okay, is my point is it doesn't give me a lot of confidence when you say. 217 Brad Heavner 01:52:39.665 --> 01:52:42.875 Don't think it's going to happen much because it hasn't happened in the past. 218 Brad Heavner 01:52:43.295 --> 01:52:50.915 It is, this is a new tool. So that that really, I don't think is is is a meaningful, um, comparisons. 219 Roger Salas SCE 01:52:51.605 --> 01:53:00.785 Right, right, right. We don't I mean, you know, we, we haven't done any of this and you'll see you'll see in the various discussions here. You know, I'm hoping that, you know, the. 220 Roger Salas SCE 01:53:00.814 --> 01:53:10.984 You know, whatever couple of years where we start getting some of these and putting some experience under our belt that we can determine whether or not it's a problem. Now, at this point is just theoretical. We don't know he may or may not happen. 221 Brad Heavner 01:53:11.374 --> 01:53:15.934 Okay, 1 question, Scott, if you would have something on this, I was going to change a little bit. 222 Sky Stanfield 01:53:16.714 --> 01:53:21.934 Yeah, well, let me follow up and just sort of put a placeholder proposal or something to talk about further on. 223 Sky Stanfield 01:53:22.024 --> 01:53:42.994 So, for everybody else participating, been doing some data requests with the utilities in preparation for phase 2, to kind of get into this a similar set of questions about how often this could happen and how you would even know if it happens. And I think they have another slide later on that's going to talk a little bit about how you would, how they would identify the circumstance and to your. 224 Sky Stanfield 01:53:43.204 --> 01:54:04.204 Like, it's not that there is some tool that's already identifying it all the time. You obviously would see it if you had a major industrial facility dropping off and high voltage throughout your set. But I think 1 of the things that we should dig into or would be helpful is to Rogers point. We don't know exactly what's going to happen. 225 Sky Stanfield 01:54:04.239 --> 01:54:25.384 In the coming years, and I think the problem is, is that we for generators or potential applicants, wanting to do an, we're never gonna be able to test it. If they don't have enough assurance that they can build something like, we can't no developer is going to volunteer to be the dummy that loses some huge amount of financial impact because it turns out this does happen. 226 Sky Stanfield 01:54:25.415 --> 01:54:46.535 A lot, and so I think there's, that's 1 of the core things that we need to figure out how to balance, or look at going forward in building this experience. Because we will never get the experience, unless we can build some sort of safety mechanism in for those generators, which means we lose out on this ability to actually provide. 227 Sky Stanfield 01:54:46.564 --> 01:55:07.684 More generational in the system needs it more, but I think that that gets to those 4 questions we don't know, but the, only if the only way to test it is to ask an individual generator to assume a huge amount of financial or potential unknown financial liability. It may turn out to be 0 or it may turn out to be a lot then we're never really going to get the opportunity to find out if this works and benefits. 228 Sky Stanfield 01:55:07.714 --> 01:55:12.244 The grant, or if those load productions actually happen more often in the future. 229 Roger Salas SCE 01:55:13.894 --> 01:55:14.104 Yeah. 230 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:55:15.634 --> 01:55:34.144 Thank you for that and I think, uh, if, uh, in that detailed document word document that I circulated, um, and remaining people that, you know, the purpose of the was to avoid distribution upgrades and 1 of the questions I had was. 231 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:55:35.254 --> 01:55:52.264 What, if let's say a customer submits their, you know, and avoid the upgrades but then a year from now, the, um. 232 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:55:53.914 --> 01:56:13.174 You know, they need to reduce to that low, lowest value, you know, for, let's say permanent or, you know, could they have the choice without going through the interconnection process again? Could they have the choice. 233 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:56:14.014 --> 01:56:35.074 There, hey, you know what? This is actually working for me, but I don't want to be at the lowest value. Can I pay for the upgrades now and bring myself sooner to either, you know, full capacity or to original, you know, without going. 234 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:56:35.134 --> 01:56:37.324 Through the interconnection process again. 235 Jorge Chacon 01:56:41.164 --> 01:56:47.554 Have a slide to that about that if we can defer that, or we can jump to that slide. If you want. 236 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 01:56:48.034 --> 01:56:51.244 Okay, no, that we can wait till we can wait to that. 237 Jorge Chacon 01:56:51.274 --> 01:56:51.424 Okay. 238 Sky Stanfield 01:56:52.054 --> 01:57:00.484 Can I jump in and just say I want to make a, I think that that's 1 option that you've queued up Jose in terms of, like the mitigations and so on. But what I'm saying is, I don't. 239 Sky Stanfield 01:57:00.514 --> 01:57:20.944 Think that that's a viable business option for most developers to say, they would build the capacity. Not know if they could if they might have to reduce and then know that. They could they could pay to upgrade the grid afterwards. If they wanted to use that capacity, which I think is what you're saying. 240 Sky Stanfield 01:57:21.785 --> 01:57:42.695 The, the central problem that we're trying to grapple with is giving that level of financial certainty to a developer. Like, yes, you could pay for upgrades later. Just like, you could have paid for upgrades in the beginning, but we're not getting any benefit from that. But if we do it that way, we're not getting any benefit of we're paying for upgrades. That may not be needed. 241 Sky Stanfield 01:57:42.814 --> 01:57:49.564 We need to build that the idea that you can upgrade later isn't really resolving the front problem is what I'm saying. 242 Brad Heavner 01:57:50.164 --> 01:58:03.934 1, quick comment, if I may on this specific topic 1 concern we have is with load growth from electrification happening throughout the state. This is going to happen 100% of the time the existing capacity in each. 243 Brad Heavner 01:58:04.024 --> 01:58:24.844 Is likely to get filled up and if generators are the 1st solution to deal with that, it's only a matter of time in any 1 customer before. They're they're ordered to reduce their output. Obviously it's not true. 100% of the time. But, but the vast majority, if we have low growth is likely to happen if this is a new tool. 244 Brad Heavner 01:58:25.294 --> 01:58:28.084 That the utilities have, it's just it's a matter of when. 245 Roger Salas SCE 01:58:28.954 --> 01:58:31.444 Electrification, but actually helps this problem. 246 Sky Stanfield 01:58:31.714 --> 01:58:32.374 Yeah, what do you mean. 247 Roger Salas SCE 01:58:33.004 --> 01:58:46.234 Yeah, so, I mean, actually putting more money in the system reduces vulnerabilities that we will have to do this. I mean, again I just want to prep is that, you know, these are these, these are possible. 248 Roger Salas SCE 01:58:46.264 --> 01:59:07.384 Conditions are low, you know, especially with electrification probably going to go up, but, you know, there may be some situations where this happens. It's just, you know, it's really hard to answer the question. How often this is going to happen because we don't know, but we need to just align on what are the possibilities that make happen and how would we deal with it? 249 Roger Salas SCE 01:59:07.415 --> 01:59:19.115 Happens, um, and I understand folks don't want to take any risk. I get that, but at the same time, maybe this is what sort of what the decision outlined. 250 Brad Heavner 01:59:22.114 --> 01:59:28.774 I have a question about how this is dealt with on an hourly basis analysis, but maybe I'll hold because you have a lot more slides to get through. 251 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:59:32.494 --> 01:59:32.944 Thank you. 252 Jorge Chacon 01:59:34.264 --> 01:59:42.424 Yeah, and run it before you go just we don't lose the Jose question that is covered in section. 3 is just so for awareness. 253 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:59:44.944 --> 01:59:45.574 All right. 254 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:59:52.024 --> 01:59:53.854 I think we can go to the next slide. 255 Roni Mejia - SCE 01:59:58.804 --> 01:59:59.314 So. 256 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:00:01.295 --> 02:00:22.115 So identifying some of the variables and, uh, that I guess a would drive safety and reliability risks, which were identified in the previous slide. Um, here in, in this specific slide, I'll invite, um, PG E, and need to talk on their specific pieces here. But, uh, I can go ahead and dive. 257 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:00:22.144 --> 02:00:43.144 To a part, and, um, the, the objective of this is to kind of show, um, how often some of the temporary and long term, uh, costs is discussed potentially in the previous slides have occurred and the types of causes. So, the table for, uh, shows, how often. 258 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:00:43.594 --> 02:01:04.354 Uh, guess a certain outages have occurred. So, for example, uh, for unplanned, um, automatic, uh, initiated in, uh, from 2007, uh, 2017, we have, we see 9 outages and, uh, uh, as as the years progress you see, uh, less outages in that. Um. 259 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:01:04.684 --> 02:01:24.994 Specific, uh, unplanned area and then, um, there could be also unplanned operations initiated and this might be reacting to certain conditions within the grid, uh, where they needed to, uh, uh, ensure the safety of, uh, of a specific circuit or the grid itself. 260 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:01:25.594 --> 02:01:30.064 So, we, there have been 3 instances in 2017 when that has happened. 261 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:01:31.624 --> 02:01:52.294 Example of, uh, some of the planned, uh, I guess maintenance it could be scheduled work, uh, which obviously would have been planned ahead of time and, uh, impact that customers would have been notified or communicator of this schedule work. And, uh, you can see here. Some of the, uh, those outages that have occurred. 262 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:01:52.654 --> 02:02:12.844 Obviously, there could be instances where the customer needs to initiate an outage, um, whether it be to perform their own maintenance or whatever the case may be. Uh, we highlight that here within this graph. And, um, we also show here that we haven't seen any, uh, related. 263 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:02:14.255 --> 02:02:28.235 Generation packages, um, so, so with that, maybe I'll hand it over to PG E, uh, for their slide for the, uh, the table here and then then we can go to. 264 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:02:40.414 --> 02:02:42.484 Is anybody there for PG E. 265 Vishal Singh 02:02:42.994 --> 02:02:44.884 Okay, uh, this is Michelle. Can you hear me. 266 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:02:45.484 --> 02:02:46.264 Yeah, go ahead. 267 Vishal Singh 02:02:46.384 --> 02:02:50.404 Yeah, I'll speak on behalf so we're kind of aligned with the. 268 Vishal Singh 02:02:53.344 --> 02:03:08.074 For the 21 generators similar to what thing but but 1 megawatt and all of that, we do connect and disconnect right? As far as based on our procedures but there's no, as far as curtailment if that's what's being asked. 269 Vishal Singh 02:03:10.565 --> 02:03:11.255 We do currently. 270 Neil Echols 02:03:11.495 --> 02:03:14.585 Yeah, so this is also, can you guys hear me. 271 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:03:16.025 --> 02:03:17.135 Yeah, can hear you. 272 Neil Echols 02:03:18.065 --> 02:03:30.035 Okay, thank you. Yeah, I was trying to speak earlier so I gathered the information there on the right for PG. E. it's very similar to what reported out. We gather data back to 2017. 273 Neil Echols 02:03:31.114 --> 02:03:51.844 Most instances that we see here are scheduled work where the source line is being taken out of service for various reasons, for the most part facility upgrades maintenance activities. And what not couple instances where we had the customer requesting the line being taken out for their own activities and we have. 274 Neil Echols 02:03:52.209 --> 02:04:13.234 1 instance, of a impacted outage back in 2019 no instances since since that to date, all of these instances were full curtailment, not partial procurement. So they were requested to come offline as the source line was taken off. 275 Neil Echols 02:04:13.534 --> 02:04:25.114 Reasons so that that's really all I have pertaining to this information or this report. So, turn it over back to or San Diego. 276 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:04:26.824 --> 02:04:29.044 Thank you. Yeah. 277 Rottman, Mary 02:04:29.044 --> 02:04:29.764 Okay. 278 Rottman, Mary 02:04:30.605 --> 02:04:31.775 Did you have a question. 279 Brad Heavner 02:04:34.055 --> 02:04:40.865 Yeah, thanks for jumping. I might have just missed something you just said, but can you explain again the greater than 1 megawatt? Why? It's it only that. 280 Roger Salas SCE 02:04:43.595 --> 02:04:46.625 I can take a deep talking about the SC chart. 281 Brad Heavner 02:04:47.464 --> 02:04:53.914 He said it was also megawatt. Wow. Is that just your data or that? You just don't don't look at it below megawatt. 282 Roger Salas SCE 02:04:54.484 --> 02:05:07.804 So, I'm gonna Pre phase, uh, our, uh, uh, the portion we didn't have time to I'm gonna say, digest all these, these, that I was presented. I think, as part of a small number of working group. 283 Roger Salas SCE 02:05:08.465 --> 02:05:29.495 Uh, from our operations teams, and so, this is where the data was gathered from there. So we don't need a, you know, I'm gonna say, currently, you know, just prefix it, that that, uh, need to get more details to determine exactly the sizes and things like that. But it is likely that these were only those projects greater than 1 megawatt, because for operational purposes, those are. 284 Roger Salas SCE 02:05:29.525 --> 02:05:50.525 Ones that we tend to take out or disconnect when we have things like a faulty condition, and we want to be able to, you know, sectionilize the systems for us to be able to restore, uh, service to our customers. Typically we go for the large generators. Uh, to to take them out temporarily while we reconfiguring. 285 Roger Salas SCE 02:05:50.854 --> 02:06:11.614 Find a faulty condition so that's the reason why we're saying is likely only greater than 1 megawatt, because the smaller ones, uh, we, we, we don't really have equipment to be able to disconnect them. And we probably wouldn't be, you know, going out to customers to try to disconnect them, um, because we're really wanted an emergency at that and that particular time. Um, so, you know, but again. 286 Roger Salas SCE 02:06:11.824 --> 02:06:17.644 We'll get into more details in terms of like, what spaces for this, but is likely greater than 1 megawatt systems. 287 Brad Heavner 02:06:19.234 --> 02:06:19.444 Okay. 288 Sky Stanfield 02:06:21.785 --> 02:06:32.555 Or either, PG or the on the table on the it shows transmission or distribution can you explain what that means? I'm not sure if I capture why they're all. 289 Neil Echols 02:06:32.555 --> 02:06:32.765 So. 290 Sky Stanfield 02:06:32.975 --> 02:06:33.665 What that means. 291 Neil Echols 02:06:34.325 --> 02:06:41.405 From transmission related for, from PGA, should I say I represent transmission the grid control center so this is. 292 Neil Echols 02:06:41.435 --> 02:07:02.555 The data that we provided for transmission related outages, I can't speak for distribution related impacts from what I understand. There's, you know, their higher chance of them happened just because of the amount of rule 21 customers on a distribution versus transmission, but that's what it is. 293 Neil Echols 02:07:02.584 --> 02:07:06.814 Or it's just a transmission interconnected, real 21 generator. 294 Sky Stanfield 02:07:09.214 --> 02:07:11.674 Interconnected rule 21 generators. 295 Neil Echols 02:07:12.874 --> 02:07:13.264 Correct. 296 Roger Salas SCE 02:07:13.984 --> 02:07:23.704 Yeah, and and Skype, that's a good question. I know. I'm not sure what recommendation I suspect that it's actually distribution and a connection generators, but that would be 1 more item that. 297 Roger Salas SCE 02:07:23.734 --> 02:07:29.074 Will follow up, we'll provide we'll do something and this 1 and we'll clarify what that means. 298 Sky Stanfield 02:07:29.104 --> 02:07:44.164 Yeah, it seems like that's important cause otherwise I'm not sure that this is actually either makes sense or is very helpful because the vast majority of the interconnections are distribution. So we good to find out how many distribution enter connected generators are curtailed underneath. 299 Dustin Dear 02:07:46.624 --> 02:08:06.004 So this is Dustin here, we went through on the distribution operations engineering manager for PG, and E. we went through this exercise. Um, I believe it was back in September and due to the volume and the lack of, or the, um. 300 Dustin Dear 02:08:06.065 --> 02:08:26.615 Data required, um, we were not able to furnish the distribution level from a volume standpoint. There's many times, especially during switching events, both planned and unplanned where a generator may be forced offline automatically. 301 Dustin Dear 02:08:28.175 --> 02:08:43.385 Um, you know, for safety reasons, and there hasn't due to the volume of switching, we weren't able to furnish that data. Um, but we can definitely circle back to that topic to, to do some more digging. 302 Roger Salas SCE 02:08:45.664 --> 02:09:06.604 1 month, take away here, uh, you know, just going back to the previous light uh, all of these are based on temporary reductions, due to emergency conditions. So, whether or not, they're in distribution or transmission. What's relevant here I think is these are permanent or temporary conditions to address a temporary condition. 303 Roger Salas SCE 02:09:06.665 --> 02:09:07.565 In the system. 304 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:09:10.384 --> 02:09:21.934 Yeah, and additionally as Dustin, uh, clarified this our curtailment down to 0 for as well. 305 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:09:25.714 --> 02:09:29.044 So, let me go ahead and go to the next slide. 306 Roger Salas SCE 02:09:29.464 --> 02:09:36.754 I think we want to have San Diego speak under under under slide, uh, which, which we don't forget them. 307 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:09:37.384 --> 02:09:41.494 Yeah, I I thought, which was it um, I think. 308 Roger Salas SCE 02:09:41.584 --> 02:09:42.334 I think. 309 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:09:43.054 --> 02:09:44.704 I'm sorry, go ahead. I'm. 310 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:09:44.734 --> 02:09:45.994 Any projects. 311 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:09:53.014 --> 02:10:09.904 Excuse me, this is Gary whole sort of, uh, I'll jump in for San Diego. You can see that. Uh, you know, we're not having fight the, we don't have the volume of, uh, interconnections 1st off a rule 21, but it's, it's similar in that. We don't have. 312 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:10:10.294 --> 02:10:30.094 The same data set, we just were able to secure it in time, but we just give you the basics here that we do. We would have similar, uh, disconnections for planning and unplanned outages but typically our, we don't curtail rule 21 generators. Um. 313 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:10:32.164 --> 02:10:34.804 Unless it's for, um, plan on plan out, it just. 314 Sky Stanfield 02:10:42.844 --> 02:10:54.154 So, Gary, what you're saying is, you don't have the data, you, we understand that you don't disconnect and less plan to them plan out just but you, you do disconnect in those cases, you just don't have the data for that is that. 315 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:10:54.964 --> 02:10:55.444 Yes. 316 Sky Stanfield 02:10:55.564 --> 02:10:56.554 Okay. 317 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:10:56.674 --> 02:10:57.304 Yes. 318 Brad Heavner 02:10:57.874 --> 02:11:03.664 Well, isn't it the case that the ones would be planned outages as much as anything. 319 Brad Heavner 02:11:03.694 --> 02:11:20.344 Is if a certain segment goes out, the generator is going to go offline it's not it trips. So I would guess that in these few cases where it does happen, planned outages could be the main reason. 320 Roger Salas SCE 02:11:21.874 --> 02:11:24.364 Maybe for. 321 Roger Salas SCE 02:11:24.819 --> 02:11:45.964 That's a true statement of the original state, which means circuit trips the generator imburse should follow a Tripoli standards and should disconnect right away using the entire new algorithms. Uh, however, you know, once we start restoring, you know, 1 of the 1st, things that we do is, like, we're trying to find where the problem is. 322 Roger Salas SCE 02:11:46.175 --> 02:12:07.115 So we break up the circuit to to try to isolate where it is. And then we, we don't wait until we find the problem to restore power to our customers. We break the circuit up and reenergize it via other circuits. You know, the big thing about operational flexibility concept and now they're reenergize. However, at that point, we don't know whether it. 323 Roger Salas SCE 02:12:07.119 --> 02:12:28.264 Safe to have them stay in that normal condition because if we don't disconnect them, they're going to come back to the grid within 15 seconds for the rule 21 requirement. We don't want that because they're in a normal state. So that's what we mean. We disconnect them to isolate them until we figure out what the situation is and whether we can bring. 324 Roger Salas SCE 02:12:28.269 --> 02:12:29.044 Back to normal. 325 Brad Heavner 02:12:29.494 --> 02:12:35.104 So, is that your expectations, these numbers per se are gonna be more about return to service than they are about planned outages? 326 Roger Salas SCE 02:12:36.604 --> 02:12:47.224 Uh, probably, I'd love to reduce some digging on that, but I think these are mostly due to retrain preventing them from returning back to service until we deem them to be safe. 327 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:12:54.394 --> 02:13:00.214 Thank you Roger. Mm. Hmm. So with that, let's go ahead and go to the next slide. 328 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 02:13:00.664 --> 02:13:01.354 Uh, before we. 329 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 02:13:01.804 --> 02:13:10.324 Uh, I mean, from the advocates office has the question, and I would like to remind everybody or. 330 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 02:13:11.074 --> 02:13:31.714 You know, if you have a question, or a comment that you'd like to be addressed to feel free to speak up, uh, this is a very interactive discussion. So now we are energy vision. We ourselves are trying to pay attention cause we're the ones ultimately writing the, uh, next resolution for this. So. 331 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 02:13:31.745 --> 02:13:35.735 It's a little difficult to, you know, if you have a question. 332 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 02:13:37.654 --> 02:13:46.324 For us to follow that in chat and also listen to what's being discussed currently go ahead and. 333 Younes, Amin 02:13:46.924 --> 02:13:58.504 Thanks uh, yeah, I'm with advocates. Um, I just wanted to ask Roger when you're talking about preventing, uh, interconnections from returning to service, and these, these short term safety and reliability. 334 Younes, Amin 02:13:58.535 --> 02:14:10.955 Scenarios, how do you actually accomplish that? And is that possible for all rule 21 0 connections or just a portion of them have the hardware necessary to respond to some sort of signal you send them or something like that? 335 Roger Salas SCE 02:14:11.945 --> 02:14:19.505 For we have for projects greater than 1 megawatt that are exporting we have. 336 Roger Salas SCE 02:14:19.805 --> 02:14:28.265 Women in the field that, uh, automatically isolate the systems until the operator deems it to be saved to reconnect. 337 Younes, Amin 02:14:30.185 --> 02:14:35.165 Okay, following up from that then, uh, is that the same for the other 2 and PG. 338 Younes, Amin 02:14:35.194 --> 02:14:52.504 Obviously, not a question for you, but for for them, but a question for you, then Roger would be and also the other is to what extent do this smaller than 1 megawatt. Uh, intersections have that. And then, to what extent is them not having that, uh, safety or reliability concern at present. 339 Roger Salas SCE 02:14:54.304 --> 02:14:56.314 Currently, we don't require that. 340 Roger Salas SCE 02:14:56.344 --> 02:15:17.464 For projects, uh, less than 1 megawatt exporting, um, you know, it's difficult to answer the question on the, the safety reliability issues. We haven't seen them, but, you know, as we, as we continue that the technology involvement, and we implement the, uh, the, uh, uh, the new. 341 Roger Salas SCE 02:15:17.495 --> 02:15:29.105 Requirements for communication, and we're able to I want to say, you know, use the, uh, the functions of smarting borders then we would be able to. 342 Roger Salas SCE 02:15:30.515 --> 02:15:40.655 Essentially disconnect those systems even smaller than 1 megawatt. Once we put all those other communications in place but right now we, we don't we don't have that requirement. 343 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:15:48.544 --> 02:16:09.034 This is Alex with PG. E. so for PG E. we only required telemetry projects that are greater than 1 megawatt. And even for those projects, not all of them have the ability to be able to be controlled. So we may require visibility into the project. We only getting the analog, but we're not able to send a control signal to them. 344 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:16:09.640 --> 02:16:30.665 Started deploying customer owned, slash low cost telemetry for some customers. Still, the threshold is a megawatt and above, and we're working on getting control to those projects. I just want to say that, as part of the implementation we did ask for ability to be able to have telemetry information. 345 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:16:31.354 --> 02:16:51.664 As we discuss more about being able to reduce these profiles and allowing customers to go below their profiles. I think the visibility becomes even more critical and control for sure if we're going to be able to allow customers to stay on line below a Pre, approved threshold or profile, then we. 346 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:16:52.234 --> 02:16:55.594 You would want to have number 1 visibility a number 2 control. 347 Sky Stanfield 02:16:59.164 --> 02:17:02.134 Alec, can I just jump on that and make sure I'm understanding what you're. 348 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:17:02.134 --> 02:17:02.464 John. 349 Sky Stanfield 02:17:02.464 --> 02:17:20.134 Do, and I know this is in the next set of advice letters we're also going to have workshops on and probably shouldn't go too far into that. Now. But when you say that you're asking for that additional control per, roger's explanation just a moment ago, is the smarter functionality. 350 Sky Stanfield 02:17:20.315 --> 02:17:33.184 The type of control that would work sort of tying together this whole discussion. Or are you saying that you want to require the telemetry for projects below 1 megawatt versus using this number of controls? 351 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:17:34.175 --> 02:17:41.285 So, it's not inviter controls may help, but I think what I'm saying is because we're asking for telemetry, we asked for. 352 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:17:41.433 --> 02:18:02.433 For project, specific to projects right right now, we have an ability to require telemetry for projects any project that's above them either. But for project specifically, I think we were more thinking of, you know, being able to verify the profile being able to verify that, you know, these projects have been implemented as. 353 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:18:03.183 --> 02:18:23.404 And now we're getting into this operational issue, where we may have projects that are approved for profile and then in the future, depending on grid conditions, or other things, we may want to approve a different profile. Um, so what I gathered from discussions internally with the operations team is maybe that might be possible, but they would definitely want to be able to control. 354 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:18:23.614 --> 02:18:44.433 See, that the project the new profile has been implemented correctly. So if so, I guess to answer your question is right now, the only requirement for projects is to have this control ability through the PCs, right? There is better. Functionality is not really required to approve the projects, but. 355 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:18:44.973 --> 02:18:58.324 If I was the case, if we did have an ability to communicate with the ambassadors directly, guess that could be a supplement to the control portion of the visibility that we're asking for. I hope that answers your question. 356 Sky Stanfield 02:19:01.115 --> 02:19:05.135 I think enough for now, obviously there's going to be there to talk about there, but thanks. 357 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:19:05.375 --> 02:19:05.675 Sure. 358 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:19:10.834 --> 02:19:15.124 Alright, thank you. Everyone can we move on to the next. 359 Younes, Amin 02:19:15.634 --> 02:19:21.034 Uh, if possible could San Diego, gas and electric address, those kind of questions before we move on. 360 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:19:22.143 --> 02:19:24.694 Um, sure, I mean, I see Jenny. 361 Tyson Swetek 02:19:25.473 --> 02:19:28.353 They're all address this 1. I'm typing the director of. 362 Tyson Swetek 02:19:29.494 --> 02:19:49.564 Operations for, um, so, yeah, we don't have very many rule 21 generators connected at this point, but we have the exact same situation. It's, uh, we have telemetry for the 1 megawatt or above, um, which is what we currently need. I believe we have control as well. So, in the same situation, if we add that. 363 Tyson Swetek 02:19:49.625 --> 02:20:01.775 Configuration we would do, like, um, where we isolate 1st, ensure that it's safe to bring them back on since it isn't an unstudied state, uh, in the abnormal configuration. 364 Younes, Amin 02:20:10.750 --> 02:20:17.045 I guess, have you observed any safety and reliability conditions that you were not able to address, for example, on smaller than 1 megawatt. 365 Tyson Swetek 02:20:18.665 --> 02:20:19.055 Um. 366 Tyson Swetek 02:20:19.594 --> 02:20:30.754 Again, I, I think we need to research how many times this has happened. We only have 13 in the system currently so it's not not a lot of frequency to to know. 367 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 02:20:40.054 --> 02:20:42.694 Okay, I think we can move on to the next slide. 368 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 02:20:45.904 --> 02:20:48.094 Just for the sake of tiny, uh, go ahead. 369 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:20:49.264 --> 02:20:51.454 Thank you. Thank you, man, thank you. Bye. Bye. Bye. 370 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:20:53.074 --> 02:21:14.194 So so tying it up to the previous slide, um, uh, the objective of this specific slide is to, um, identify, I guess, unique aspects of ltp customers and, um, certain circumstances in which profile must be reduced, uh, below the lowest, uh. 371 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:21:14.199 --> 02:21:35.074 Value, um, some specific, I guess, unique aspects, uh, right off the bat. The fact that, you know, we have 12 variables for, as was being discussed earlier versus your 1 limit for your non project. So, uh, there's obviously. 372 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:21:35.495 --> 02:21:52.205 More opportunity for, uh, you know, variation in the, in the amount of, uh, of of generation output that's being produced at the GP level. Uh, 12 different instances uh, throughout the month. 373 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:21:52.269 --> 02:22:13.294 So that, uh, obviously, uh, a unique aspect there, um, the, because, uh, there is, uh, these 12 different variables, uh, there is a higher level of possibility where, um, they condition may arise where the profile. 374 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:22:13.445 --> 02:22:34.325 Be at s, uh, my might have been, um, uh, the profile capacity might have been, uh, higher uncertain month as we had indicated initially during the, the, the slide, uh, pictorial representation. Um, and a condition could arise, uh, where. 375 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:22:35.194 --> 02:22:55.624 We summarized in in the, uh, temporary reductions, uh, slide. Uh, there could be a possibility where, uh, if the generator profile was 2 megawatts and the lowest profile was to say 1 megawatt, uh, during a certain month it's possibility that, instead of having the 2 megawatts. 376 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:22:55.720 --> 02:23:16.865 It could go down to the 1 megawatt to ensure that, uh, the condition that has is now being experience, um, is mitigated. And, as we indicated, previously low reductions, it could potential impact, uh, the, the, the output of the. 377 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:23:16.894 --> 02:23:19.054 Files that. 378 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:23:21.185 --> 02:23:31.565 Um, that had originally been, uh, agreed upon, uh, through the interconnection process. Initially. 379 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:23:34.174 --> 02:23:54.934 The only instances or that, we have identify where the reduction of, uh, of below the value, uh, would be required. And, uh, this is equivalent to non projects is and obviously not expected to be a permanent state. 380 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:23:55.684 --> 02:24:08.044 Uh, is your, uh, under emergency or planned conditions? Uh, we, we have an earthquake condition where the grid, uh, gets, uh. 381 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:24:09.904 --> 02:24:30.124 Portions of the grid get, uh, you know, uh, destroyed or whatever the case may be. Then at that point, we obviously have to reduce, uh, certain generations, uh, to, uh, 0, potentially. Um, and of course unprecedented, uh, grid changes. 382 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:24:30.424 --> 02:24:37.924 Which then I would also be equivalent to non projects where we would go below the value. 383 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:24:43.173 --> 02:24:47.403 So, with that, and any questions here before we go to the next 1. 384 Sky Stanfield 02:24:48.363 --> 02:24:52.743 Of course, Brad, you want to go? 1st I can I go. 385 Brad Heavner 02:24:53.313 --> 02:24:53.883 Go ahead. 386 Sky Stanfield 02:24:54.303 --> 02:25:01.203 So, I think I think this this slide is really going to get to the not of what we really want to unpack. 387 Sky Stanfield 02:25:01.264 --> 02:25:02.764 For, and I think, um. 388 Sky Stanfield 02:25:04.984 --> 02:25:25.174 I wanna some help thinking around whether the, what kind of additional or magnitude of additional risk this in theory, this 12 points versus 1 point concept goes to and I wanna ask if there's, if you guys have done any data analysis, or could do any data analysis. 389 Sky Stanfield 02:25:25.505 --> 02:25:46.325 To help us really see if that's true. In the sense that just, I understand the concept that you have 1 limit versus 12 limits, and that there, you have 12 times more likely in theory, though it, it's going to vary, depending on what the actual generators touching up against. But do we know. Actually, if it is. 390 Sky Stanfield 02:25:46.354 --> 02:26:07.384 Greater risk based on any actual measured grid conditions that it is more likely that this, that you're going to reduce that that 1 lowest 1 is going to be less risky than any of the other 12. that's a long way. But I still think we're saying this, we're saying 12 is more risky than 1, but without any anchor to, like. 391 Sky Stanfield 02:26:07.774 --> 02:26:22.054 That we've seen that happen that we've seen the way load reductions occur would make that more risky for example, especially because I think low direction is basically the only scenario that's been identified where this would occur outside of an emergency right? 392 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:26:23.524 --> 02:26:28.624 Yeah, I, I think also, uh, 1, important aspect to remember. 393 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:26:28.655 --> 02:26:49.745 That we are pushing the limits right of the, uh, the circuits by, uh, by allowing this flexibility. Right? Uh, by inherently, not, uh, obviously trying to, uh. 394 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:26:49.804 --> 02:27:09.364 Go or try to not have upgrades right to interconnect your project, you have this ability to, um, if the, if, if the, uh, Circuit does not have the ability to to, uh, host your entire capacity right that you can go ahead and maybe reduce it to, uh, this. 395 Roger Salas SCE 02:27:09.394 --> 02:27:09.574 Yeah. 396 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:27:09.664 --> 02:27:10.894 Do a limited. 397 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:27:10.930 --> 02:27:20.015 Federation profile level, and so that inherently kind of creates a risk, right? Because we are now pushing our system. 398 Sky Stanfield 02:27:25.384 --> 02:27:41.704 The system, like, if you're in the lowest the 1, the 1 scenario, that's at the limit. Right? So why are we're not really pushing the system in those other ones? We're fine. Just the same way. We would have been to the 1 point. 399 Roger Salas SCE 02:27:42.334 --> 02:27:46.174 Let me, let me see if I can answer your question. Like, we have not done the analysis that you're looking. 400 Sky Stanfield 02:27:46.205 --> 02:27:47.045 For okay. 401 Roger Salas SCE 02:27:47.285 --> 02:28:07.325 Start with that 2nd, is, there is absolutely 12 the 12 limits versus 1. so so we need to not dismiss that. And I'm not, we're not saying that this is going to happen. All I'm saying, all we're saying is that now you have 12 times an opportunity work before you had 1 before you. 402 Roger Salas SCE 02:28:07.329 --> 02:28:28.474 You have the lowest value for the entire year. This time you have the lowest value for 8 months so inherently inherently there is a higher level or risk as to whether or not that risk material license. It's a different question. But but but there is. 403 Roger Salas SCE 02:28:28.479 --> 02:28:49.624 Quickly a higher level of risk that this is going to happen, because we're dealing to a month to month basis and in changes of load profiles that may have not been a problem before because a low profile may only affected our changes to certain months. But not necessarily affected the lowest value before they didn't. 404 Roger Salas SCE 02:28:49.630 --> 02:29:10.775 Better right, but now, because customers may be changing the way they operate and they may be doing certain things and things like that that could change certain profiles, but not necessarily the lowest value and so so so to answer your question, we have not done that analysis. You know, all we're pointing out here is that there are differences. 405 Roger Salas SCE 02:29:11.674 --> 02:29:16.714 There's 12 limits versus 1, which inherently is a significant level over. 406 Brad Heavner 02:29:17.674 --> 02:29:31.864 Either case, is it not through that? It's 288 values right? Cause you're going to be studying these based on hourly hosting capacity, right? When you're evaluating interconnection. 407 Brad Heavner 02:29:31.930 --> 02:29:41.045 You're applying the profile against the 288 value, exporting profile. 408 Roger Salas SCE 02:29:41.315 --> 02:29:44.375 Now, we only applying it to the lowest value of each month. 409 Brad Heavner 02:29:47.614 --> 02:29:57.694 For any for a normal generating customer without limited generation profile that has a generation that varies with time. 410 Brad Heavner 02:29:58.895 --> 02:30:10.985 In the new screen M, and beyond when you're looking at the hosting capacity and comparing it to the proposed generation, that's an hourly analysis. 411 Roger Salas SCE 02:30:11.675 --> 02:30:19.865 Is an hour analysis to calculate the IC value, but the only time the only thing that we use in screen M is. 412 Roger Salas SCE 02:30:19.954 --> 02:30:39.454 We use the lowest value of the profile with a 1 hour. That's the only 1 that we evaluate we'll evaluate each 1 of the 2 profiles, and it's not necessary because, you know, the other 280 values are going to be higher than the smallest value. So, there's no reason to look at those. 413 Brad Heavner 02:30:39.544 --> 02:30:40.984 But if the hours don't line up. 414 Brad Heavner 02:30:41.374 --> 02:30:51.784 We're just not doing the ACA properly if the lowest value is at noon and the highest export is at 2, those don't go to mismatch. That should not be the comparison. 415 Roger Salas SCE 02:30:52.144 --> 02:31:02.164 Well, it is, I mean, if if you have a PD profile, that has a, that has say that if you're using a PD profile, we will use the typical profile. 416 Roger Salas SCE 02:31:02.170 --> 02:31:16.715 Follow up with to calculate against the against the, you know, profile of the or the or the values, but at the end, at the end of the day, you, you end up with 11 value. That's the lowest that's it. 417 Brad Heavner 02:31:16.775 --> 02:31:23.315 There's 1 limit to the actual, you know, that goes into the interconnection agreement, but the analysis that determines what that limit will. 418 Brad Heavner 02:31:23.344 --> 02:31:25.624 Is an hour you don't compare at 12 o'clock to 2 o'clock. 419 Roger Salas SCE 02:31:25.984 --> 02:31:34.264 Right you compare out to our but again, since you put up 1 profile for the other profile, you look at the hour with the Mosley meaning value and that's it. 420 Roger Salas SCE 02:31:36.275 --> 02:31:37.505 Maybe we're saying the same thing. 421 Brad Heavner 02:31:37.745 --> 02:31:38.045 So. 422 Alex Mwaura PG&E 02:31:38.555 --> 02:31:39.245 Can I can I. 423 Brad Heavner 02:31:39.815 --> 02:31:42.965 Limit but in either case, it's really 288 values. 424 Roger Salas SCE 02:31:44.045 --> 02:31:51.305 That's fine, but just don't know what that has to do with this discussion in this discussion. We're talking about limits on a monthly basis. 425 Brad Heavner 02:31:53.405 --> 02:32:03.635 I want to make is you should be thinking about all of this on an hourly basis. Not just the initial screens. The grid management is on an hourly basis. 426 Roger Salas SCE 02:32:04.265 --> 02:32:14.045 Yeah, and and that's fine. I mean, if you want to look at it that way, that's fine. But what I'm saying here is that when we talk about a level of risk, you know, you're probably going to have. 427 Roger Salas SCE 02:32:14.079 --> 02:32:28.264 several risks here then the ones for a single when you base your approval based on the lowest value which is the screen m that has a lower risk then based on a total values i guarantee you that 428 Frances Cleveland 02:32:30.664 --> 02:32:50.314 Now, I think, um, I just sort of want to jump in a little bit here. Uh, I believe that Roger, you're absolutely right that if you take everything else as the same, and you change it to 12 values, then the, the risk is a little higher. 429 Frances Cleveland 02:32:50.824 --> 02:33:11.884 but i think the the whole concept is that we're looking at a different way to do things and if you add in the ability to say monitor the pcc at least from a a metering perspective if you can get the metering data from your folks 430 Frances Cleveland 02:33:12.695 --> 02:33:33.035 Uh, then the, the risk is less, actually, because now you have a different way of handling the entire situation so to say that the risk is higher, just because they're now 12 values and there actually should be the 288 values. 431 Frances Cleveland 02:33:33.484 --> 02:33:38.524 Uh, is misleading because we're talking about more than changing 1 thing. 432 Roger Salas SCE 02:33:39.874 --> 02:33:54.184 Listen, this is the utilities perspective, you know, we're giving you what we think. We think there's a higher level of risk. If, you know, if you ask stakeholders view, that is no risk and, you know, it's up to you but, um. 433 Roger Salas SCE 02:33:54.189 --> 02:33:57.874 Tell you that we going from 1.24 points and for me, that's high level. 434 Sky Stanfield 02:33:58.144 --> 02:34:15.334 Roger, I think we understand that that's your perspective and I think that the what the committee has asked us to do is to kind of work together here to come up with a consensus. And the reason I'm asking about this is obviously this gets to the real core of what's the difference between the old school's plat generation? 435 Sky Stanfield 02:34:15.364 --> 02:34:36.484 Versus, so what what, I think we need to understand, you guys are looking at this is, this is where our risk is increased and then if we're thinking about well, how do we enable a generator to actually do a limited generation profile? We have to understand that risk, even from their perspective. So they need to have a better understanding of is it 10 times or 12 times more like. 436 Sky Stanfield 02:34:36.784 --> 02:34:57.484 Or not, and what I'm hearing is, I don't disagree conceptually that we're talking about 1 point versus 12 points. But what we're saying is that we don't actually have data or anything that would help inform. For example, the potential applicant as to what their risk is, let alone the utility as to whether this is actually a greater risk or not. 437 Roger Salas SCE 02:34:58.055 --> 02:35:18.785 Yeah, I mean, the only way to do that, it would be look at year over year and year. Now what the changes in low profiles are and each circuit is different. Each customer. I mean, you have so many variables there that you wouldn't be able to come up with something that I'm going to say would give you. 438 Roger Salas SCE 02:35:18.964 --> 02:35:28.624 You know, a piece of mind, if you want to call it, that it's variable, you know, every circuit is different every customers different in many cases. 439 Sky Stanfield 02:35:28.654 --> 02:35:39.934 Right so I think this is this is a, not necessarily a question for you Roger. But more of a statement from my standpoint is, like, what we're highlighting here is if that's the case, if there's no way for. 440 Sky Stanfield 02:35:39.939 --> 02:36:00.904 For us to predict anything, where does the risk fall? What the utilities proposal is that the risk will fall on the proposed applicant and there may be reasons that that makes sense. But the problem with that is that it means there's no benefits received by anybody in California from having increased generation without unnecessary upgrades. 441 Sky Stanfield 02:36:01.114 --> 02:36:22.234 Like, there's a trade off here I get that the risks have to fall somewhere, but the solution of shifting the risk to individual generators is that no benefit will be received by any Californians and the grid, including you guys, if we do it that way. So understanding the risk and how to mitigate it. If we are going to put it. 442 Sky Stanfield 02:36:22.264 --> 02:36:43.384 on to the back so the individual generators is the only way we're going to actually enable achievement of of those benefits which you know and when we're talking about the seasonal level are significant it's not like we didn't have massive potential blackouts again this year in august for example like that's we're talking about remembering that there is risk but there's also 443 Sky Stanfield 02:36:43.415 --> 02:36:46.355 It that won't be achieved if we don't allocate it accordingly. 444 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:36:46.985 --> 02:36:52.985 Skype scary. Can I, that concept of benefits for just a moment? 445 Sky Stanfield 02:36:53.015 --> 02:36:53.435 Yeah. 446 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:36:53.825 --> 02:37:04.415 Because the benefit, let's let's I think we've already mentioned it. I just want to reiterate the benefit is to avoid upgrades primarily. 447 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:37:05.884 --> 02:37:22.504 Now, with that ability, you know, everything has a cost right now all benefit instead of some kind of costs. And so the cost is that there are opportunity. There may be more opportunities or more, you know. 448 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:37:24.604 --> 02:37:45.394 I was just gonna say opportunities to have a lower value than you'd like, if you, if, you know, the status quo or the old school way, as you mentioned is pay for the upgrades upfront and, you know, you manage it that way that get you the known quantity. 449 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:37:45.430 --> 02:38:00.935 Upfront if you don't want to pay for the upgrades, then you have a situation where you're going to have a risk of less revenue opportunity, or wherever you want to call it. Then you would normally. 450 Sky Stanfield 02:38:05.525 --> 02:38:24.905 A benefit that you're not highlighting there is that when we build the distribution system to only to let the vast majority of the distribution system costs are associated with achieving peak. And what we're saying here is that we're taking off the table actual cost savings. That could be managed by the. 451 Sky Stanfield 02:38:25.025 --> 02:38:46.055 Smart BR, in a connection, we're just going to continue to build the whole system out to manage that peak and ignore the potential capabilities that are now on the table, which weren't before. I don't disagree. That that's the, the paradigm is the generator, if they want to generate more, can pay for upgrades. It's just unclear that those upgrades are really needed. I mean, you guys are saying that yourself. 452 Sky Stanfield 02:38:46.083 --> 02:38:55.953 You don't know that it's very often that this curtailment will ever actually need to be done, which suggests that those upgrades may never need to be done as well. 453 Roger Salas SCE 02:38:57.364 --> 02:38:58.324 Well, no. 454 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:39:00.545 --> 02:39:11.225 You're talking about a screening versus a study, you know, and the process that we go through and screening versus study and study, you know, whether those upgrades are needed or not. 455 gary holdsworth sdg&e 02:39:12.875 --> 02:39:14.885 Right, right? I mean, would you. 456 Sky Stanfield 02:39:14.915 --> 02:39:26.255 We should definitely get into that. I think there is an actually slide on that too. So it would be great if we could dive it a little bit into the distinction between an, and our connection versus a studied in our connection. 457 Regnier, Justin 02:39:27.365 --> 02:39:33.605 So, let me, let me jump in let me jump in because we have many many topics and not in front of time. 458 Regnier, Justin 02:39:34.000 --> 02:39:55.145 The original reason I wanted to jump in is just on point of fact, my understanding is that if you're in this, this may have already been discussed everybody's satisfaction. Apologies of. So, when you are looking at a photovoltaic interconnection, versus you are looking at 2 curves or 2 profiles that you're. 459 Regnier, Justin 02:39:55.354 --> 02:39:57.214 Each other, it's not a single point of comparison. 460 Roger Salas SCE 02:39:57.244 --> 02:39:57.544 Huh. 461 Regnier, Justin 02:39:58.204 --> 02:40:05.374 You're matching the maximum phone the phone. It will take profile to what is available. Um, the. 462 Roger Salas SCE 02:40:05.374 --> 02:40:05.524 Hmm. 463 Regnier, Justin 02:40:05.554 --> 02:40:16.294 The 2nd is the values have definitely asserted that limited generation profile will be a singular value across the entire month. I don't believe that that is the extent of the possibilities that are. 464 Regnier, Justin 02:40:16.684 --> 02:40:34.684 The decision we have articulated that we will not be doing an hour by hour matching, we will not be changing the profile more than once a month. That leaves a whole lot of possibilities in between. So, I think the discussion of whether we're doing profile the profile matching versus single point, matching as valid 1. 465 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:40:51.094 --> 02:40:51.694 All right. 466 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:40:53.914 --> 02:40:55.594 So, we move on to the next slide. 467 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:41:03.454 --> 02:41:09.874 So, again, in this specific slide, I'm gonna actually invite, um, uh, and P. 468 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:41:09.880 --> 02:41:30.935 You need to talk on there a specific piece, but I'll go ahead and cover, uh, our piece 1st and then I'll invite. Um, and then PG E. um, and, uh, the objective of, uh, this specific slide is to identify, uh, you know, how, how do we. 469 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:41:31.384 --> 02:41:51.934 Do, uh, I guess, what is our existing, uh, generation outage process um, when it comes to, uh, you know, as we have discussed previously, when her circumstances arise, uh, where we might have an emergency condition or perhaps a schedule work average, uh, for. 470 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:41:52.385 --> 02:42:13.325 We do have a system operating, uh, bulletin, uh, 104, uh, which defines, uh, the, uh, the process on how se, uh, operators, uh, would, um, perform, uh, specific outages. And, uh, as I think Roger had indicated. 471 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:42:13.354 --> 02:42:34.234 In instances where we have, um, emergency conditions, uh, the non, and customers would be treated the same. Um, and, uh, in addition, there would be instances when we, if we have experienced a. 472 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:42:34.684 --> 02:42:55.534 A condition in the system, uh, that is abnormal then, uh, we do there we do have mechanisms to automatically disconnect, uh, generation, uh, that will, uh, that will, um, you know, cause a, uh, generated to go offline. For example, the island. 473 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:42:56.165 --> 02:43:16.565 Uh, protection, uh, if a circuit, uh, becomes the energized, or, um, the, uh, as Roger had pointed out before we also have a remote control switches, uh, which would also be, uh, utilized to, um, uh, you know, potentially the energize the generator. 474 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:43:16.779 --> 02:43:24.094 1 megawatt so with that, I'll go ahead and hand it over to. 475 Tyson Swetek 02:43:34.835 --> 02:43:51.815 I can speak to our outage process, so for planned outages with generators, we do have a minimum of a 5 day notification, um, for our large customers, including our large generators. We will, uh, work with those customers to, um, coordinate a time. 476 Tyson Swetek 02:43:52.294 --> 02:44:01.804 That it does work, uh, for, uh, for them, whether it be and assigned large commercial, industrial customer or a generator. Um. 477 Tyson Swetek 02:44:01.924 --> 02:44:20.404 And then again, for unplanned outages, um, we, those generators, it'll have the automatic disconnect for the standard, and they're notified again through their channels. We have automated calling outage, websites and a number of different channels to notify customers and values. 478 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:44:29.614 --> 02:44:31.384 Thank you now. 479 Vishal Singh 02:44:39.394 --> 02:44:55.474 Yeah, so from the system operational needs and similar data for our operating procedures, 32,700 P, clearance and non test operators are given direction. The inverter patient should be given exception to stay them online during plan or emergency situate switching not the. 480 Vishal Singh 02:44:55.504 --> 02:45:13.084 Is long enough that has 1 megawatt above like, Alex mentioned that has telemetry, the distribution system operation can send the clearance non test or even as emergency to the distribution operation engineer to review and approve if that Jen can stay online or not. 481 Vishal Singh 02:45:17.855 --> 02:45:19.595 Then there's a question, I'm happy. Mistaken. 482 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:45:22.564 --> 02:45:23.434 Thanks. 483 Sky Stanfield 02:45:25.444 --> 02:45:32.734 Were you done with your explanation of the, all the, all the aspects here I wanted to talk about those system emergency conditions, but if. 484 Vishal Singh 02:45:34.504 --> 02:45:42.094 Yeah, I believe I'll just touch on the last part of that the DMP system. Like I mentioned, there's significantly damaged bandwidth, like fire risk and. 485 Sky Stanfield 02:45:42.094 --> 02:45:42.694 Huh. 486 Vishal Singh 02:45:42.844 --> 02:45:45.694 An example, that's given the generators connected to a. 487 Vishal Singh 02:45:46.684 --> 02:45:59.824 Was destroyed before in a while file the rebuild design that serves the long term objectives in short term needs. Generative research could be. In that case, we could do the study and make the changes for that system. Emergency conditions. 488 Sky Stanfield 02:46:02.794 --> 02:46:07.384 So, if I'm understanding what the, at least what I understood, when I read this. 489 Sky Stanfield 02:46:07.745 --> 02:46:28.535 Is what you're saying is, is that if there was a wildfire, and you had to rebuild the whole circuit that you might rebuild the circuit, not to match the available capacity, or the previous lead existing capacity of the system, and therefore permanently curtail those generates. Now. 1st of all, I want to say that if there's a major wildfire that requires you to. 490 Sky Stanfield 02:46:28.594 --> 02:46:49.684 Burden it's free rebuild this there may not be the generator in place anymore and all this could be bizarre hypothetical, but I don't see how the utility could justify not building out to the same capacity. Because this is not like the generator is interconnected based on what's available. This is not a situation where. 491 Sky Stanfield 02:46:49.714 --> 02:47:04.084 What is changed is that you're having to build it all out and you're saying you just prioritize load needs and not the existing generator. That example troubles me a fair bit, because it implicates any interconnected generator right? 492 Vishal Singh 02:47:07.054 --> 02:47:14.584 That particular example in a wildfire case, the load has changed. Correct? Because, like you said, everything's burnt down around that area. 493 Sky Stanfield 02:47:14.824 --> 02:47:15.304 Right. 494 Vishal Singh 02:47:16.144 --> 02:47:26.314 So, there is a change in the load itself, but whatever was signed off in the interconnection agreement to connect to circuit. B. yes. We would have to honor that. 495 Vishal Singh 02:47:26.375 --> 02:47:28.355 Cause it's part of the interconnection agreement. 496 Sky Stanfield 02:47:30.604 --> 02:47:32.944 Okay, so you are saying you would honor. 497 Dustin Dear 02:47:33.814 --> 02:47:34.204 Yeah. 498 Dustin Dear 02:47:35.223 --> 02:47:47.643 What this is highlighting this test and this is a, any event we were to run into a situation like this the generator may be asked for a short term timeframe per tail. 499 Sky Stanfield 02:47:48.273 --> 02:47:49.263 Until. 500 Dustin Dear 02:47:50.583 --> 02:47:54.753 We have the ability to go back and rebuild according to our current capacity. 501 Dustin Dear 02:47:55.959 --> 02:47:57.844 Would honor the existing. 502 Sky Stanfield 02:47:58.984 --> 02:48:01.264 Okay, I was reading it as you wouldn't read the old to. 503 Dustin Dear 02:48:01.264 --> 02:48:02.704 No, we would, we would rebuilt. 504 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:48:12.305 --> 02:48:15.305 Thank you. So, let's go ahead and move on to the next slide. 505 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:48:23.674 --> 02:48:24.304 So. 506 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:48:25.569 --> 02:48:28.354 This, uh, slide here, um, is. 507 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:48:30.514 --> 02:48:50.704 Attempting to attempting to define, uh, the, uh, future grid conditions, uh, as the have. Uh, see, I guess, um, you know, the, uh, the system changing, uh, as as, uh, as, uh, certain conditions. 508 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:48:51.034 --> 02:49:11.494 Arise within within the grid, so for due to the, you know, the dynamic nature of off the grid, uh, there might be certain instances, uh, where, uh, the system might change, uh, based on the initial static conditions um, operationally. And, um. 509 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:49:12.425 --> 02:49:33.245 And, and therefore, um, in the future, it could there could be, um, other, uh, you know, elements that could have cost the system to now come to a different state. Um, and these states might include, as we had indicated previously. 510 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:49:33.274 --> 02:49:54.094 Uh, different load profiles, uh, I, E, whether it be higher as I think Brad had indicated that we might have, uh, you know, through electrification, we might have, um, higher, uh, load profiles or, or, uh, higher loads or, um, perhaps lower loads or, you know, uh, and, uh. 511 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:49:54.574 --> 02:50:15.544 We also might have different grid configurations that could change the state of the grid from, uh, what was originally studied, um, at a certain point in time, uh, there's obviously different operating procedures that could call for, uh, you know, changes on the grid that could also affect, uh, the, uh, the state of the. 512 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:50:15.549 --> 02:50:36.694 The initial conditions that were originally, um, study for any given project at any given time and, of course, additional removals are replacement of certain, uh, distribution equipment, uh, could change the state of the grid in a future condition that would make it different. 513 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:50:36.844 --> 02:50:47.254 Uh, from the initial state, uh, that wasn't a study at a given point in time when a project, uh, would interconnect. 514 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:50:49.625 --> 02:51:10.445 And there might be instances where, uh, the may need to reduce the generation, uh, profiles, um, due to this, uh, future, great conditions. Um, for the 11 months of what of those profiles uh. 515 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:51:10.834 --> 02:51:28.834 Obviously, not to be below the lowest value, um, and, uh, with regards to cost, uh, this will be further discussed in the mitigation option section. And, uh, I think, uh, Gary will be going over that. 516 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:51:30.304 --> 02:51:51.154 Um, I think, uh, what are the, the things that have been highlighted previously is that, you know, 1 of the most impactful, quick conditions that could, uh, you know, effect, uh, LGB projects is a low profile, lower, lower load, um, uh, changes. And, um. 517 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:51:51.785 --> 02:51:53.675 As Roger had, um. 518 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:51:54.874 --> 02:52:06.664 Pointed out, you know, we don't expect these conditions to occur frequently. Uh, but it's possible that it can. Um, and also, uh, you know. 519 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:52:08.825 --> 02:52:29.495 There for the, uh, non projects, there is no, uh, current provision where, uh, which allows, uh, you know, the utilities to reduce them from, uh, a, you know, from their, uh, application level of generation to a lower level. Um, and and I. 520 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:52:29.499 --> 02:52:50.644 I think that's a key distinction there, uh, with your projects and, um, and the projects we are allowed to go down to the minimum value and this might be necessary if a, a. 521 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:52:50.649 --> 02:53:00.874 Condition as defined within the bullet arises that necessitate us to, um. 522 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:53:01.955 --> 02:53:09.935 Mitigate a, uh, uh, a new state that, uh, perhaps has reduced the profile from what was originally studied. 523 Roni Mejia - SCE 02:53:13.234 --> 02:53:15.844 So, with that, I will open it up for questions. 524 Sky Stanfield 02:53:20.254 --> 02:53:27.514 Running can you on the in the 4 bullet points there under 1? B I. or 1. 525 Sky Stanfield 02:53:29.165 --> 02:53:47.045 It seems to me, like, the only 1 of those that actually relates to where the creates higher risk is the 1st, 1, that load profile. I'm not sure I understand how the. 526 Sky Stanfield 02:53:49.264 --> 02:54:08.194 Why the other 3 grid conditions would result in the project being treated differently than the than a non project um, maybe you guys can explain a little bit more for load configurations, different operating. 527 Sky Stanfield 02:54:08.199 --> 02:54:23.194 Procedures and maybe that requires just some more explanation in general what you mean by operating procedures, and then remove our replacement of equipment. Like, what is it about the in particular that makes those grid conditions justify different treatment of them? 528 Roger Salas SCE 02:54:24.184 --> 02:54:29.344 Randy, I can answer that we're Skype. We're not saying that these 4. 529 Roger Salas SCE 02:54:29.585 --> 02:54:50.495 Or others will impact the GP, this was just a definition of what is the future grid condition and that's it. So, you know, you know, a huge recommendation that the grid could be different because the, the, the grid change, we move circuits around. It could be that. Now we have a different way of operating the grid. 530 Roger Salas SCE 02:54:50.524 --> 02:55:01.804 For certain reasons, as we learn new things, all we're saying here is what is the definition of it? This is not implying what has more impacts, or let's impacts to projects. 531 Sky Stanfield 02:55:02.044 --> 02:55:11.494 Okay, so you're not using these and I know there's later slides on this to say that these are the conditions that would trigger curtailment of an project. 532 Sky Stanfield 02:55:12.184 --> 02:55:15.514 In the in the longer term, not in the emergency conditioned scenario. 533 Roger Salas SCE 02:55:15.934 --> 02:55:31.114 Yeah, this is just a definition of what we viewed as a future great condition. How will the grid change in the future? They may be others, but these are the product that came into mind, but it doesn't imply that all of these will require to be affected. 534 Brad Heavner 02:55:35.164 --> 02:55:51.124 I have a question in the last bullet there. I don't think it's quite accurate to say that you see allows the export limits to reduce the, the minimum value. The ordering paragraph says the profile, the, the. 535 Brad Heavner 02:55:51.155 --> 02:56:12.275 The profile is in place at a time so we've, you know, you've created that that chart that we've all seen with the 12 different levels, which is useful to some extent to visualize it, but it's a shorthand. It's, you know, there's actually within that monthly, it's actually a monthly profile, not a monthly static value, single value. 536 Brad Heavner 02:56:12.334 --> 02:56:33.394 The whole month, and then there will be certain hours that are the ones that are that are the concern to be addressed. If the future grid conditions change, and you say we have a problem here, that problem will exist in certain hours not in every hour. And so there's nothing to say that you. 537 Brad Heavner 02:56:33.430 --> 02:56:47.525 You have to then go to the minimum profile for all hours of the month. If the concern is 10 till 2, then you could return you could you could change it to the. 538 Brad Heavner 02:56:47.614 --> 02:56:54.904 Profile for those hours and leave it it for the other hours untouched, according to the interconnection agreement. 539 Roger Salas SCE 02:56:57.694 --> 02:57:06.274 Yeah, but I'm not understanding you're, you're coming to be frank, you know, which are you talking about? It's at the bottom portion of the top portion. 540 Brad Heavner 02:57:07.504 --> 02:57:09.484 The last bullet on the page, so. 541 Roger Salas SCE 02:57:09.664 --> 02:57:15.724 Did you see allows the GP projects to have extra limits reduce down to minimum. 542 Roger Salas SCE 02:57:15.754 --> 02:57:16.684 Values that you come in. 543 Brad Heavner 02:57:17.014 --> 02:57:22.354 Value for each out. Yeah, I see. Profile is so given that there are there. 544 Younes, Amin 02:57:22.354 --> 02:57:25.474 This is the lowest value in profile. 545 Roger Salas SCE 02:57:25.504 --> 02:57:26.704 Yeah, the minimum value. 546 Younes, Amin 02:57:27.094 --> 02:57:28.924 Not the profile. 547 Roger Salas SCE 02:57:29.644 --> 02:57:36.874 I mean, I thought that was, I mean, you haven't read the order in a long time, but I thought the order allow the profile the. 548 Roger Salas SCE 02:57:36.880 --> 02:57:47.675 7 months, 11 other points in that profile to be reduced as long as he didn't go below the minimum. 549 Brad Heavner 02:57:48.485 --> 02:57:52.355 With the, for each month is 12 is 24 values. 550 Roger Salas SCE 02:57:54.515 --> 02:57:57.515 Right, but, you know, again, this probably where we can. 551 Roger Salas SCE 02:57:58.054 --> 02:58:19.174 Getting into more discussion our interpretation is that there is 1 value for per month. 1 value per month. We're not looking about. We're not looking at 24 hours per month is 1 value per month. And as long as a generator doesn't go higher than 1. 552 Roger Salas SCE 02:58:19.535 --> 02:58:40.325 At 1 level per month and then then it's good. That's the limit is 1 value per month um, in in under these conditions if the grid changes, then we're saying we can change 11 months, 11 hours, except the month where the. 553 Roger Salas SCE 02:58:40.354 --> 02:58:43.834 As you value is the minimum we have to. 554 Brad Heavner 02:58:44.494 --> 02:59:01.474 We think that's a misinterpretation of the decision. Does it mean just put in the ordering paragraph here? It says the lowest typical profile value so it uses both the word profile and the word value, right? But it says profile. So it the only real reasonable. 555 Brad Heavner 02:59:01.504 --> 02:59:15.904 This is the profile value for each hour for the value for each hour, the profile and so going from a 24 hour limit within a month to 1 hour limit. And this doesn't this doesn't tell you to do that. 556 Roger Salas SCE 02:59:16.054 --> 02:59:21.844 Yeah, yeah, maybe that that I'm not sure when we get into that discussion, whether that's. 557 Roger Salas SCE 02:59:22.655 --> 02:59:42.935 Yeah, but that is not our interpretation interpretation is, you know, this came out of the working group. Uh, I don't know, to issue 9 or the proposed seasonal areas. And as the counterproposal as a counterproposal tuition 9 and the commission. 558 Roger Salas SCE 02:59:43.924 --> 02:59:54.874 Approve utilities counterproposal, but would it change to go monthly basis with a rationale that we update the IC values on a monthly basis? 559 Brad Heavner 02:59:55.804 --> 02:59:57.814 Yeah, I see a profile on a monthly basis. 560 Brad Heavner 02:59:59.824 --> 03:00:00.124 The. 561 Brad Heavner 03:00:00.214 --> 03:00:00.634 Difference. 562 Regnier, Justin 03:00:02.344 --> 03:00:20.434 A direct reading of documentation supports brad's be on this. There is no language anywhere that specifies that the profile has to be limited to 1 value per month. So, even if it is 1 value per month, it is a 24 hour profile. 563 Regnier, Justin 03:00:20.439 --> 03:00:38.944 Based on 1 value, and that the export limits can be reduced for safety and reliability, but they have to be based the reduction has to be based on safety and reliability safety and reliability are driven at a particular timeframe that may not affect the profile. 564 Brad Heavner 03:00:39.574 --> 03:00:41.194 Right. And then my further point. 565 Brad Heavner 03:00:41.944 --> 03:00:58.594 The context of this slide is, if it reduces to the profile for a month, given changing grid conditions, it doesn't necessarily have to reduce to that profile in all hours. Because there are only certain hours that are the ones that are creating a problem. 566 Roger Salas SCE 03:01:03.874 --> 03:01:06.274 We'll have to think a little more about that, but, um. 567 Brad Heavner 03:01:09.545 --> 03:01:28.865 I mean, the, the thing I have in mind is a, um, so in storage system with the battery, not exporting no storage export. This will become more common. And you're gonna study that as the, the solar profile is the capacity of the system to export is the solar profile, right? 568 Brad Heavner 03:01:29.529 --> 03:01:42.424 The battery's not exporting, so the PB curve is still going to be alive. And well, even though we're going to get a lot of batteries, and you want to enable those systems and use their flexibility. So I just think there's a very real situation. 569 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:01:44.225 --> 03:02:04.775 So, uh, Brad to your, uh, earlier comment, um, you know, I, I think it just speaks about granularity and this is, uh, part of what we're solution e5230, uh, you know, part of that, those discussions. So, I think that if we. 570 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:02:04.954 --> 03:02:25.924 Any language neutral in this process instead of, and not specify 1 value per month, then the pros, depending on the discussions, uh, you know, once a year to 230, uh, you know, if it gets adopted, then everything should still fit into. 571 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:02:28.295 --> 03:02:43.205 So, at the moment, I think, you know, developing the process here should keep the language very neutral and not Pre, specify or Pre judge what future discussions, uh, you know, will determine. 572 Brad Heavner 03:02:46.355 --> 03:02:58.775 I appreciate that, but, I mean, if the objective is, you said, at the very beginning, Jose is for us to reach a comprehensive proposal, we got it. We gotta talk about how this is actually going to work out. Not just the language. I mean, we need to agree on and the reality of things. 573 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:03:01.325 --> 03:03:14.675 Okay, yeah, maybe that could be a followup item for workshop too. Uh, I know there are 2 other and I'm not, I don't mean to dismiss, you know, your topic brand, but, you know, it may be a little bit more complicated. 574 Roger Salas SCE 03:03:15.035 --> 03:03:15.275 Yeah. 575 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:03:15.395 --> 03:03:20.585 But, uh, we have 2 other people that had their hands up. Uh, I mean, and then. 576 Younes, Amin 03:03:21.935 --> 03:03:22.325 Yeah. 577 Younes, Amin 03:03:22.894 --> 03:03:43.414 I'm still on this, this question of, like, static versus dynamic value, I guess. Um, I'm not quite understanding. Sorry, Justin I don't quite follow what you're saying. Because it does say a predefined static level, which, to me, implies that it's a single level that applies at every hour. However, kind of contrary to what is on bullet, the final bullet of this. 578 Younes, Amin 03:03:43.684 --> 03:04:04.624 Which, to me reading the final of the slide, it says that the user allowed to reduce it down to that static value. I actually think the ordering paragraph says the opposite are kind of the opposite. They shall not reduce it below that value, but they still have the, um, they still need to prove. I think the need to reduce it to that value based on the. 579 Younes, Amin 03:04:04.655 --> 03:04:14.165 Reliability concerns, so I think I think this the, the final bullet, the way I read, it gives gives a little bit too much, or implies the permission is too broad. Yeah. 580 Roger Salas SCE 03:04:15.425 --> 03:04:25.235 Yeah, let me let me clarify that. That's right. It has to be based on safety and reliability but what I'm what we're saying is in certain conditions, for instance, not. 581 Roger Salas SCE 03:04:25.894 --> 03:04:46.864 Again, you know, speaking for our interpretation, at least for is if you have 12 hours, 1212 months, um, and you have, we can never go for any of those months. We cannot go below the minimum, lowest static value. We can never do that. 582 Roger Salas SCE 03:04:47.255 --> 03:05:08.045 But for the other 11 months, some months, we may be able to go down to the, the specific value, but the other 1, the other values may not need to, um, unless each, in all the, all the months have a safety and reliability concerned. But if some months do not have it, then those months would be. 583 Roger Salas SCE 03:05:08.079 --> 03:05:09.304 Want to stay at a higher value. 584 Brad Heavner 03:05:11.344 --> 03:05:18.574 Wh, where you just said value Roger, I think you would should more correctly have said profile, right? That's the difference here. Yeah. 585 Roger Salas SCE 03:05:18.664 --> 03:05:29.014 I think our interpretation is that there is 1 value per month. That's our interpretation. Uh, you know, this. 586 Roger Salas SCE 03:05:29.344 --> 03:05:50.374 You know, you know, W, W, you know, at least for for, for that's what we interpreted with this, we started back in issue issue 9 where, where the, you know, the utilities counterproposal was accepted, except with modifications in our, in our counterproposal back in the days was 1 value per per season the commission. 587 Roger Salas SCE 03:05:50.405 --> 03:05:57.035 Said, okay, let's not the 1 Molly persistent. Let's do 1 value per month because we do I see values on a monthly basis. 588 Brad Heavner 03:05:57.095 --> 03:06:02.825 Well, no, the, what the commission said is, what, I mean, posted into the chat here they, they said 1 profile per month. 589 Regnier, Justin 03:06:03.755 --> 03:06:11.195 Let me maybe put a little bit of clarification around. So the, what is the driving. 590 Regnier, Justin 03:06:11.884 --> 03:06:32.674 Consideration is what the commission has put into their decision or resolution when the commission references and material that can be referred to in clarification of. I do not believe that there is anywhere in record a determination that limited generation profile. 591 Regnier, Justin 03:06:32.680 --> 03:06:34.775 1, singular value for an entire month. 592 Regnier, Justin 03:06:39.635 --> 03:06:43.625 Part of why we're here today is to ensure that we've got a record established. 593 Roger Salas SCE 03:06:43.895 --> 03:06:44.165 Yeah. 594 Regnier, Justin 03:06:44.225 --> 03:06:57.365 That identifies the possibilities and allows the commission to issue a resolution that weighs the disadvantages and advantages on a policy basis of all those opportunities. 595 Regnier, Justin 03:06:58.083 --> 03:07:07.743 Initially the direction forward. Yeah, we just don't have that on the record right now, which is why we want to get everybody's ideas here on the record and we appreciate the live today. Excuse me? 596 Roger Salas SCE 03:07:10.294 --> 03:07:30.484 I mean, if we're standing positions here, I think again, our interpretation has been 1 value per month again that's whether or not that was the intent of the commission based on our revealed the order Mason, all the background of this position is been that is 1 value per month and and again that's. 597 Roger Salas SCE 03:07:30.904 --> 03:07:36.094 You know, you know, we're putting, you know, what are our views are in the table that does what for? That's what. 598 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:07:37.444 --> 03:07:43.114 I put this in the chatbot just to speak up, uh, for the record. This is not just an interpretation. 599 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:07:43.715 --> 03:08:02.915 Are you interpretation this issue did come up because the language in the decision was sort of up to interpretation, and we had discussions through various with meetings where we talked through this issue I think included 1 of the advice letter filings. Pg e's interpretation is also that they. 600 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:08:04.414 --> 03:08:25.174 Profile that's related to the is 12 values 1 for each month, but it's best on the ICM profile, which is based on the 288 buddies that Brad you're talking about. So that's where it comes from. But for each month, we determine what's the lowest value. And that is the amount of expert that's allowed for the projects. 601 Roger Salas SCE 03:08:25.564 --> 03:08:25.834 Mm, hmm. 602 Yi Li SDG&E 03:08:27.755 --> 03:08:29.705 Hey, this is. 603 Yi Li SDG&E 03:08:29.914 --> 03:08:50.854 Uh, I think Roger mentioned this already, but I just posted what he was referring to in the chat as well as Roger mentioned. We initially proposed seasonal limits and then the decision to adopt it to be monthly limits, which is a revised notification, uh, a resolution to issue not. So, it's, it's in the chats. We can provide a page reference to once we. 604 Yi Li SDG&E 03:08:50.884 --> 03:08:51.544 Digging into it. 605 Sky Stanfield 03:08:53.464 --> 03:09:12.004 Justin, can I suggest that this is a super important discussion, obviously, but I think we haven't actually even lead the foundations for understanding her at the basic level yet. And I think we should maybe go go through that. And then we can get into understanding that debate better. I mean, we can debate this now, but I. 606 Sky Stanfield 03:09:12.010 --> 03:09:28.475 Still feel like, I still don't even understand what we're talking about when we're talking about a single hour, let alone or 12 hour or 12 months or whatever. And I think that our understanding about whether it's even worth debating, that kind of goes down to that basic question. 607 Sky Stanfield 03:09:34.444 --> 03:09:41.284 And if I'm hearing no position to that, Justin, go ahead. I don't want to. I'm not facilitator here. Obviously. 608 Regnier, Justin 03:09:43.654 --> 03:09:45.064 Pastor the day, because he is. 609 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:09:47.260 --> 03:10:08.195 Yeah, thank you. Scott for that. Uh, yes, this is the deeper question that we did clearly like Brad did mentioned earlier. We need to understand it, but at the moment, we are trying to develop a process and that's why I was trying to stress the fact that. 610 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:10:08.555 --> 03:10:29.525 If we keep the language neutral to some extent, then come future discussions now, due to resolution the upcoming resolution, you know, that language could be adapted. So, that's what I meant by saying. 611 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:10:29.583 --> 03:10:36.123 It's not, uh, defined anything now, like, 1 value per month. 612 Sky Stanfield 03:10:37.023 --> 03:10:50.703 And it seems to me, like, we kind of just need to put on the table, um, that that's something that parties disagree with. And they should think about, as we assess what this retirement means what so there's some disagreement on whether it's just gonna be a single. 613 Sky Stanfield 03:10:50.734 --> 03:11:10.174 Or or profile for each of those, or a single, 12 month limit, or a profile for each of those 12 months. But we should we need to get into understanding what the actual correct? We still haven't really got to what this it means and how it happens. I think whether it's once every 12 months, or on a profile basis. 614 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:11:10.864 --> 03:11:11.164 Correct. 615 Sky Stanfield 03:11:12.184 --> 03:11:15.034 Um, my question, I'm sorry, go ahead, Jose. 616 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:11:15.454 --> 03:11:22.174 I was going to say after your question, I was going to say yes, so we could, uh, you know, punches to workshop number 2. 617 Sky Stanfield 03:11:23.194 --> 03:11:25.804 Or just later this afternoon, even depending on where we get to. Yeah. 618 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:11:26.074 --> 03:11:32.554 Exactly, but at the moment, you know yeah. We're still an item to on the agenda. 619 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:11:33.035 --> 03:11:53.735 Even though we were supposed to be finishing item 3. so, you know, uh, I am glad, uh, rescheduled that buffer at the end of the, uh, you know, at 33,330 to 430. so I think we'll end that utilizing that buffer. So, I think after your question, and after. 620 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:11:54.215 --> 03:12:06.515 This question will take our designated, uh, 10 minute break and then, uh, you know, resume, uh, with item 3 of the agenda. 621 Sky Stanfield 03:12:08.045 --> 03:12:15.305 Okay, so my, um, question sorry Francis, let me just finish this 1. um, so we here on the. 622 Sky Stanfield 03:12:15.333 --> 03:12:36.453 Slide we have issue 1. B, we've got my 1st, question was which of those, how those future grid condition definition relates to essentially what is 1 B2, 2 and it looks like later in the slides. We're not getting to 12, which is discussed the, the fact of the future grid. 623 Sky Stanfield 03:12:36.459 --> 03:12:56.224 Or the few effect they may have on customers. So going back to my question, Roger earlier, I'm not sure I understand why the definition of future grid conditions includes those 3 latter bullets. If it doesn't relate to what you're proposing, would happen to the customer. 624 Sky Stanfield 03:12:57.844 --> 03:13:03.064 You guys can speak to the last item in red on here. That would be helpful. 625 Roger Salas SCE 03:13:04.955 --> 03:13:25.685 I mean, I'm go back, we're asked to define what is the future really condition and that's what we said the definition is whether or not each 1 of these bullets affects, you know, it's not, it's not part of the definition. It's just like, how can the grid change in the future? All of these are some possibilities as to how it changes. That's it. 626 Sky Stanfield 03:13:27.033 --> 03:13:33.333 Can we, when are we going to discuss the effect of future that future good conditions may have on the customer? 627 Roger Salas SCE 03:13:33.333 --> 03:13:44.583 So, I think that's again that's that's the bottom portion, right? We're talking about in the, the, the, you know, we see if you notice in the bottom, we're not talking about the last 3 bullets. 628 Roger Salas SCE 03:13:47.134 --> 03:13:52.684 It says load those changes are probably was gonna be a major driver to change in the LGB. 629 Sky Stanfield 03:13:53.104 --> 03:14:00.724 Okay, so we need to confirm that's helpful. Roger and that's what I thought you were saying, but I wanted to just confirm that we are saying that different load profiles are. 630 Roger Salas SCE 03:14:00.724 --> 03:14:01.444 Conditions. 631 Sky Stanfield 03:14:01.624 --> 03:14:08.104 Is the only driver of conditions that would change? Curtailment or that would result in. 632 Sky Stanfield 03:14:08.374 --> 03:14:08.944 Customer. 633 Roger Salas SCE 03:14:08.944 --> 03:14:11.854 On a permanent basis on a permanent. 634 Sky Stanfield 03:14:12.304 --> 03:14:15.124 On a permanent basis, right? Okay. Thanks. Thanks. 635 Frances Cleveland 03:14:18.094 --> 03:14:39.034 Mostly, I just want to pick up on actually what sky said. I don't think we're, it's certainly me I'm not clear what happens on a daily non emergency basis, because, you know, is it 1 value for every single hour of. 636 Frances Cleveland 03:14:39.875 --> 03:15:00.275 And it's the export from the, from the PCC. Um, and, uh, is it a profile for that month based on, which is 288 or is it even on a normal day without any safety or reliability issues? 637 Frances Cleveland 03:15:00.724 --> 03:15:21.364 Is that what that forces the limit at the PCC? And I don't think it's even clear to me yet exactly where the base is and then we can discuss safety and reliability issues where you say, okay under these conditions we may have to. 638 Frances Cleveland 03:15:21.455 --> 03:15:32.735 Change the limit down to a certain maximum limit, but I'm not clear even what the current situation is. 639 Roger Salas SCE 03:15:33.515 --> 03:15:42.575 Well, let me try to clarify that. I mean, I think, you know, the 3 areas, we made it clear that, you know, our position is that based on our. 640 Roger Salas SCE 03:15:42.634 --> 03:16:03.334 The language, which some of it's been posted as 1 value per month. So the limit is 1 value per month. And as long as we aren't, we don't go below the lowest value in in those 12 months. Then, if there was a safety and reliability issue, that could be cause mostly because the low changes. 641 Roger Salas SCE 03:16:03.754 --> 03:16:20.104 Uh, that could potentially bring a permanent change to the 1212 month profile. Um, you know, um, while emergency conditions or plan switching, that would be, uh, that could be the same for both and projects. 642 Frances Cleveland 03:16:21.034 --> 03:16:24.844 Okay, cause, uh, I think the, the key to my. 643 Frances Cleveland 03:16:24.905 --> 03:16:46.025 Buying them is what is the justification for not having it on a 24 hour basis because, you know, that's what the icaay has come up with. Why not have it on the 24 hour basis, rather than a single value? Obviously that's what we're discussing. 644 Frances Cleveland 03:16:46.624 --> 03:16:57.934 Uh, but I, I believe that if we need to make that clear before we resolve, even what, you know, abnormal conditions would hold. 645 Roger Salas SCE 03:16:58.234 --> 03:17:07.144 Yeah, in France, all of that discussion is part of working group 9. I'm not sure you had an opportunity to take a look at working on working group group. 2 issue 9. 646 Roger Salas SCE 03:17:07.655 --> 03:17:24.425 Because that's what we discuss. Why is it that it is? I'm gonna say very risky to to try to run an a profile versus having limits. And so that's where the utilities propose a counter proposal. And then we ended up with this, you know, moments. 647 Sky Stanfield 03:17:25.955 --> 03:17:37.055 We don't actually you told me Roger, you don't actually know if it's risky. We've agreed that that doesn't exist to show. It's a conceptual risk. Not a documented risk. 648 Roger Salas SCE 03:17:37.085 --> 03:17:37.295 Well. 649 Frances Cleveland 03:17:38.885 --> 03:17:46.115 I believe there are ways better ways to handle it than just saying it's, it's risky and therefore we won't do it. 650 Frances Cleveland 03:17:46.715 --> 03:17:58.805 I think that's what I'm trying to get out. There are ways to mitigate the risk and I think that's what we need to talk about. But I think it's also time for a break. 651 Roger Salas SCE 03:17:59.165 --> 03:17:59.435 Yeah. 652 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:17:59.795 --> 03:18:07.775 Yes, thank you. Francis so I'd like to remind you and Francis, thank you for saying you last sentence that there are ways. 653 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:18:07.833 --> 03:18:28.923 Indicate the risk, uh, as I mentioned during the, uh, introduction here, these are the utilities views and, you know, we, uh, you know, stakeholder should come up also with their own proposals. The utilities are obligated in the. 654 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:18:29.014 --> 03:18:50.104 By floaters to, uh, discuss the alternate proposals. Uh, so we have in writing this in writing the universe solution to 11. we have opened the door to allow these alternate, uh, 3rd party. No, no you party proposals. 655 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:18:50.109 --> 03:19:11.254 To get on the record, so, you know, we can make a, you know, a good decision on how this is going to be, uh, you know, implemented. So, having said that, I think it's, uh, that this call at 1115. now, I think. 656 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:19:11.525 --> 03:19:31.175 It's time to take a 10 minute break. Uh, let's break until 1125 and then we will resume uh, we'll start with, uh, item number 3. uh, like I said, we're, we are 1 item, uh, behind. 657 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:19:32.435 --> 03:19:47.615 And after that, we should be able to take a, uh, I'm thinking, probably a shocking lunch break to maybe 45 minutes, uh, you know, to allow more time to, uh, discuss subject matter. So. 658 Sky Stanfield 03:19:48.545 --> 03:19:53.555 Jose, when you say item number 3, what do you what I, what's the item listing? Cause? It looks like. 659 Sky Stanfield 03:19:53.583 --> 03:19:55.293 We haven't got to 2. I'm not sure. 660 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:19:55.353 --> 03:19:58.683 Oh, no so the slides reflect topic. 661 Sky Stanfield 03:19:59.343 --> 03:20:03.093 Right so it is it next up to a, not 3. 662 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:20:04.473 --> 03:20:12.903 Y, yeah, yeah, so that's what I'm saying the, uh, the slides reflect topic, but if you look at the agenda on the slides. 663 Sky Stanfield 03:20:14.433 --> 03:20:14.703 Okay. 664 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:20:15.184 --> 03:20:16.234 I don't know. 665 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:20:16.534 --> 03:20:19.114 1 was, uh, in production. 666 Sky Stanfield 03:20:19.354 --> 03:20:20.764 Okay, sorry? 667 Regnier, Justin 03:20:21.364 --> 03:20:24.934 Putting on the agenda doesn't match the numbering on a topic list. 668 Sky Stanfield 03:20:25.174 --> 03:20:25.684 Thank you. 669 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:20:26.224 --> 03:20:31.294 Yes, so thank you for bringing that up sky. So. 670 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:20:31.655 --> 03:20:48.965 Okay, so, uh, Joseph, could you bring up the, uh, our break slide? So people know and, uh, Joseph, if you could change the time on that from 1115 to, uh, you know, change the times to reflect 1115 to 1025. 671 Haga, Joseph 03:20:59.465 --> 03:21:00.605 I'll do that straight away. Yes. 672 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:21:01.655 --> 03:21:02.015 Thank you. 673 Rottman, Mary 03:21:32.585 --> 03:21:35.795 Could you reiterate the times again? 674 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:21:36.605 --> 03:21:38.765 Uh, yes, uh. 675 Rottman, Mary 03:21:38.765 --> 03:21:42.725 We're taking a break now it's actually a 115. 676 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:21:42.935 --> 03:21:46.655 We'll resume at 1125. 677 Rottman, Mary 03:21:47.195 --> 03:21:52.025 25, and then lunch, let's go to just. 678 Rottman, Mary 03:21:53.410 --> 03:21:53.825 We could. 679 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:21:54.215 --> 03:21:58.355 We could discuss that offline in our chat. 680 Rottman, Mary 03:21:59.615 --> 03:22:02.555 Yeah, I'm just trying to get it done, so he's going to put it up. 681 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:22:02.735 --> 03:22:03.755 Okay all right. 682 Rottman, Mary 03:22:03.965 --> 03:22:06.515 Yeah, yeah, because it's a whole thing. 683 Rottman, Mary 03:22:07.775 --> 03:22:10.025 I'm confused. Okay so. 684 Rottman, Mary 03:22:14.314 --> 03:22:16.594 If you just say it, it's faster, that's all. 685 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 03:22:17.734 --> 03:22:19.114 Um. 686 Haga, Joseph 03:22:20.224 --> 03:22:22.804 Sorry lunches when I can change the slide for it right now. 687 Regnier, Justin 03:22:25.835 --> 03:22:28.625 I'm not sure we know yet given the evolution of discussion. 688 Rottman, Mary 03:22:29.585 --> 03:22:32.525 All right that's the case. That's great. I'll just leave it and. 689 Rottman, Mary 03:22:37.564 --> 03:22:40.294 We'll just decide, uh, when we're ready. 690 Rottman, Mary 03:22:41.405 --> 03:22:44.645 He could change it. Um, we'll just dismiss people from. 691 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:34:18.664 --> 03:34:27.754 Uh, the needs to be exceeded those these 3 are the main items that would cause us to look into potentially reducing the. 692 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:34:27.784 --> 03:34:28.324 Limits. 693 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:34:30.903 --> 03:34:32.763 There are no questions we can move on to the next slide. 694 Sky Stanfield 03:34:34.233 --> 03:34:36.123 It's me again, of course, I have a question. 695 Sky Stanfield 03:34:38.314 --> 03:34:53.614 Um, can you just quickly say some of the voltage flicker exceeding flicker we'll just flicker limits how those are examined for and how does that tie specifically to the curtailment? Does that make sense? 696 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:34:54.574 --> 03:34:58.774 Yeah, so this will be so flick issue would apply to all projects. 697 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:34:58.954 --> 03:35:04.234 The projects, um, so the way are you asking, how would we determine if there's an issue. 698 Sky Stanfield 03:35:04.774 --> 03:35:11.074 No, what I mean is, if we're saying that these are the criteria, the conditions that could cause a reduction in the. 699 Sky Stanfield 03:35:11.615 --> 03:35:32.555 Yeah, W, what I'm trying to make sure. I understand for each of these, and I'm going to end up beating a dead horse with it probably is why those are are more are caused essentially, by the fact that a project is using an versus otherwise and and it's a little bit unclear to me with again, because I don't understand, like, super well, but how that. 700 Sky Stanfield 03:35:32.619 --> 03:35:38.494 Ties to why that's a condition for an project versus any other project. 701 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:35:39.004 --> 03:35:53.764 yeah so uh this is these are these are not conditions just for projects these are conditions that would be cause with any generate generating project but we're just saying that once we identify these conditions it may 702 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:35:53.769 --> 03:36:06.814 Has to look at whether we need to reduce generation limits, or I tell them and this could be projects could be impacted. It's not just an issue with the project where we're saying that they could be impacted if these conditions existed. 703 Sky Stanfield 03:36:09.304 --> 03:36:30.394 Okay, so I guess when are we are we do we have a slide where we're going to get into what you guys are actually proposing for when an project's going to be curtailed? Because that's the thing that we're focusing on right here is when are you saying, the weather and how or whatever the decision is said for specifically. 704 Sky Stanfield 03:36:30.635 --> 03:36:34.115 Not just an abstract when a condition could arise. 705 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:36:35.195 --> 03:36:51.545 So so these conditions could exist for any project, but then I'm going to tie this back to a discussion that we had earlier where we said, even though the conditions can be caused by any generating project, we may have. 706 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:36:51.723 --> 03:37:12.633 So, what we can do with existing projects that have an agreed upon, uh, limit based on the interconnection agreement, rather than a 12 month profile, or whatever we decide, as part of these discussions, right? So, the issue is going to be there because you have this generated resource that's causing or resources that's causing voltage to exceed 1 point. 707 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:37:12.994 --> 03:37:27.904 unit now if you had an project and you needed to tell them or cause them to go to a lower profile to me to get that issue that we're saying that that's something we may do in this scenario so this is not 708 Sky Stanfield 03:37:28.144 --> 03:37:28.654 This. 709 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:37:28.684 --> 03:37:33.844 These conditions and not limited to just projects. This is for any generating projects. 710 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:37:34.294 --> 03:37:39.214 But because of this condition, we may require projects to reduce the, the output. 711 Sky Stanfield 03:37:40.804 --> 03:37:44.464 Even if that sorry. 712 Jorge Chacon 03:37:45.604 --> 03:37:49.624 I'm sorry, I was gonna say the next slide goes a little bit into into the question you're asking. 713 Sky Stanfield 03:37:50.974 --> 03:37:51.244 Okay. 714 Frances Cleveland 03:37:52.804 --> 03:37:54.754 And I'd just like to. 715 Frances Cleveland 03:37:56.134 --> 03:38:16.174 Ask, why would you necessarily? And I agree that what you're saying is just a possibility that projects could be impacted, but there are many other ways of addressing voltage like Volt bar, uh, as well as obvious. 716 Frances Cleveland 03:38:16.180 --> 03:38:26.195 Modifying your own, um, equipment, uh, voltage regulators and all. Uh, but so. 717 Frances Cleveland 03:38:28.145 --> 03:38:37.115 Why are you using voltage as a reason for reducing. 718 Roger Salas SCE 03:38:38.705 --> 03:38:48.605 yeah can i give it a truck on that uh alex i mean i think the question here is just one may costs and so the assumption here is that you that 719 Roger Salas SCE 03:38:48.634 --> 03:39:09.484 All that you could with multiple regulators, murderers, whatever you want to call it in your a point where you are still over these, you know, these criteria. Then, at that point, then you have no option. But to reduce them, you have a problem out there that you cannot resolve by changing some operational. 720 Roger Salas SCE 03:39:09.874 --> 03:39:30.904 You know, condition in, in, in some systems, right? So we need to do something. And so that's something it would be reduction of of export. And the difference here would be that for projects, we, we would have to do something to bring those Pre projects after they're approved limit while the L. G. 721 Roger Salas SCE 03:39:30.910 --> 03:39:40.505 Projects, uh, if they met the, the letter of, you know, the, the, the ruling or or the decision, then they may stay a lower profile. 722 Frances Cleveland 03:39:41.615 --> 03:39:50.585 it's sort of penalizing the projects which sounds well that may be another issue to address 723 Roger Salas SCE 03:39:51.365 --> 03:39:51.785 right 724 Roger Salas SCE 03:39:52.293 --> 03:40:03.123 Yeah, to that end, I mean, the decision made a determination as to LGB projects being. I'm going to say, uh, a little bit different than non projects. 725 phuoc 03:40:05.463 --> 03:40:12.423 Yeah, roger's books from PG maybe there's a slide on slide 22 that talk about mitigation options, including. 726 phuoc 03:40:13.325 --> 03:40:20.165 Load so this is just say, it may cost it, but there's the slide later on. You can wait, uh, just the mitigation method. 727 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:40:24.753 --> 03:40:35.163 Yeah, that's a good question for instance, but we do address that. That was something that I think was there brought up as far as, um, alternate mitigation. So that is addressed later on. But that's a good question. 728 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:40:45.753 --> 03:41:03.963 So, as a follow up to that previous, uh, item, this is where we, uh, identified scenarios that, under, which we would need to make changes to projects. So when system conditions have changed, so you will notice. 729 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:41:03.995 --> 03:41:15.155 You know, the discussion goes on some of these questions, or answers are pretty similar to what we've talked about before. So, but we wanted to make sure that we're addressing each item in the agenda. So, for this. 730 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:41:17.345 --> 03:41:37.025 That may prompt us to reduce the limits would be system system conditions, have changed. And an project is causing an over voltage an overload condition. If we have operators do using their real time tools, observe potential grid, safety issues. 731 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:41:37.833 --> 03:41:58.953 I mean, that potentially the project is causing the condition if we start to see pretty much our equipment failure in our system. And we do an investigation determined that they're probably being caused by projects. If we, if we have customers that are having making complaints about the equipment malfunctioning. 732 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:41:58.960 --> 03:42:20.105 Such as tripping offline, if we some of these generators have telemetry. Most of our distribution operations engineer can go in and scrutinize the issue more and come up with potential mitigations or a plan of action. If there's no telemetry the approach would be to tell. 733 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:42:20.109 --> 03:42:26.884 The systems to 0, or turn them offline until the issue is either figured out or resolved to allow these projects to potentially come on line. 734 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:42:30.184 --> 03:42:31.024 Any questions yeah. 735 Sky Stanfield 03:42:32.854 --> 03:42:53.944 Beating the dead horse, Alex, I think you said this next slide would get into that. So, tell me how each of these is tied to the fact that the project is using a limited generation profile based on the versus just any other project. It doesn't what I don't I think that it's really important that we. 736 Sky Stanfield 03:42:53.974 --> 03:43:15.064 Anchor this in that concept, cause otherwise what I think you're proposing, if it's not that the impacts are tied to the fact that it's a profile is that you're basically saying that projects are exposed to additional basic risk beyond that of a traditional interconnection and. 737 Sky Stanfield 03:43:15.125 --> 03:43:29.105 For some of these, I'm not sure I understand where the profile is. The 1 that's create is the thing that's creating the additional risk that would justify different. 738 Sky Stanfield 03:43:29.199 --> 03:43:29.619 Treatment. 739 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:43:31.174 --> 03:43:50.194 So, with regards to additional risks guy, this is kind of tied to the earlier discussion, right? It still goes back to the fact that projects are being interconnected based on these profile, which at this point, they are used determined that that means 12 monthly profiles. 740 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:43:50.765 --> 03:44:11.435 So, previous interconnections, even prior to the new screen M, using, or based on a 12 month historical minimum loading, which was a very conservative number, and we feel like now that we're going to potentially having larger generators interconnected in the system based on this profile. 741 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:44:11.824 --> 03:44:20.164 But there's more risk, right? So, uh, Roger Roger pointed out before we're not just looking at 1 point in time when we look at this minimum value, we're potentially going. 742 Sky Stanfield 03:44:20.524 --> 03:44:32.644 I don't understand, I mean, just because I understand what you're seeing about why you think there's more risk, but what I don't see is you tying these actions to those risks. So any system, even with the. 743 Sky Stanfield 03:44:32.650 --> 03:44:37.565 Single flat profile could trigger any of these scenarios. 744 Sky Stanfield 03:44:39.844 --> 03:45:00.844 It seems to me, like, if we're going to have a logical basis in which again, any generator would agree to do this, it has to relate back to that increased risk that you're alleging. And and each of these conditions aren't defined concretely enough to relate to the condition. It's just any generator could have had. 745 Sky Stanfield 03:45:00.850 --> 03:45:21.995 Those happened, and you're saying that it's not really or unless we define these further, it doesn't seem to me that it's tied actually to whether the project how the project is introducing additional risk. And maybe I'm misunderstanding what you guys are saying with these. And I realize that that's a difficult step to take as well. I just think that otherwise. 746 Sky Stanfield 03:45:22.024 --> 03:45:30.184 What you're saying is, like, actually an customers just exposed to way more, even than a traditional generator would have been, which seems like we're going backwards. 747 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:45:31.384 --> 03:45:43.144 So, I'm, I'm going to make an attempt to answer the question. So, basically what we're saying here is, let's, let's look at maybe an overvoltage condition, meaning that there's more generation on, for example. 748 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:45:43.150 --> 03:46:03.545 Section that does that landscape can can withstand. If you had a project that was, for example, in January, exporting a megawatt, automatic go, no issues exist. But, you know, sometime, you know, maybe in July, there's a higher limit, you know, potentially more export. 749 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:46:04.324 --> 03:46:14.434 That could then result in an overload condition, whereas if you had a non customer that limit that you identify to be safe in January is gonna be the same limit for the whole year. 750 Sky Stanfield 03:46:16.323 --> 03:46:19.443 Right, but you would only correct. Wh, what we need to do is type just. 751 Regnier, Justin 03:46:21.993 --> 03:46:36.573 Kind of jump into the more fundamental question. Um, it sounds like the position is that because there was reduction allowed to the lowest, um. 752 Regnier, Justin 03:46:37.174 --> 03:46:57.424 Modeled point at the time of interconnection that the project should become kind of the 1st thing to go down. So to make an analogy, if you've got a, a mortgage, there's a primary holder, and a secondary tertiary, and the. 753 Regnier, Justin 03:46:58.084 --> 03:47:00.964 Scenario what the user's saying is okay. 754 Regnier, Justin 03:47:02.854 --> 03:47:23.254 We, we interconnected it with the conditions at the time the conditions have changed in order to to do safety and reliability. We've got to change something. So we can, we are allowed under safety and reliability to make the limited generation profile project. The. 755 Regnier, Justin 03:47:23.284 --> 03:47:27.604 The barriers the brunt is that a fair statement? 756 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:47:29.704 --> 03:47:38.944 I don't think I would characterize it that way. Uh, I might end up being the end result, but that's now what we're what we're trying to do, and I just to add to that we will try to. 757 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:47:40.205 --> 03:47:50.405 To see, if there's other things that we can do to ensure that to save right before we go into the extent of telling them or disconnected. 758 Regnier, Justin 03:47:50.405 --> 03:48:01.265 Roger Roger mentioned that before the break that the assumption is that the has tried everything that they can to not before they do that. So, I mean, I think the fundamental policy call that's. 759 Regnier, Justin 03:48:01.353 --> 03:48:21.483 End up, having to be made here is who pays when the system changes right on that 1st bullet it says when systems conditions have changed and is causing an Oracle to Jordan overlook condition where my brain goes with that is it's not that's causing the overvoltage or overload condition necessarily. 760 Regnier, Justin 03:48:22.594 --> 03:48:32.614 The system conditions have changed and the sum of the system components are closing that, but we're asking to change to accommodate it. 761 Regnier, Justin 03:48:34.084 --> 03:48:34.594 I think. 762 Regnier, Justin 03:48:36.753 --> 03:48:56.313 Question is, whether it's a, whether the is going to be asked in perpetuity to absorb the effective system changes, or whether it's something that we just have to make sure. Like, every other system is safe at the time of interconnection. 763 Roger Salas SCE 03:48:59.494 --> 03:49:18.844 Uh, Justin, so so, maybe this for bullet, you know, maybe a change would have been under certain system conditions. Right? Um, for instance, obviously, if we change the system, say we move circuits around to say, uh. 764 Roger Salas SCE 03:49:19.264 --> 03:49:40.024 You know, because of whatever reasons balancing load, or wherever we made that change and it would be, would we be inappropriate to tell the LGB project to redo? So, I think those were the ones we're saying, we wouldn't we would just pay for the upgrade under those conditions, but it's when the utilities didn't do anything and. 765 Roger Salas SCE 03:49:40.084 --> 03:50:00.394 Just, the, the load went down I think that's what we continue to come back to the load profiles changing. If the load changes, uh, circle stays continue. Exactly. The same was before and just, you know, the load goes down, uh, for whatever reason, customers decide to shut down and move on to some somewhere else. 766 Roger Salas SCE 03:50:01.325 --> 03:50:22.325 At that point, the utilities haven't done anything different. It's just it happens. It only under those conditions. I think we're saying is there's a possibility where the would go down only when there's no other way to fix it. I mean, you know, there's, there's, there's other areas that we can do, we can switch things around. 767 Roger Salas SCE 03:50:22.353 --> 03:50:24.963 To try to make it better, we can change. 768 Roger Salas SCE 03:50:26.643 --> 03:50:41.523 The the LTC, so the voltage regulators, and that's why, I think what we're basically that's what makes it easy conversation. So difficult because if you ask me on my experience, we're probably not going to be dealing with many of these. But, nevertheless, we have to put them in the table cause they may happen. 769 Regnier, Justin 03:50:42.183 --> 03:50:47.703 Well, let's go back then to brad's example so we've got 2 factories. They're at the end. 770 Regnier, Justin 03:50:47.735 --> 03:50:59.825 1 factory has generation not generation just regular old them real 21 generation under megawatt. The other factory doesn't. 771 Roger Salas SCE 03:51:00.395 --> 03:51:00.785 Mm, hmm. 772 Regnier, Justin 03:51:00.785 --> 03:51:08.855 Factory that doesn't shuts down resulting in a safety and reliability issue that means that you have. 773 Regnier, Justin 03:51:08.884 --> 03:51:21.844 Curtail you can't curtail, you have to shut off the generation at the remaining factory who pays right now for the upgrade. That will allow that generator to come back online. 774 Roger Salas SCE 03:51:22.324 --> 03:51:30.004 Yep, so for for for projects again, we, we haven't encountered that situation, but in theory. 775 Roger Salas SCE 03:51:30.424 --> 03:51:51.154 What we have said is for non projects, we wait with guaranteed those values and temporarily, we will say, you know, we need to need you to shut down because we have an emergency condition here and we need to fix that. But once the system upgrade is complete. And pay by the utilities, then the customer would be allowed to go back to their Pre approved. 776 Roger Salas SCE 03:51:51.160 --> 03:51:57.635 Non L, GP level. I mean, that's sort of like again hasn't happened, but I think that's how theoretically will happen. 777 Frances Cleveland 03:52:03.544 --> 03:52:20.644 Uh, but Roger, just picking up on what Justin said, why our customers any different. In other words, why pick on them? 1st, rather than saying okay, we've got 3. 778 Frances Cleveland 03:52:20.769 --> 03:52:30.454 Normal customers and 1 customer, shouldn't they all bear the same burden? Why just pick on customers? 779 Roger Salas SCE 03:52:34.175 --> 03:52:34.565 For. 780 gary holdsworth sdg&e 03:52:35.645 --> 03:52:48.755 Well, it's the, the difference between the, and the non customers is the customer did not pay for upgrades to start and. 781 Sky Stanfield 03:52:49.505 --> 03:52:53.165 The other a regular customer didn't necessarily pay for upgrades. 782 gary holdsworth sdg&e 03:52:53.585 --> 03:52:53.945 Well. 783 gary holdsworth sdg&e 03:52:54.609 --> 03:53:00.664 It didn't, but they were studied and their study results said they weren't required to do upgrades. 784 Younes, Amin 03:53:03.663 --> 03:53:06.363 So, with the right they're in the same boat. 785 gary holdsworth sdg&e 03:53:08.193 --> 03:53:10.263 Based off of an. 786 Sky Stanfield 03:53:12.423 --> 03:53:24.213 Well, you could have an isolated non customer and you have tons of generators that are connected under old school rule, 21 basic screening not study. So, I mean, that's not that's. 787 Sky Stanfield 03:53:24.245 --> 03:53:26.045 Not the difference there. 788 Roger Salas SCE 03:53:26.375 --> 03:53:44.315 Probably, the most straightforward answer is that the decision allows us to bring the values down to the, the value that the decision allows us. As long as we have a reliability condition while for the project. We don't have that condition. 789 Roger Salas SCE 03:53:45.574 --> 03:53:46.114 The bottom line. 790 Frances Cleveland 03:53:46.864 --> 03:53:47.854 Change that. 791 Frances Cleveland 03:53:50.105 --> 03:53:51.515 A little. 792 Roger Salas SCE 03:53:51.545 --> 03:54:05.285 All right, that's that could change. What I'm saying is today as we speak today right now that's where we are. I is like, the decision allow us to read project just a little bit different than LGB projects. 793 Sky Stanfield 03:54:06.155 --> 03:54:10.715 If you adequately define those conditions and they anchor it and that's why we're. 794 Sky Stanfield 03:54:10.749 --> 03:54:31.804 Here is to discuss those conditions so obviously that that's the purpose of the discussion. Um, and there's lots to talk about here 1 of the things I wanted to go back to. I had just asked a question and I didn't get an answer and I think it came up with my own answer, which I want to test on you, Roger. So all of these bullets here, are they all bound by the lowest. 795 Sky Stanfield 03:54:32.165 --> 03:54:52.955 G, profile or limit for that project in the sense that if you're not going to curtail each 1 of them could be reworded to essentially say where the risk is is only if this condition occurs between that lowest profile and whatever. 796 Sky Stanfield 03:54:53.134 --> 03:54:57.514 Additional hours are or additional export is in the profile. 797 Roger Salas SCE 03:54:59.374 --> 03:55:14.104 I think I understand your question, but we'll characterize it is these are the conditions where we need to take action. Right? And the action would be a little bit different, depending on whether. 798 Roger Salas SCE 03:55:14.584 --> 03:55:26.014 Or non L. G. P. a project we may still have to take action because there's immediate safety reliability issue. But the difference is that we will have or not. We could bring those. 799 Sky Stanfield 03:55:26.014 --> 03:55:26.374 Project. 800 Roger Salas SCE 03:55:26.794 --> 03:55:35.314 Their approval limit last week yes. Again, where the whereas the LDP projects, there may be an opportunity to. 801 Roger Salas SCE 03:55:35.555 --> 03:55:51.155 You know, if, if if reducing down to the lowest value of the, you provided that fix is the problem and I don't need to do or not. Then we may decide to do that instead of doing a system upgrade. Obviously, if the problem is a problem. 802 Sky Stanfield 03:55:51.155 --> 03:55:52.325 The practice. 803 Roger Salas SCE 03:55:52.595 --> 03:55:56.495 Even below the minimum value of the value, we will. 804 Roger Salas SCE 03:55:56.524 --> 03:56:05.494 Then have to do upgrades to fix that are minimum to the minimum minimum value. That makes sense. 805 Sky Stanfield 03:56:05.824 --> 03:56:06.184 Okay. 806 Regnier, Justin 03:56:06.214 --> 03:56:09.574 So, I, I think everybody's agreed with that on the emergency. 807 Sky Stanfield 03:56:09.574 --> 03:56:10.564 Basis. 808 Regnier, Justin 03:56:12.094 --> 03:56:17.644 But what it sounds like the utilities are proposing is creating an entirely different customer class on the. 809 Sky Stanfield 03:56:18.095 --> 03:56:18.935 Basis. 810 Regnier, Justin 03:56:19.985 --> 03:56:26.945 And I don't know what justification has been provided on the record to create a new customer class on a long term basis. 811 gary holdsworth sdg&e 03:56:30.605 --> 03:56:32.375 I don't think we're saying that at all. 812 Roger Salas SCE 03:56:33.215 --> 03:56:34.865 Yeah, and what I will do is. 813 gary holdsworth sdg&e 03:56:35.915 --> 03:56:51.275 The timeline to make the longer term fix on the utility, you know, the utilities going to fix on their dime, you know, may or may not coincide with the desire of the other end customer. 814 gary holdsworth sdg&e 03:56:51.904 --> 03:57:07.834 But those, those upgrades, you know, have to be gone through it, like an annual planning process and identified and scheduled and the resources procured and, you know, all that all that stuff that has to happen through the regular distribution planning process. 815 Roger Salas SCE 03:57:08.674 --> 03:57:12.604 But again, we, I would say the following though, and Justin. 816 Roger Salas SCE 03:57:12.664 --> 03:57:33.724 You can clarify that, but the way the way we understand the decision is that the decision is, you can modify the, the, the limits, you know, whether the monthly or something else as long as you don't go below the value. The decision did not indicate that we needed to do. 817 Roger Salas SCE 03:57:33.814 --> 03:57:39.514 Upgrades to bring those IC values back to their approval limit. That is see that in the decision. 818 Younes, Amin 03:57:41.405 --> 03:57:59.525 That doesn't, that's not, I mean, I'd love to hear justin's answer as well, but that's not my reading of decision. My reading of decision is that you shall not reduce them below the the predefined level. Not that you have carte blanche to reduce them to the predefined level. I think it seems like there's that still needs to be justified that you that you bring them down to that level. 819 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:58:00.095 --> 03:58:01.925 I think, I mean, you have read the, the. 820 Alex Mwaura PG&E 03:58:02.014 --> 03:58:09.154 Right before that right it says will be given the opportunity to reduce it. But then since you shall not go below the limit. So we have. 821 Younes, Amin 03:58:09.424 --> 03:58:14.404 Say it for a long term basis I couldn't I interpret that as very short term basis. 822 Regnier, Justin 03:58:15.634 --> 03:58:23.134 So, there there, there are definitely questions of interpretation. We are ministerial over here so there was limits of low level of. 823 Regnier, Justin 03:58:23.139 --> 03:58:44.284 Interpretation I think 1 thing that wasn't brought up in the decision I'm sorry, the decision or resolution has to do with cost causation in the previous examples we looked at, we were talking about load going away or the cost causation of logo. 824 Regnier, Justin 03:58:44.314 --> 03:59:05.404 The way is, is the prior customer we were talking about adding non export customers. Well, if we're adding non export customers in a way that creates a safety condition, we shouldn't, you know, that that should come up in the interconnection screens. I'm trying to get my head. 825 Regnier, Justin 03:59:05.464 --> 03:59:18.034 Around how the system changes in the future that is a, that has the customer as the actor causing the cost. 826 Regnier, Justin 03:59:19.744 --> 03:59:21.934 That's that's the other consideration that's in my mind. 827 Roger Salas SCE 03:59:24.004 --> 03:59:44.914 I think that the, the, the typical thing is, who holds the responsibility when nobody nobody is someone to say triggering the cost. There's no, there's no trigger as, you know, I'm doing, you know, a stakeholder right? The stakeholder is. 828 Roger Salas SCE 03:59:44.975 --> 04:00:06.065 Not doing something that causes a problem in this case, we're saying you have the generator entity, you have a utility. We both are doing what we're supposed to, you know, as long as you operate for your profile, you know, we're happy. We're good, but then there's a 3rd entity other customers that say, have the ability to reduce the load that causes a problem. 829 Roger Salas SCE 04:00:06.153 --> 04:00:27.213 Interaction and the question is who pays for that. Right? And in my interpretation of the decision was that. Hey, listen, we cannot kind of divide this into into 2 kind of the way where finally, utilities can reduce the profile to the minimum value of the value. And if that fixes the problem, then. 830 Roger Salas SCE 04:00:27.275 --> 04:00:39.065 We're good, but if you have to go below the value, then I think that's where we will have to pay for the upgrades. I mean, at least, I mean, again, just like, you know, interpretation here. 831 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:00:43.983 --> 04:00:58.443 I would, I would only add to that scary again, uh, that, you know, you mentioned that the is not the actor causing the cost. Uh, if we cannot show that we have no ability to. 832 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:00:59.975 --> 04:01:20.795 You know, to mandate that, that that becomes a utility cost. I don't think we're saying it's not a utility cost. If it's an overall system problem that was not immediately identified to a certain actor and that's a system wide, you know, distribution plan problem. 833 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:01:20.799 --> 04:01:24.874 It can be addressed that should be addressed by the utility. 834 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:01:28.025 --> 04:01:48.995 I think the only caveat to that is what, what I alluded to before, right? What if what if the limit, what if we're reducing the export by 50 kilowatts? But to need the ability to go above, that would would require like, a 5Million dollar upgrade to the distribution system. Um, in that case, is that something that is a. 835 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:01:49.024 --> 04:01:54.844 For that, uh, socializing that 5Million dollar cost as that justify 50 kilowatt. 836 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:01:54.844 --> 04:01:55.804 Christmas. 837 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:01:55.804 --> 04:01:56.374 Customer. 838 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:01:56.614 --> 04:02:08.224 We're already covering all my all the points on my slides on companies so that's, uh, that's on that slide as well. Uh, in relation to a high cost upgrade. 839 Roger Salas SCE 04:02:08.644 --> 04:02:09.004 Yeah. 840 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:02:09.514 --> 04:02:10.144 You know. 841 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:02:10.355 --> 04:02:19.235 By definition what that, you know, when that's gonna no 1 uh, no, 1 could support a single project, you know, financing that. 842 Roger Salas SCE 04:02:20.045 --> 04:02:31.235 Yeah, I think that's why in a way, he's trying to define responsibility. Yeah the 1st phase, which is down to the lowest value I see value, which I think I heard folks say, like, this is what you want to be. 843 Roger Salas SCE 04:02:31.324 --> 04:02:52.414 But, anyways, so as long as you go, you don't go below the value then we'll say, does the responsibility of the customer does their contribution to resolve the issue if we go below that I see the value, then that does utilities contribution to resolve the issue. So, it seems to me that we're sort of dividing the. 844 Roger Salas SCE 04:02:52.654 --> 04:02:55.654 The responsibility of what will happen in in the future. 845 Sky Stanfield 04:02:56.705 --> 04:03:17.735 Well, we're designing it to customers without talking about load customers and all the others. I feel like, I have a question for you about what we're going to actually, like, sort of what, how we get work towards consensus here and the more I'm listening to the discussion the more I think I would love for the there to be an openness to talk about since we. 846 Sky Stanfield 04:03:17.973 --> 04:03:38.973 I agree that this risk is probably low. We don't have data to pointed out, but I think we've heard the utility say that in engineering team similarly, as assessed it that way, but we're not going to get around that. It seems to me, like, if that's the case that there's probably a reason for everybody to try to think about a different way of. 847 Sky Stanfield 04:03:39.064 --> 04:04:00.124 And the rest that's fair that enables the capture capturing of the benefit from the project. Brad shaking his head. But I feel like if we're going to move forward on a consensus basis, this, all just comes down to this question of what's the best way to allocate the risk and we're having a hard time even defining who's responsible. 848 Sky Stanfield 04:04:00.129 --> 04:04:08.374 Further, which is a bit tricky, but I still think that that's where the open mindedness needs to come in. If we're going to get consensus. 849 Brad Heavner 04:04:09.154 --> 04:04:20.704 Well, I have a problem with this discussion about responsibility when it's a new need that you're saying is caused by a previous action that doesn't sit well with. I don't think that's right. 850 Brad Heavner 04:04:21.304 --> 04:04:42.424 Because the previous action was the customer interconnected a system that was within the hosting capacity of the time. In other words, they made use of the existing paid for constructed grid capacity. That's a good thing. And if later there's reconfiguration that change that capacity and you're saying it's caused. 851 Brad Heavner 04:04:42.430 --> 04:04:51.905 By the customer who previously interconnected under the hosting capacity of the time I don't think that's a correct interpretation of responsibility. So. 852 Roger Salas SCE 04:04:52.925 --> 04:05:03.575 Let me just clarify that. I think, you know, maybe we put a, maybe a little more clear. I think, when we're talking about is low reduction, that is not under the control of the utility. Obviously we may. 853 Roger Salas SCE 04:05:04.083 --> 04:05:23.913 Reconfiguration that put us in the situation then now, of course, you know, utility would be responsible for that. But is when the utility didn't do anything, you know, our grid is the same configure the same. Just happens that, you know, you know, a set of customers, or a large customer decided to, to change their, their, the way they operate or move away. 854 Roger Salas SCE 04:05:24.844 --> 04:05:32.644 That's that's a condition that is not caused by the utility and it's not caused by the the project is kinda like 3rd party and I don't know what to do. 855 Sky Stanfield 04:05:32.914 --> 04:05:45.844 Doesn't that suggest we should re, evaluate how we allocate the risk? Because what utility we're saying is the generator didn't do anything. We didn't do anything, but we think the generator should be responsible for the risk. Even though they're a single project. To me, I don't disagree. 856 Sky Stanfield 04:05:45.879 --> 04:06:05.164 With you Roger, but like, I think that's why we're trying. This is problematic to say the utilities. We're not. Nobody's saying utility. You didn't use the wrong generator didn't do anything. The customers. They didn't do anything wrong either. They just did what they're allowed to do. So, why does it make sense to allocate all of the risk to the generator when it's not anybody's fault? 857 Sky Stanfield 04:06:07.804 --> 04:06:28.174 I don't think that the commission fully thought about this and that, but I do think that there's a room for us to come up with a better approach based on that fact that it's nobody's fault. Nobody was a bad guy. Nobody was evil. Therefore, doesn't make sense to assign the responsibility to somebody who was doing exactly what they were told to do based on the. 858 Sky Stanfield 04:06:28.235 --> 04:06:29.345 Available information. 859 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:06:30.035 --> 04:06:49.325 So, sky and everybody else, uh, very good discussion. I'm enjoying it getting a little headache. Maybe that's a cold but I did want to point out that, you know, we brought up this subject of responsibility and cost. 860 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:06:49.353 --> 04:07:10.473 This because these advice letters are feeding into phase 2 of the proceeding, which is the rate making phase. So we need and the rate making faces the 1 that's going to be deciding what is the appropriate cost responsibility but right now we need a. 861 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:07:10.479 --> 04:07:19.024 Foundation to actually, you know, feed into that phase 2. 862 Sky Stanfield 04:07:20.405 --> 04:07:33.095 How do you do that? Jose? I think that's a really interesting point. Um, but I don't see how we agree on how the customer can be curtailed or what it would be functional without having decided on that question. 863 Sky Stanfield 04:07:35.074 --> 04:07:42.934 Confused about why that question is even in phase 2, because it presumes if we adopted a program that works and then whether we're going to revisit it, I guess but. 864 Frances Cleveland 04:07:43.414 --> 04:07:55.354 Yeah, and and I would like to add a big elephant to into the wrong, uh, which I think needs to be made aware of, in part of this discussion, which is load management. 865 Frances Cleveland 04:07:55.865 --> 04:08:16.655 Load as well as generation, I think if we can't do both, then we've got a future. That's all lopsided where load can do anything at once and generations somehow has to manage itself to avoid the constraints. The problems. 866 Frances Cleveland 04:08:16.774 --> 04:08:33.994 On the grid I realized this is an discussion, but I think again the solutions to this problem are broader than just, you know, the details of how the contracts have to be signed. 867 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:08:39.664 --> 04:08:43.264 Okay, thank you. Francis, and thank you. Scott. So. 868 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:08:44.974 --> 04:09:05.944 Skype, you don't have an answer for you on your question and how the 2 procedures for me to find this way. This was so long ago. Um, what I can say is you asked a question earlier on, you know, how I'm envisioning it. Well, you didn't see these exact words, but. 869 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:09:07.055 --> 04:09:07.745 On how this. 870 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:09:09.245 --> 04:09:21.605 Processes working to arrive at a consensus proposal, and I wanted to say, you know, workshop number 1, the way I envisioned it was, you know, we get all this material out in the. 871 Sky Stanfield 04:09:22.385 --> 04:09:22.685 Yeah. 872 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:09:23.555 --> 04:09:29.975 Both the, uh, parties and the no, no, no you parties that want to work together. 873 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:09:30.303 --> 04:09:44.103 Get a proposal going, you have your homework there to come up with a proposal and then workshop number 2 we can now then, um. 874 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:09:46.293 --> 04:09:54.303 Look at those proposals and discuss any outstanding questions of cultural topics that come out of this workshop that we still need to address. 875 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:09:55.984 --> 04:10:16.594 And, you know, I have stressed that the utilities that based on the, uh, subject matter there is, uh, very high possibility of a workshop 3, you know, come early December. And that's why we've scheduled, uh, you know, workshop to, uh, late November. So we can schedule it. 876 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:10:16.625 --> 04:10:25.625 Workshops 3, early December before the utilities into file, um, in early January. So. 877 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:10:28.204 --> 04:10:48.394 Early on, when I was working on these for solutions, I had, uh, made a chart, which I, I did not. I decided at the last minute not to include in the, uh, resolution because I think it Pre judged too many things that we're discussing about right now. 878 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:10:49.894 --> 04:11:09.754 Basically, it was like a flowchart reduced to the level to the, you know, for example, reduced to 0 power due to an emergency condition emergency stops, bring it up to, uh, you know, the, uh, the original or, you know. 879 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:11:10.205 --> 04:11:31.325 Basically, kind of like, oh, it's not a temporary solutions. Medications are needed, you know, who pays and that's why we came up with all these questions in diverse solution that we need to address. And I know some questions regarding costs have been, uh, brought up in France. Is a working group. 880 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:11:31.683 --> 04:11:45.153 You know, that people have brought up that, you know, we need answers to this before we can continue. So, that's how I am envisioning this process. 881 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:11:47.465 --> 04:12:05.465 At the moment, I don't expect I don't expect consensus during today's workshop, but today, uh, is at brainstorming, get all the information we need out there in the open to then come up with a process. 882 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:12:06.753 --> 04:12:27.663 Process and not process, and I have stressed during a case manager calls to the utilities, you know, they should also prepare a list of questions to non parties on, you know, what is needed and, you know, to come up to, uh. 883 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:12:27.729 --> 04:12:28.539 Consensus. 884 Sky Stanfield 04:12:32.314 --> 04:12:39.934 Thanks, that's a helpful kind of helps us set where, when we should dig in further on some of these things, or how best to do it. So I appreciate that. 885 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:12:41.284 --> 04:12:51.694 The, uh, uh, and just to stress the resolution we, uh, I mean, other than staff staff turnover. 886 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:12:52.204 --> 04:12:54.214 You know, the resolution was written in that way. 887 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:12:56.345 --> 04:13:15.155 Just to allow this venue basically, and to build a record, cause there was a lot missing. And I know the original working group, uh, rule, 21 working groups, 123 and 4 could not given the time a lot. It could not really do well into these topics. 888 Regnier, Justin 04:13:18.183 --> 04:13:37.353 And I did recall somebody earlier saying they remembered this conversation or that conversation in the working group. And I think we need to be careful there because it's been it's been a long time. And I think the discussion in those groups permitted folks to come away with a different impression of what was agreed to. 889 Regnier, Justin 04:13:38.229 --> 04:13:46.534 If that weren't the case, then we wouldn't be having these discussions right now. So I just wanted to defer what a word of caution in there before we go. 890 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:14:00.215 --> 04:14:05.705 Okay, so, unless there are any further questions or comments on this side, maybe we can move forward to the next 1. 891 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:14:11.615 --> 04:14:28.985 All right, so for this slide, we identified conditions where reduction may be necessary and then also identify tools that they will use to make this determination. So, for the conditions, and is similar to the ones that were covered. 892 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:14:29.014 --> 04:14:50.134 For high voltage issues with customer invited us going off line or tripping offline real time great operators, observation, using the tools they have. Or if we had issues with equipment on the grid, not functioning functioning as designed an example would be if we had capacity banks going. 893 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:14:50.194 --> 04:15:11.134 If we had voltage regulators, not maintaining adequate voltage, and as far as tools that I use could use, or may use would be the real time or observation tools I think all 3 use something different but the end result is the same for planning purposes. We may use. 894 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:15:11.344 --> 04:15:32.344 Uh, modeling tools, like Sam, we may also leverage our mirroring information. We have customers that are experiencing low voltage or high voltage and then if we have an issue that requires investigation in the field, we may deploy power quality instrumentation to do that investigation. And then, you know. 895 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:15:33.724 --> 04:15:39.184 May be needed, um, as we learn more about projects. So, issues that may be coming up in the future. 896 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:15:41.795 --> 04:15:43.295 Any questions, but this slide. 897 Brian Lydic 04:15:48.514 --> 04:16:02.914 Yeah, this is Brian with Eric. I'm just curious in terms of utilizing information. Have you already operationalize that in terms of monitoring voltage debt or any other data for power? Quality purposes. 898 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:16:04.564 --> 04:16:07.564 Yeah, so for PG we already have access to. 899 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:16:07.714 --> 04:16:22.984 Data we can see, uh, where voltages alone we have a report that I don't know how often it gets published, but it looks like like low voltage based on predetermined thresholds or high voltage. So we do have access to that information. It may not be. 900 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:16:23.224 --> 04:16:37.054 All the information, but we do check them depending on which cluster? Remind me to say we do check in some interval. Maybe like, you know, once a day or twice a day or something to that effect. But I can get specifics. If this is something you're interested in, Brian. 901 Brian Lydic 04:16:38.824 --> 04:16:40.264 That's good to know. I'll let, you know. 902 Brian Lydic 04:16:41.674 --> 04:16:43.114 Maybe in the future, we can talk more. 903 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:16:43.684 --> 04:16:43.894 Okay. 904 Brian Lydic 04:16:43.924 --> 04:16:44.254 Thanks. 905 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:16:44.794 --> 04:16:45.004 Sure. 906 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:16:47.465 --> 04:16:50.525 I just want to chime in on that in my question before we move on. 907 Roger Salas SCE 04:16:51.035 --> 04:17:07.925 Alex, I think the same for every week, I think we pulled the meters once a day and whatever information is at that time. That's what we bring in. And so we have like, hourly information. 908 Roger Salas SCE 04:17:08.343 --> 04:17:29.463 I don't know that it's sufficient to to deal with power quality issues, which are, in many cases in the, in the millisecond or or something like that. Uh, so so we may have limitations about metaphor, steady state conditions. Uh, we have the ability to look at the data, although it's not in a. 909 Roger Salas SCE 04:17:29.495 --> 04:17:33.935 Format like like PG need us. I mean, we may be able to do it now in a case by case basis. 910 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:17:34.775 --> 04:17:49.025 Yeah, and and to roger's point, you know, this is gonna be something that may inform that there's an issue but if the investigation is required, that's when we will deploy power quality instrumentation to actually pinpoint what the issue is. And what may be causing it. 911 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:17:53.854 --> 04:17:54.724 Next slide please. 912 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:18:02.675 --> 04:18:23.045 So this slide kind of tries to go into how we can justify reducing all the differences between the and customers. Right? So is something we've talked about and use case right? You know, get it to death. But the reason why. 913 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:18:23.074 --> 04:18:44.104 We feel like, we may have to look at projects different than manual projects is this introduction of additional risk inherent upon using 12 limits but is 1 limit for the interconnection. I'm sure this is something we're going to discuss again in the future. But this is the position at this. 914 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:18:44.584 --> 04:19:05.074 Um, and then, you know, if we had load profile changes, we based on these additional limits for the other 11 months, we've made a determination that we think the projects introduce a higher risk than non projects that are using 1. 915 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:19:05.375 --> 04:19:26.045 For the, essentially, for the whole, uh, duration of the inter connection and then we did mention here that, uh, right now, based on the interconnection agreement, that non customers, you know, sign, it's pretty much we're not allowed to go back and reduce that limit. Right? But our interpretation of the decision. 916 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:19:27.244 --> 04:19:37.564 Led us to believe that we are being allowed the opportunity to go back and reduce the export values. So long as we don't go below that predetermined lowest value. 917 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:19:42.275 --> 04:19:43.535 Any questions about this slide. 918 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:19:50.524 --> 04:19:51.454 Okay, next slide please. 919 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:19:56.434 --> 04:20:01.354 So, this slide is talking about the duration of potential reduction of LGB. 920 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:20:02.374 --> 04:20:03.424 All right, so. 921 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:20:04.773 --> 04:20:25.683 What we're saying here is that if we can mitigate the issue, then we will allow the project to return to the original profile. But if the issue cannot be mitigated, or if the issue or the mitigation is cost prohibitive to the right path, then we may require the project to permanently reduce the export value. So long as it does not go below. 922 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:20:25.835 --> 04:20:29.885 I CSG value, um, in order to maintain system, safety and reliability. 923 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:20:37.533 --> 04:20:39.573 Then our questions may be the next slide please. 924 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:20:44.584 --> 04:21:02.374 Uh, this 1 talks about fairness, which is something that I think everybody on this call is interested in. So for temporary reductions, we're going to apply the conditions. The criteria that we talked about before equally among L. G. P. and L. GP customer. 925 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:21:02.614 --> 04:21:22.954 So, basically, if you have an emergency condition on the on the system, and we need to reduce those projects, we're not going to, you know, for example, only reduce or tell customers to go offline. It's going to be. Everybody needs to go offline until we figure out what the issues or resolve the issue. And then generally, we don't anticipate. 926 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:21:23.794 --> 04:21:44.224 Having to permanently reduce export for customers, just like, we don't do it for non LGB customers. So we're going to try our best to fix whatever issues are prompting this potential reduction. And this will be sort of like, you know, last resort. If we have to reduce the expert limits. 927 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:21:46.415 --> 04:21:53.705 Um, most of these, we've kind of talked about emergency conditions, um, covered in slide 8 and then. 928 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:21:57.485 --> 04:22:17.105 Yeah, so I think 1 of the questions I was asked is if we would give priority to generate generators that have paid for upgrades and so this is kind of tied to the slide that just went over. There would not be any priority if we need to we need systems to go offline for safety reasons. We're just gonna remove all the international. 929 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:22:17.164 --> 04:22:18.904 Resources, um. 930 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:22:20.375 --> 04:22:34.715 And then the last point is talking about again, if we need to reduce the projects to the lowest value, because we've exhausted all other potential mitigations issues, then we would go below, uh, to that. 931 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:22:37.144 --> 04:22:38.344 As allowed by the decision. 932 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:22:42.153 --> 04:22:47.253 I think this is the end of, uh, agenda item 3 section 2 of the discussions. 933 Regnier, Justin 04:22:49.539 --> 04:22:53.344 You tell us what probation across the board means sorry? I'm not following. 934 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:22:54.454 --> 04:23:08.254 I think, uh, that was meant to mean that we would not reduce project versus a non project to mitigate issues or we just either all of them would come off line. That's what this is supposed to mean. 935 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:23:10.834 --> 04:23:13.654 So, for, I guess, would be 0 for everyone. 936 Younes, Amin 04:23:20.315 --> 04:23:20.555 That's. 937 Younes, Amin 04:23:20.853 --> 04:23:29.763 Follow it seems like it would make more sense that you're saying, if there are 2 LGB customer customers on the same circuit, that they would kind of split the different or split they need. 938 Younes, Amin 04:23:31.955 --> 04:23:39.215 But you said, you don't have the, the authority to re to reduce non LGB customers. So it would have to be only between customers, right? 939 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:23:40.055 --> 04:23:52.985 No, I don't think he said that. I think he's saying that probation just means any resource that regardless of its ltp or not in status is fair. 940 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:23:52.989 --> 04:23:56.164 Fair game when operators have to make. 941 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:23:57.245 --> 04:24:00.905 Decisions in a very short amount of time to fix a problem. 942 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:24:01.715 --> 04:24:07.925 Yeah, I mean, I think the difference in this slide is talking about, uh, temporary reduction, not permanent reduction. 943 Regnier, Justin 04:24:09.695 --> 04:24:12.275 This is our referring to emergency conditions and morale. 944 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:24:12.845 --> 04:24:13.445 That is correct. 945 Frances Cleveland 04:24:16.595 --> 04:24:18.335 And would it be 0 for. 946 Frances Cleveland 04:24:18.394 --> 04:24:22.084 Non customers versus just reduction. 947 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:24:23.524 --> 04:24:24.694 It would be 0 yes. 948 Frances Cleveland 04:24:26.828 --> 04:24:27.963 Any reason for that. 949 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:24:28.263 --> 04:24:42.453 Well, so national GP customers do not have the ltp customers right now would have a controller, right? There will be a, uh, ability to do a schedule non. Customers do not have that ability today. So. 950 Frances Cleveland 04:24:42.453 --> 04:24:44.343 I'd have to have that ability to. 951 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:24:44.343 --> 04:24:47.973 Do not have to have it here. So I guess, you know, if you had a customer. 952 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:24:48.004 --> 04:25:09.034 That was like, a limited export using a relay, for example. I mean, potentially, if we came up with the non 0 reduction need, then in theory you could have them set their relay for that. But then that involves a whole slew of issues, because this is an emergency condition, right? There's no time to have him change the. 953 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:25:09.129 --> 04:25:15.304 And they really settings, you know, or do all that stuff. So, in this case, if it's an emergency condition, or we just ask him to go offline. 954 Regnier, Justin 04:25:16.774 --> 04:25:25.684 It sounds like in the emergency conditions, you wouldn't by definition, have the time to plan and you would just ask everybody to go all the way off line irrespective. 955 Alex Mwaura PG&E 04:25:26.584 --> 04:25:27.874 That would be a correct statement. 956 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:25:27.874 --> 04:25:29.794 Typically is correct yes. 957 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:25:32.314 --> 04:25:34.504 It's a blunt instrument at that point. 958 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:25:40.415 --> 04:25:57.065 So, uh, that is information we need to be clearly stated, you know, uh, especially when, you know, uh, when we talk about differences between, uh, customers and non customers. So. 959 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:25:57.093 --> 04:25:59.373 He knows what's going on. 960 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:26:01.324 --> 04:26:21.604 So, in the in the temporary basis, they're what we're saying is the utilities don't really see a difference in the, you know, extended time frame. Where are you talking about? 2 upgrades need to be done to fix a problem then you may be talking about something to try a different treatment. 961 gary holdsworth sdg&e 04:26:23.314 --> 04:26:28.204 That's your current position and that's 1 of the things I'm talking about. My next slide. 962 Regnier, Justin 04:26:29.614 --> 04:26:42.544 Well, I think jose's got a point and we can keep it in mind going forward. My question is, can we put some kind of balance around temporary and permanent when we're saying a car hits a pole and we've got to shut things down. 963 Regnier, Justin 04:26:43.625 --> 04:26:47.825 We're talking about minutes hours maybe a day. 964 Regnier, Justin 04:26:49.474 --> 04:26:55.654 Is that what we're talking about here? Maybe 2 or 3 days if there's inclement weather. 965 Roger Salas SCE 04:26:58.084 --> 04:27:18.604 I mean, it could, it could be a little longer I mean, it depends depends on how it is right for instance, take that example ball in the middle of the circuit, not in order in order to be able to bring certain generators, depending, depending on where they're located let's say they're on the on the other side of the fault, right? 966 Roger Salas SCE 04:27:19.145 --> 04:27:31.115 Uh, in order to bring that generator back to its normal configuration, we have to re, make repairs and, you know, whatever the damage was. Um. 967 Roger Salas SCE 04:27:31.564 --> 04:27:49.654 You know, that may be longer than than a day or 2, but all it also is not going to be months either. So so it's it's really difficult to say. Well, let's put a bone of 1 or 2 days, cause really the pins on each situation. Some could be. 968 Regnier, Justin 04:27:49.714 --> 04:27:52.684 Yeah, and WH, which I heard you just say is, it's not going to be months. 969 Regnier, Justin 04:27:52.714 --> 04:28:01.054 So, okay, but generally, if it's going to be more than a day, you're looking to find some kind of a switching solution or some kind of a. 970 Roger Salas SCE 04:28:01.234 --> 04:28:01.564 Yeah. 971 Regnier, Justin 04:28:02.674 --> 04:28:04.594 Another part of the grid solution sounds like. 972 Roger Salas SCE 04:28:04.624 --> 04:28:13.534 Right, right, right, right. So yeah, we're talking about restoration of service. We want to restore service as quickly as possible possibly, you know, within. 973 Roger Salas SCE 04:28:14.045 --> 04:28:34.895 In the next few hours, right? Cause we got we got switching ties. We have automation schemes that big load somewhere else very quickly. But now the generator ended up in a different configuration thing was originally study for and that's the 1. we're thinking as to like, okay, you know, especially for larger generators those would be the ones that getting. 974 Roger Salas SCE 04:28:35.074 --> 04:28:45.544 And more, you know, potentially, they need to be offline for longer period of time. For instance, they may end up at the very tail end of a circuit, um, under the new configuration. You know. 975 Regnier, Justin 04:28:55.355 --> 04:29:01.055 It makes sense, I don't know if it helps me make policy or Jose make policy and he was make policy. 976 Regnier, Justin 04:29:03.484 --> 04:29:03.754 Thank you. 977 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:29:14.525 --> 04:29:24.005 Okay um, are there any, uh, questions any other questions regarding this, uh, agenda item? 978 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:29:33.184 --> 04:29:48.124 Okay hearing not. Oh, I'm sorry my bad. That was my own microphone lighting up. Uh, so, uh, hearing none I think we can take a lunch break now. Uh, I am suggesting. 979 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:29:50.705 --> 04:30:09.995 Let's do a 45 minute lunch break. Actually let's do 50 minutes. Lunch break that way. We'll begin at, uh, 115 sharp. Uh, I will, um, sent, uh, or Mary. We'll send Joseph the, uh. 980 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:30:11.134 --> 04:30:23.374 Lunch break slide here and that will contain the, uh, updated, uh, agenda timing. So anybody can refer to that during their lunch break. 981 Regnier, Justin 04:30:25.445 --> 04:30:46.115 I mean, sorry, 1 thing out really quickly before we go to lunch I remember back end before days a lot of work got done at lunch a lot of work that maybe couldn't get done on the record. Um, to the extent that folks are are able to do that work virtually I think it would would certainly help. Obviously we have to eat too, but, uh, definitely appreciate. 982 Regnier, Justin 04:30:46.144 --> 04:30:55.204 All the, all the collaboration and all the viewpoints that are coming together and hopefully we can start back up and keep productivity. 983 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:31:19.803 --> 04:31:35.463 Okay, have you said that we will start a lunch break? Uh, Joseph, uh, I'm sending you an updated, uh, slide deck to with, uh, slide to, uh, put up during the lunch break. So people can, uh, look at. 984 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:31:35.495 --> 04:31:40.445 Your agenda that should be in your mailbox within maybe 1 minute. 985 Rottman, Mary 04:31:51.035 --> 04:31:52.295 Thanks so. 986 Rottman, Mary 04:32:05.883 --> 04:32:08.493 Do you want to copy me just in case there's an issue. 987 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:32:10.113 --> 04:32:12.873 I think I did marry. 988 Rottman, Mary 04:32:12.933 --> 04:32:13.863 Oh, it looks like it's it. 989 Haga, Joseph 04:32:15.034 --> 04:32:19.924 That's not the, it's, it just hit me my email box just as I, uh. 990 Haga, Joseph 04:32:20.764 --> 04:32:23.524 Go ahead, and open the new presentation and get that 1 up. 991 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:32:24.304 --> 04:32:29.014 Yeah, yeah, it's, it's, uh, a version too that I just emailed like, 30 seconds ago. 992 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:32:32.135 --> 04:32:46.325 Uh, there's a lunch break, slide there with a new agenda on it. So that's the 1 that should be displayed. Uh, so people know what's going on right now. 993 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:32:48.334 --> 04:32:50.044 Since the agenda has changed. 994 Rottman, Mary 04:32:50.404 --> 04:32:53.734 Yes, and do you want to take a little time. 995 Haga, Joseph 04:32:53.974 --> 04:32:56.134 Do you want the agenda up now? 996 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:32:57.124 --> 04:32:59.524 Yes, please. Okay. You see that slide. I think it. 997 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:32:59.644 --> 04:33:00.274 Right. 998 Haga, Joseph 04:33:00.364 --> 04:33:00.574 Yep. 999 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:33:08.225 --> 04:33:10.055 Perfect yeah. 1000 Rottman, Mary 04:33:10.533 --> 04:33:14.135 So, we have 1 slide up at a time so. 1001 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:33:14.885 --> 04:33:15.965 Yeah. 1002 Rottman, Mary 04:33:15.994 --> 04:33:16.594 On top. 1003 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:33:18.334 --> 04:33:24.004 Yeah, let's just keep, uh, recording going so, uh, you know, we don't miss anything and so. 1004 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:33:24.064 --> 04:33:29.404 People can reflect on the edge, reflect not the right word. 1005 Rottman, Mary 04:33:31.115 --> 04:33:34.506 I can edit this out. Um, so. 1006 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:33:34.506 --> 04:33:37.176 People can meditate on the agenda. 1007 Rottman, Mary 04:33:40.535 --> 04:33:51.035 Yeah, well, so we'll do editing to cut out them, you know, like the conversations. Um, so I hope you guys gonna take a little break. I'm starving. I need lunch. 1008 Regnier, Justin 04:33:52.295 --> 04:33:54.635 Yeah, no, I think we're planning on it. Um. 1009 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:33:54.664 --> 04:33:54.965 Yeah. 1010 Rottman, Mary 04:33:54.994 --> 04:33:55.836 Hold medication. 1011 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 04:33:59.795 --> 04:34:03.033 So all right see you all at 115. 1012 Rottman, Mary 04:34:03.904 --> 04:34:07.295 Yeah. Okay. Thanks guys. 1013 Josh McDonald SCE 04:50:11.014 --> 04:50:12.334 That's the only way to do it. Gordon. 1014 Josh McDonald SCE 04:51:58.024 --> 04:52:03.814 Bsc must ensure that all management information that are in effect for the site are mutually compatible. 1015 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:20:41.404 --> 05:20:46.294 It's 115, I just wanted to make sure the utilities are back. 1016 Jorge Chacon 05:20:50.044 --> 05:20:52.414 George to conference on the California admins here. 1017 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:20:53.106 --> 05:20:53.676 Okay. 1018 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:20:55.058 --> 05:20:57.062 Jenny and Jenny. 1019 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:20:58.534 --> 05:21:00.242 Gary from San diego's here. 1020 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:21:06.964 --> 05:21:08.074 And PG E. 1021 Alex Mwaura PG&E 05:21:12.454 --> 05:21:14.072 This is Alex. 1022 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:21:14.072 --> 05:21:19.832 Okay, thank you Alex. All right. 1023 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:21:27.516 --> 05:21:28.984 And Mary are you on the call? 1024 Rottman, Mary 05:21:32.344 --> 05:21:33.062 I am. 1025 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:21:33.542 --> 05:21:34.892 Okay, and we're still recording. 1026 Rottman, Mary 05:21:35.950 --> 05:21:37.714 I was just going to say we're still recording. 1027 Rottman, Mary 05:21:38.822 --> 05:21:39.362 Okay. 1028 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:21:39.362 --> 05:21:47.972 So, I think we can now resume a topic. What is it now? Item number. 1029 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:21:50.194 --> 05:21:53.194 No, it's the next 1, I think the next slide. 1030 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:21:56.014 --> 05:21:56.794 Yeah. 1031 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:22:00.756 --> 05:22:03.484 There we go who's gonna kickoff discussion? 1032 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:22:04.474 --> 05:22:07.206 Gary Holdsworth from San Diego, gas electric. 1033 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:22:07.956 --> 05:22:10.234 Okay, perfect. Take it away. 1034 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:22:10.836 --> 05:22:19.506 All right, well, welcome back everybody. I hope you had a good lunch. I had a great lunch. I am fighting a little cold as well. 1035 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:22:19.686 --> 05:22:40.804 This change in the weather, but hopefully you can hear me. Okay. You know, my voice will not give out on me. So, these are the items that we've been asked I've been asked to look to address on the mitigation options and the next slide of who pays. So, we've largely talked a lot about some of these items, but the key thing. 1036 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:22:40.832 --> 05:23:01.954 There is in, we're asked to provide a definition for each mitigation option, discuss how mitigation options differ from upgrade measures. So, the key thing in what we're talking about here, mitigations are temporary and easy to easier to implement options lower cost. 1037 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:23:01.958 --> 05:23:22.414 Questions and there's some examples here that are listed as mitigations, you know, adding load to circuits by doing different switching techniques. Oh, and I'll mention that, you know, I'm, I'm here mostly for the financial aspect of the who pays. 1038 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:23:23.554 --> 05:23:44.254 Of my, uh, you know, colleagues need to address technical issues. They will jump in and help with that. But, uh, we have, you know, voltage regulators can be adjusted. You have you can temporarily alter circuit configurations you can enable or disable. 1039 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:23:44.260 --> 05:24:05.256 Capacity banks and so forth. Um, now there's also another item here that was added, um, adjust generating facility, operational capabilities to determine the viable searches, smarter murders. And I think we've already had some discussion about and and whether they can be a near term. 1040 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:24:05.410 --> 05:24:26.074 Mitigation examples, so those are examples though. 22 things are 2 types of things that can be done either altering system configuration and, or, you know, making switching and things like that. And maybe using a smart inverter capability on a generating side. Now, to contrast that with. 1041 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:24:26.558 --> 05:24:27.308 Upgrades. 1042 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:24:29.524 --> 05:24:50.524 More long lasting efforts. Uh, I mentioned there's no such thing as permanent, but that's in the long, long term timeframe but upgrades are typically equipment and a re, conjecturing, uh, adding equipment to, uh, upgrading substations through making putting in bigger. 1043 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:24:50.554 --> 05:25:10.534 Farmers capacity or banks a line re, conductor, including boosting the throughput of underground cables, permanently altering circuit configurations, creating new circuits like splitting a circuit and creating a new circuit and phase balancing of circuits. Those are. 1044 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:25:11.680 --> 05:25:32.314 Medium to high cost and we didn't have a, you know, we have a ballpark. What? Low cost means what medium cost means and what high cost means but I think it's generally accepted among the industry. That low cost, uh, means things like, in the tens of thousands or less kind of range. 1045 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:25:33.062 --> 05:25:53.222 Uh, medium costs is probably hundreds of thousands or tens of thousands and high cost is where you're talking a 1Million dollars and up or, you know, several 1Million dollars type of upgrades re, conductors being kind of the 1 example of a high cost upgrade as well as a transformer swap out. 1046 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:25:54.004 --> 05:26:15.124 Those are both going to be multi year, multi, 1Million, dollar type upgrades that are going to be required so you asked for definitions? Well, the definition is, we say, you know, mitigation is there anything going to be done on a temporary basis, upgrades on a longer term basis and that's really how we define those. 1047 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:26:16.144 --> 05:26:19.444 That's where I hit is, I will ask for any questions. 1048 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:26:33.154 --> 05:26:37.084 Okay, next, uh, next slide. 1049 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:26:42.844 --> 05:27:00.244 All right, so then the cost, which has been, you know, I already talked about quite a bit, um, these are the parameters under which we work on a regular basis in the interconnection world as far as, you know, cost causality was was mentioned he who triggers. 1050 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:27:00.274 --> 05:27:18.572 Pay is she who trigger space so this is what the are thinking at this point in time that the will pay for system upgrades didn't meet the minimum requirements up to the minimum. 1051 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:27:19.504 --> 05:27:39.694 Uh, values we've already discussed that. That's what going to be on the utilities to pay for those type of upgrades that would bring the system back to a minimum at kind of value. Let me get through all of them and I'll take questions, but the next 1 is the will pay for. 1052 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:27:39.728 --> 05:28:00.874 Upgrades to turn the LGB profile to its original value where the team they upgrade to be low cost, or be able to be done. I know on a regular, you know, a fairly tight time. Timetable won't take years to. This is again we're talking about shorter term. 1053 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:28:01.114 --> 05:28:21.454 Lower cost items, uh, if the customer doesn't like the timetable that the utility is talking about, in relation to that type of upgrade, where that utility is funding, they have the ability to fund the upgrade themselves. Uh, and or if they. 1054 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:28:22.204 --> 05:28:43.144 You know, the are not funding the upgrade in the 1st place, because of cost, then it will become more of the customer's responsibility. So, once more kind of an option, once more of a requirement, that's what we're thinking. And then just to throw in on an M projects now, uh, less than or equal to. 1055 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:28:43.180 --> 05:28:54.036 To go out, have their upgrades funded by the essentially ratepayers the them projects just so we're made aware they're not participating in. 1056 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:28:54.874 --> 05:29:15.364 So, if an upgrade is put into place, uh, for a non project, that does provide some benefit, uh, to an project that was previously impacted, maybe they were reduced their, their profile, and then comes in. And, um, that that upgrades funded by the, uh. 1057 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:29:15.694 --> 05:29:30.784 That project does benefit and can benefit from that without having to participate in it. That's our current thinking on on how a benefit might move from an M, to a non project. 1058 Sky Stanfield 05:29:31.174 --> 05:29:36.724 Gary, can I forgetting so, why is it the non project? I can think of reasons why. 1059 Sky Stanfield 05:29:36.760 --> 05:29:45.366 There's not much of an incentive for them projects to participate in. But is there a reason why a non project can't participate in an. 1060 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:29:47.734 --> 05:29:56.914 That was rejected way back so I don't I don't remember the rationale for that, but that was that was a qualification long ago. 1061 Regnier, Justin 05:29:58.384 --> 05:29:59.196 Familiar with that. 1062 Roger Salas SCE 05:29:59.526 --> 05:30:04.894 Hey, Gary, I don't think that I agree. I don't think Dallas I don't recall that as to, you know. 1063 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:30:05.016 --> 05:30:06.244 It was all right. 1064 Roger Salas SCE 05:30:07.834 --> 05:30:11.824 Whether by why I asked the question, why would they, I mean. 1065 Roger Salas SCE 05:30:13.624 --> 05:30:25.266 For less than 1 Mega, we, you know, we are required to give them full capacity. Why would anybody in the right mind? Say I want to be limited, but for 1 megawatt, then I can see that they could participate. 1066 Sky Stanfield 05:30:25.384 --> 05:30:34.564 Right, well, I think there's 2 things there 1, obviously for the larger than 1 megawatt that's where the incentives really aren't driven, but also for a smaller than 1 may want, there could be. 1067 Sky Stanfield 05:30:34.624 --> 05:30:55.684 A reason to do it on a temporary basis, for example, if a major upgrade was to be required and there could be reasons why we want to think about that encouraging a non customer to do. This is beneficial for all of us. So, we don't want to foreclose that, but I just wanted to be clear at the beginning that this is there's nothing that prevented them customer. 1068 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:30:55.746 --> 05:30:56.136 Okay. 1069 Sky Stanfield 05:30:57.066 --> 05:30:57.696 Right. Okay. 1070 Regnier, Justin 05:30:57.906 --> 05:31:05.226 All right, so just let me get this on the record. It sounds like we've got agreement that there is not a prohibition against them unlimited generation profile. 1071 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:31:05.226 --> 05:31:15.516 Right. So, on that 1, so I was not aware so I thought it was that way. So any other questions, this is. 1072 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:31:21.334 --> 05:31:36.634 So, I, you know, I mentioned the timetable, you know, for all intents and purposes those I mentioned previously, if it's a system problem that needs to be addressed through a, for example, creating a new circuit. 1073 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:31:38.342 --> 05:31:59.042 Each of the utilities have their own distribution planning process that identifies new circuits that are needed every year and, you know, that upgrade would have to go through that process to make it happen and get the resources, get the, you know, capital and all that. So that's not a short, you know, that's not a short term fix. That's a longer term. 1074 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:32:00.276 --> 05:32:11.494 It may not coincide with the customer's timetable and we understand that. But that is the, the fix that the utilities would put into place under the utilities, using the utilities resources and their timeline. 1075 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:32:18.544 --> 05:32:20.464 And that's my 2 slides. 1076 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:32:29.914 --> 05:32:46.894 I have a question about timeline, so current, 21 regulates or recent decision regulates that the design time and construction time to each 60 business days for upgrades. Would this timeline for upgrades complying with that timeline? 1077 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:32:50.494 --> 05:32:55.294 Well, it's 60 days or 6 days where I was agreed to with the customer. 1078 Roger Salas SCE 05:32:56.376 --> 05:33:01.536 Yeah, and Gary, and I would say, no, because this is not part of the interconnection these, after the fact. 1079 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:33:01.744 --> 05:33:02.766 This is after the fact. 1080 Roger Salas SCE 05:33:02.914 --> 05:33:03.634 This is not. 1081 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:33:03.634 --> 05:33:04.324 You're talking about. 1082 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:33:05.674 --> 05:33:16.204 Yes, that is also true. And so that goes squarely into the, uh, distribution planning process for each utility that's regulated as well. So. 1083 Regnier, Justin 05:33:19.924 --> 05:33:20.104 So. 1084 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:33:20.104 --> 05:33:22.654 So, what's the difference between Sarah Justin? 1085 Regnier, Justin 05:33:23.044 --> 05:33:23.494 Go ahead. 1086 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:33:24.484 --> 05:33:39.244 What's the difference between they're all interconnection customers right? Why why would current in the connection? Customer legal name customer can require? Or utility has to. 1087 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:33:39.304 --> 05:33:47.044 160 day timeline versus this 1, like, you have the excuses, not work, comply with. 1088 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:33:47.044 --> 05:33:50.884 Let me, let me say it again and maybe I'll help you understand. 1089 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:33:52.296 --> 05:34:11.556 What we're talking about is a s, a system degradation for whatever reason that required a large upgrade. Well, after the fact that you have an project interconnected to that circuit, and it has to be split and maybe rerouted and then a bunch of other things it's gonna cost a lot of money. 1090 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:34:13.204 --> 05:34:34.264 Not coming out of an interconnection study, but coming out of operational, uh, viewing of what's going on in that circuit, you know, voltage problems or what whatever the problems that that occur, then the utility is is bound to fix that problem. That that problem. 1091 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:34:34.268 --> 05:34:39.662 Be fixed on the utility through the utilities distribution plan, not through an interconnection study. 1092 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:34:47.402 --> 05:34:50.132 And the low cost items that you identified. 1093 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:34:50.524 --> 05:34:50.854 Yes. 1094 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:34:52.600 --> 05:35:02.914 Talk about bullet number 2, right? So if the app is considered to be low cost items, that's not long term degradation right? That's. 1095 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:35:03.334 --> 05:35:05.014 Right. So. 1096 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:35:05.794 --> 05:35:06.604 Low costs. 1097 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:35:08.284 --> 05:35:12.634 Possibly utility agrees to the finance it, but it can still take time. 1098 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:35:14.014 --> 05:35:34.892 You know, resources being what they are and so forth. So, the whole 60, 60 construct was, uh, you know, I'm not gonna go into the word minor cause I'll probably get my head cut off but that was the utilities. Agreed to. 1099 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:35:34.924 --> 05:35:56.042 Back in the working group, is that the minor upgrades could be done 6,060. you're talking about the same kind of low cost easy to construct kind of things. Here. By the time the decision came out that liner word evaporated and we were left with that. But that was still our thought process. So when it takes longer than 60 days. 1100 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:35:56.074 --> 05:36:17.194 Then we work with the customers to say, you know, we can't procure a long lead time model, like a new Transformer even if it's, you know, I'm just saying, you know, whatever, call it next, upgrade the lead time for that is normally 12 months. And then we need an extra X number of months. 1101 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:36:17.224 --> 05:36:23.194 To design and construct that's what we would work out with the customer, right? In that regard. 1102 Sky Stanfield 05:36:27.606 --> 05:36:41.734 So, we're, we're talking about in this, what you guys are debating right now we're talking about an upgrade. The utility would pay for it to get the project to its, the lowest value. 1103 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:36:44.494 --> 05:36:57.606 Um, well, we're really talking about a bullet to under to return to the original profile. Um, uh, when they, in the case where the utility would pay for the. 1104 Sky Stanfield 05:36:57.606 --> 05:36:57.994 Okay. 1105 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:36:58.026 --> 05:37:05.044 To get up to the minimum, you know, is somewhat, still related that those. 1106 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:37:05.138 --> 05:37:09.484 There'll be come utility projects and they will have their, you know. 1107 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:37:10.954 --> 05:37:15.874 Fight for the resources, or like any other utility project um. 1108 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:37:18.392 --> 05:37:38.972 What my concern is those, we're talking a low cost items. Like, you might have low cost items that's easy to construct and should comply with some timeline and with this open ending, um, kind of language here. Um, I, you know, I don't see an incentive for you to to. 1109 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:37:38.978 --> 05:38:00.094 To do it sooner rather than later. Um, we were just told 1 of our project, the bank replacement will be delayed in 2024 and that will affect the whole accurate schedule for the whole system. Like, that doesn't complete. It's upgrade until at least 20. 1110 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:38:00.154 --> 05:38:04.354 For so, so that's very concerning. And for the customer. 1111 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:38:04.654 --> 05:38:06.454 Welcome to the world. 1112 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:38:11.106 --> 05:38:11.676 Yes. 1113 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:38:12.276 --> 05:38:20.616 And then not knowing, like, the, their system will be cut off line for like, a year or 2. that's that's that's very that's high risk. 1114 Roger Salas SCE 05:38:22.446 --> 05:38:29.526 Clarify that, you know, if you go back to the previous life, the low cost item, there's no construction. 1115 Roger Salas SCE 05:38:29.740 --> 05:38:32.346 That needs to happen. So so that's the. 1116 Sky Stanfield 05:38:32.914 --> 05:38:33.756 Right. 1117 Roger Salas SCE 05:38:33.756 --> 05:38:33.876 Yeah. 1118 Sky Stanfield 05:38:34.234 --> 05:38:37.086 Confirmation of that. And that's what gary's not saying. 1119 Roger Salas SCE 05:38:37.116 --> 05:38:50.286 So, low construct these things like we're doing some switching the field, we can do some settings. We're enabling staff disabling stuff. There's no quote, unquote work. 1120 Roger Salas SCE 05:38:51.154 --> 05:39:08.194 That needs to happen for the low cost items and tell us those could be done relatively quickly. You know, as you stated, uh, is the, the ones that are medium or high, those, those require, you know, design, construction, procurement and things like that. So those are those take a lot more time. 1121 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:39:09.246 --> 05:39:11.286 Thank you Roger clarify. 1122 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 05:39:14.074 --> 05:39:32.584 Right. So that's my point right? Low cost. I'm supposed to be quick and easy relatively speaking so that have a time limitation on bullet. 2 will help increase the certainty and competence of developers. Otherwise it's too high of risk for, for, for development. 1123 Regnier, Justin 05:39:34.294 --> 05:39:34.534 I mean. 1124 Regnier, Justin 05:39:34.600 --> 05:39:41.554 That's the question directly. Is there any reason why the low cost mitigation shouldn't be held to the 660 timeframe? 1125 Roger Salas SCE 05:39:45.096 --> 05:39:45.516 My. 1126 Regnier, Justin 05:39:45.516 --> 05:39:46.056 Got it. 1127 Roger Salas SCE 05:39:46.056 --> 05:40:05.586 Filling their justice probably. Okay. Um, but we just need to take a look at it 1 more but, yeah, I mean, this is a lot of a lot of this is done switching settings. I mean, the only thing I can think of is you go out there trying to put some settings. The thing doesn't work then at that point, then maybe it's going to be more. 1128 Regnier, Justin 05:40:06.574 --> 05:40:20.854 Yeah, and that's all reasonable efforts question. So let's do this. Let's assume that it's going to be a 60, 60 timeframe unless we hear back by the next workshop for some reason that the or not. But there's some reason that, I mean, we're got like. 1129 Roger Salas SCE 05:40:21.304 --> 05:40:21.574 Yeah. 1130 Regnier, Justin 05:40:22.294 --> 05:40:26.584 Nearly not quite a month till the next 1 so it should be plenty of time to figure it out. I think. 1131 Regnier, Justin 05:40:27.002 --> 05:40:27.512 That makes sense. 1132 Roger Salas SCE 05:40:28.172 --> 05:40:30.362 That's only for the low cost, uh, solution. 1133 Regnier, Justin 05:40:31.352 --> 05:40:31.682 Yep. 1134 Roger Salas SCE 05:40:32.132 --> 05:40:32.492 Sounds good. 1135 Regnier, Justin 05:40:32.492 --> 05:40:33.872 That's what we're talking about right now. 1136 Sky Stanfield 05:40:34.202 --> 05:40:47.912 And, but ultimately, I think it was points good to get to that. But ultimately this, because you don't know whether it's going to be a low cost or a medium or high cost upgrade when you're applying this still just completely. 1137 Sky Stanfield 05:40:49.294 --> 05:41:03.064 This is just another layer of, like, complete unpredictability for the customer. Like, it'd be comforting to know. Oh, if it happened, we don't if, if I was guaranteed, it was a low cost upgrade within 60 days. That's a risk. I can. 1138 Roger Salas SCE 05:41:03.096 --> 05:41:03.724 Around. 1139 Sky Stanfield 05:41:03.964 --> 05:41:09.064 But we're not at the point where you can do that, because you don't have any ability to control whether it. 1140 Sky Stanfield 05:41:09.094 --> 05:41:11.732 Up being that lower or high cost upgrade right? 1141 Sky Stanfield 05:41:13.564 --> 05:41:14.704 Critiquing anything here. 1142 Sky Stanfield 05:41:15.484 --> 05:41:19.564 Be clear about what the issue is that we're trying to grapple with. 1143 Roger Salas SCE 05:41:19.654 --> 05:41:21.094 Yeah, that's right. 1144 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:41:21.454 --> 05:41:30.934 Key word is a strong word, you know, you know, we'll react to that. Right? But. 1145 Sky Stanfield 05:41:31.294 --> 05:41:34.444 Yeah, and I get that, but what I keep doing and you guys are. 1146 Sky Stanfield 05:41:34.594 --> 05:41:37.264 I'm sure you're following is I'm really trying to help. 1147 Roger Salas SCE 05:41:37.474 --> 05:41:37.834 Yeah. 1148 Sky Stanfield 05:41:38.074 --> 05:41:46.714 Expose highlight areas where I think we need to work together to to get to that with why this is also difficult. 1149 Sky Stanfield 05:41:48.244 --> 05:41:55.594 There's just a complete unknown for the for the customer. So when I know that it puts you guys on a different position. But I think these are the things. 1150 Sky Stanfield 05:41:55.624 --> 05:42:05.854 Where it's just like, all of the steps have no predictability. So, you know, how could Eva, for example, go out, make assessing that risk if she wants to do that. 1151 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:42:06.904 --> 05:42:15.574 Okay, I hear you Skype, but the interconnection process is fraught with those unpredictability. The whole. 1152 Sky Stanfield 05:42:15.574 --> 05:42:28.024 They're not fraught with them after an applicant has made an investment and been finance. So it's really I agree. You know, Gary that I know as well as you, that process is fraught with risk and. 1153 Sky Stanfield 05:42:28.030 --> 05:42:49.144 Certainty up until the point where you're interconnected, we're now talking about risk and uncertainty after you already paid the gotten your financing and decided whether it's worth building the project. So, these are 2 really different categories of uncertainty not your fault Gary, but they, they are really. 1154 Sky Stanfield 05:42:49.180 --> 05:43:05.134 Different, and obviously I'd like to reduce the uncertainty on the front part of it but at the very least if we want people to be able to do this, we have to have something somebody can finance. So, there has to be some level of certainly the same way as you would during the application process. 1155 Roger Salas SCE 05:43:06.006 --> 05:43:09.336 Yeah, we also like to reduce risk. I mean, see stuff. 1156 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:43:10.652 --> 05:43:10.892 Yeah. 1157 Roger Salas SCE 05:43:11.222 --> 05:43:13.624 You don't know why you don't know at this point. That's a big problem. Right? 1158 Sky Stanfield 05:43:14.104 --> 05:43:26.492 Right and that's how I think our biggest problem is simply literally that we don't have enough data to inform an outcome for either or we don't have enough data. We know generally everybody agrees that this is low risk. 1159 Sky Stanfield 05:43:27.274 --> 05:43:30.754 But not enough that we can assign the risk essentially. 1160 Sky Stanfield 05:43:31.954 --> 05:43:32.402 Yeah. 1161 gary holdsworth sdg&e 05:43:39.124 --> 05:43:39.634 Done. 1162 Jorge Chacon 05:43:46.774 --> 05:43:51.454 All right, well, good afternoon. This is George. If we are ready to move on to the next. 1163 Jorge Chacon 05:43:52.924 --> 05:43:55.684 Set of questions dealing with the implementation process. 1164 Jorge Chacon 05:43:57.844 --> 05:43:59.284 Can, uh, go to the next slide. 1165 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:44:05.286 --> 05:44:08.164 Next slide or next. Okay next item. 1166 Jorge Chacon 05:44:08.314 --> 05:44:10.564 Yeah, I'm right here. Next item. Yes. 1167 Jorge Chacon 05:44:12.544 --> 05:44:33.514 So, the implementation process, what the are envisioning is to utilize the information that is contained in the executed contract, inform the customer of the need to change the operating profiles in such a. 1168 Jorge Chacon 05:44:33.518 --> 05:44:36.092 Procurement is deemed necessary. 1169 Jorge Chacon 05:44:39.814 --> 05:44:58.536 What we're thinking about is if customers are able to make those changes, the customer will be required to disconnect for the system until such the system until such time that they can make the change and the secondary the will require confirmation that the change has been performed. 1170 Jorge Chacon 05:45:01.652 --> 05:45:21.364 Thought process in this 1st bullet is that when we identify a need for reduction, it is because of a safety and reliability concern, which we have to address effectively immediately. So, this is what's driving. Our thought process here. Other examples to consider is that. 1171 Jorge Chacon 05:45:21.604 --> 05:45:42.574 If they need for restrictions is attributed to a potential maintenance condition use will notify in writing as soon as, you know, for that maintenance condition in advance consistent with the interconnection agreement use will notify customers in writing. As soon as the safety and reliability. 1172 Jorge Chacon 05:45:42.634 --> 05:46:03.754 2 results in the need to temporary adjust. The, this is the not an emergency condition, but plan maintenance, planned outage things of that nature. The temporary changes will not require a new inner connection agreement update to the attached to the attachment may be needed and then it. 1173 Jorge Chacon 05:46:03.760 --> 05:46:24.876 Would be the customer's responsibility to engage the authorized personnel to implement the changes within the customer's power system control and the finally reserve the right to request proof of the updated profile within the implementation process. We are our current thought process. 1174 Jorge Chacon 05:46:24.936 --> 05:46:45.814 That this would be memorialized in the appropriate in a connection agreement and that again, notifications for client maintenance and system upgrades will be required will upgrade will be required set in the interconnection agreements. In other words notification in advance all other drivers, implementation would be required with. 1175 Jorge Chacon 05:46:46.082 --> 05:46:51.302 Subsequent information Information provided by the customer, I'll provide it to the customer. I'm sorry. 1176 Jorge Chacon 05:46:53.944 --> 05:46:56.914 Is there any questions on this particular slide? 1177 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:47:01.294 --> 05:47:10.086 I think timelines would be, uh, helpful here. Like, uh, I useful notify customer and writing. 1178 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:47:12.394 --> 05:47:31.594 After notify, you know, uh, identify safety and reliability issues. How long would that turnaround be to notify the customer? How long the customer has to make those changes? 1179 Jorge Chacon 05:47:34.536 --> 05:47:52.234 Okay, so, for the things that are that are planned that are not emergency or the thinking currently, is that the timelines embedded within the interconnection agreement would be the timelines that would be followed for notifying the interconnection customer. 1180 Jorge Chacon 05:47:53.974 --> 05:47:54.756 For for. 1181 Jorge Chacon 05:47:57.844 --> 05:48:17.704 Is there a generation profile? I'm not exactly sure what those timelines within those agreements are. But I do know that there are sections in the agreement that do require us to coordinate and work with the customer and provide a notification in advance for the conditions that our emergency, the communication. 1182 Jorge Chacon 05:48:17.708 --> 05:48:38.584 Would be done well, 1st of all the operators would take whatever action the operator operators deem necessary to maintain safety and reliability. And then once the, the emergency condition is resolved, then the audio use will be working towards providing the customer written notification. 1183 Jorge Chacon 05:48:38.914 --> 05:48:59.884 The email, or based on the contact, they provided, uh, informing them of duration of the restriction under this particular emergency condition. So, again, the example of a car pole emergency condition may drive us to have to restrict the customer. 1184 Jorge Chacon 05:49:00.664 --> 05:49:15.456 To address the emergency problem, if the outage is going to be prolonged a couple of hours to a day or so, then the thinking, as we would be communicating as quickly as we have a schedule to the customer, the relevant information. 1185 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:49:17.286 --> 05:49:38.044 Okay, and, uh, just on semantics here on the 1st bullet, the I use envision that kind of implies to me anyways, other types of contact information. Uh, so maybe a little bit more specific a specific city there. 1186 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:49:38.104 --> 05:49:53.072 Will utilize contact information, or whether the are thinking, maybe in the future using telemetry to change settings themselves, you know, to support ambition. Just leaves it open a lot. I think. 1187 Jorge Chacon 05:49:54.302 --> 05:49:59.222 Yeah, since we haven't done this, I haven't done implementation. This is our. 1188 Jorge Chacon 05:49:59.462 --> 05:50:20.284 Thought process obviously has progressed forward if there's other means of available tools that we can leverage that makes things a little easier. We'll go ahead and do that. But right now, based on what we know our current thinking is going to be utilizing the contract information to provide, you know, to get the contact for which we will be. 1189 Jorge Chacon 05:50:20.404 --> 05:50:21.814 Providing the information too. 1190 Jorge Chacon 05:50:23.200 --> 05:50:43.954 That's what that word envision is intended to convey is a verbal and minimum contacting the contract will be used as a mechanism to inform and as the world evolves, if there's different mechanisms like telemetry and things things of that nature. Then, at that point in time, if it's. 1191 Jorge Chacon 05:50:44.350 --> 05:50:50.044 Implementable we'll go ahead and do something different, but right now it's our thought process. 1192 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:50:51.094 --> 05:50:55.924 Okay, that that clarifies a lot Thank you, but like I said, you know, in the proposal. 1193 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 05:50:58.294 --> 05:51:02.704 And also, within the advice letters, that would be good information to, uh, put in. 1194 Jorge Chacon 05:51:04.116 --> 05:51:09.214 Okay, any other questions on this slide before we move to the next 1. 1195 Regnier, Justin 05:51:12.034 --> 05:51:26.704 Might be good to chat it where we can get consensus as well. I spent a little note and Alex was talking about potentially having inverter level control. Um. 1196 Regnier, Justin 05:51:28.802 --> 05:51:49.204 My understanding of the record, and I can correct me if I'm wrong, is that yeah, I use a requested telemetry for visibility, unlimited generation projects. I believe telemetry is used per, say for control even for over 1 megawatt projects the commission was not granted that requirement. 1197 Regnier, Justin 05:51:50.464 --> 05:51:56.614 Um, either for visibility and definitely control we have there's no basis that I'm aware of. 1198 Regnier, Justin 05:51:57.786 --> 05:52:07.776 In the, the record for this at all. Um, but, you know, if I could log on with PG E, and see my output the next day. 1199 Regnier, Justin 05:52:08.950 --> 05:52:28.954 It would stand to reason that Dan, my networks would be able to provide surety that the profile had been adjusted. I think it is. It's incumbent on the to demonstrate why the tools that they've already got the repairs, have already paid for are not sufficient to provide visibility. 1200 Regnier, Justin 05:52:30.124 --> 05:52:51.214 I'm not new anybody pipe up if I'm off base here, but I don't think there's any record anywhere about yeah, I use having control over projects just because they're limited generation profile, they can indicate what they want to the customers and they can disconnect the customers you know, if there's a rule. 1201 Regnier, Justin 05:52:51.274 --> 05:52:56.344 This year or 2 issue, but I'm not aware of that being in the record. 1202 Alex Mwaura PG&E 05:53:04.414 --> 05:53:20.854 So, I'll speak up Justin, cause you see my name. So, in the advice letter 6,041 for PG E and I forget the numbers for the other I use, we did ask for telemetry of project. 1203 Alex Mwaura PG&E 05:53:20.884 --> 05:53:41.794 Right. So I think the request on that under operational performance was to either have telemetry and if we did not have telemetry to have a requirement for projects to do a quarterly reporting to you, so we can verify that they are staying within the operational requirements. So understanding that this has not been granted. 1204 Alex Mwaura PG&E 05:53:42.606 --> 05:54:03.154 You know what, what I brought up earlier was just to kind of drive the point home that if we go to, you know, if we have an issue on the grid, and we have to reduce the limit or profile that in discussions with PG E, internal teams especially the, the folks that actually do. 1205 Alex Mwaura PG&E 05:54:03.160 --> 05:54:23.734 The system, their view was that if we were to issue, a new profile or modify the profile after, we've already verified it. That they would want an ability to be able to see that. The new profile has been implemented and also an ability to control the resource. If they determine that. 1206 Alex Mwaura PG&E 05:54:24.332 --> 05:54:43.024 The LGB customer was not adhering to the new limit. So, that's what I was trying to highlight, but I recognize that in the original advice letter, the only thing that we asked for was telemetry or reporting. And the idea behind that was to just verify that the project is operating has agreed upon. 1207 Jorge Chacon 05:54:52.234 --> 05:55:09.904 Respect to the data that you indicated. I'm clear to me that the API data provides generation data, nor do I know if it's instantaneous. So we don't I mean, I hear what you're saying, but I'm not sure I understand. 1208 Yi Li SDG&E 05:55:23.674 --> 05:55:27.964 This is I see any. I would really appreciate a similar clarification. 1209 Yi Li SDG&E 05:55:29.196 --> 05:55:43.866 My data reflect the limitation profile, because it's really just a point of interconnection. It shows really the export data between the load and generation. And typically it's a 15 value is not instantaneous value. 1210 Regnier, Justin 05:55:50.766 --> 05:55:52.446 Limited generation profile. 1211 Regnier, Justin 05:55:55.144 --> 05:55:59.374 Refers to the export value or not not the generation by my understanding. 1212 Frances Cleveland 05:55:59.494 --> 05:56:15.154 So, I guess I'm coming back to the fact that meters are supposed to be at the PCC. That's the presumption anyway. And therefore, metering data would show whether the. 1213 Frances Cleveland 05:56:15.724 --> 05:56:19.294 ltp limits are have been respected. 1214 Brian Lydic 05:56:25.686 --> 05:56:39.394 It would have to be averaged over the, the measuring period, but, you know, you could envision a ceiling of energy that could be export it as an 8 given. Um, 5 minute, 15 minute increment. Whatever. 1215 Sky Stanfield 05:56:43.804 --> 05:57:03.634 I still don't think we've addressed the basic issue about why you need this. Why you need that visibility compared to any limited generation project. What's the what's the mistrust element? That what is the thing that you're not trusting that you want that visibility that you wouldn't get with a regular limited generation? 1216 Sky Stanfield 05:57:03.784 --> 05:57:04.504 Project. 1217 Sky Stanfield 05:57:08.374 --> 05:57:20.764 Is it cause you, you're saying you guys don't trust this whatever, and we don't have that yet, but whatever the certification would be that would come with the schedule. And that's why you think you need additional verification. 1218 Roger Salas SCE 05:57:22.234 --> 05:57:28.864 This is Roger. I mean, I think that's part of it. I mean, this is something new for us. Um, we are. 1219 Roger Salas SCE 05:57:29.042 --> 05:57:50.162 Industry are thinking that all this is going to work as intended, which I copied us, but I think it would be great to have a way to verify that things work the way they're supposed to work. And so so I think that's kind of the main reason it's, it's new, it's not tested and. 1220 Roger Salas SCE 05:57:50.196 --> 05:57:58.744 Would be a good way to, to sort of make everybody feel more comfortable, um, that, um, the things that things are working on. 1221 Frances Cleveland 05:58:00.096 --> 05:58:11.314 Now, I have no trouble with verification, but why would metering data not provide adequate verification? Because we're talking. 1222 Frances Cleveland 05:58:11.344 --> 05:58:16.534 Ping at the, we're not talking at the, you know, behind the meter equipment. 1223 Sky Stanfield 05:58:17.792 --> 05:58:31.982 I have a problem with verification if it's raising costs essentially and that's the part what Francis is getting, like, if we can do verification without raising cost or at least in the minimal way, then that's fine. If we're talking about something that's. 1224 Sky Stanfield 05:58:32.826 --> 05:58:46.686 Further both yeah, generators eating risk and installing more more capacity for part of the year that they're not gonna use and we're adding additional costs of the telemetry level. We're really narrowing any hope that this would be used. Right? 1225 Roger Salas SCE 05:58:47.226 --> 05:58:53.496 Yeah, I mean, I think at minimum we had asked, I don't know how these will recently passed. We were asked, we had asked that. 1226 Roger Salas SCE 05:58:53.824 --> 05:59:04.894 Basis they generated a verification of the output that they have been having. I mean, I don't know though. I don't know how much cost that is, but. 1227 Roger Salas SCE 05:59:06.364 --> 05:59:07.444 I don't think it would be much. 1228 Yi Li SDG&E 05:59:09.662 --> 05:59:09.962 Yeah. 1229 Sky Stanfield 05:59:10.024 --> 05:59:12.632 That's at this point. Are you getting that via metering? 1230 Roger Salas SCE 05:59:13.024 --> 05:59:16.472 Yeah, maybe we need to check on our and see what we can get before. 1231 Yi Li SDG&E 05:59:17.194 --> 05:59:27.454 Yeah, I don't I, this is usually again, I don't mean to derail this conversation. I know there's separate, uh, resolution talking about the telemetry and the data requirements. I do just want to. 1232 Yi Li SDG&E 05:59:27.484 --> 05:59:42.964 Piggy back and comment on some common ask I mentioned previously in this discussion right um, we just don't have a lot of data on this, because this is new. Right? So, to the extent that if there's data that can be offered, either from the smart inverters or from those. 1233 Yi Li SDG&E 05:59:42.970 --> 05:59:48.516 Systems it would be helpful to leverage those so we can collectively build my knowledge around that. 1234 John Berdner 05:59:53.552 --> 06:00:10.772 This is John from I, I just wanted to point out that in addition to the data, there's also the interoperability, uh, in 147 2018 and in, which could also be used to verify. 1235 John Berdner 06:00:11.170 --> 06:00:32.314 The equipment, so those are essentially available today in equipment that is being installed now. So saying, we have to have telemetry and control when we haven't even put in place the capability to use. The existing features seems to be a bit. 1236 Brian Lydic 06:00:39.304 --> 06:00:41.314 1 potential. 1237 Jorge Chacon 06:00:43.264 --> 06:00:44.134 I'm sorry, go ahead. 1238 Brian Lydic 06:00:44.494 --> 06:00:59.104 Yeah, I was just going to say 1, potential snag is the, you know, you would have to measure the export. Um, and that would probably be a separate device, um, monitoring the export. And, you know, we're probably talking about going back to using each of. 1239 Brian Lydic 06:00:59.134 --> 06:01:11.374 Manufacturers proprietary reports in terms of how they can display or export that data. And so it's not going to be a standardized process. 1240 Jorge Chacon 06:01:12.814 --> 06:01:13.534 Mm, hmm. 1241 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:01:14.644 --> 06:01:14.944 Yeah. 1242 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:01:16.114 --> 06:01:33.364 I think Brian makes a good point, um, for the Intel probability ability. Uh, am I still an open question? I think Roger mentioned, we would go back and take a look and potentially be prepared to have a more discussion on this during the next workshop before the other resolution. 1243 Regnier, Justin 06:01:36.092 --> 06:01:43.562 Let's do that as an action item then if there is any reason that is not capable of fulfilling this function, we'd like to hear about it in the next workshop. 1244 Sky Stanfield 06:01:45.754 --> 06:02:01.084 Quick clarifying question that is occurred to me. We're the proposal and this comes up in the other data centers is that all limited generation projects do this verification not just those that have had their profile reduced rate. 1245 Roger Salas SCE 06:02:05.466 --> 06:02:05.736 Yep. 1246 Sky Stanfield 06:02:05.796 --> 06:02:11.226 I just wanted to make sure we were over bifurcating or splitting this into buckets. Everyone's clear on that. 1247 Jorge Chacon 06:02:17.016 --> 06:02:24.244 All right, so let's go ahead and move on to the next slide. We'll take on that action item to come back and this workshop with some Intel. 1248 Jorge Chacon 06:02:27.184 --> 06:02:47.344 Um, this particular slide addresses issue for a 3 and 4 B, the initial application prior to, in that initial application that customer identifies the profile with the format as Sean. You can hit the enter 1 more time that way. The little. 1249 Jorge Chacon 06:02:48.276 --> 06:02:51.964 And show up, I think there's a table on this slide. 1250 Jorge Chacon 06:02:57.902 --> 06:03:01.444 I'm sorry. Okay, so that's the table. Let's go back to the other slides. Well. 1251 Jorge Chacon 06:03:13.776 --> 06:03:31.384 Then go back to the slide. I don't know my screen. Oh, there we go. Okay. So, customer identified profile with the format is showing in that table. We just saw as approved for the interconnection process. What that 2nd bullet means is that the results are posted. 1252 Jorge Chacon 06:03:31.414 --> 06:03:50.614 Dr Pepper, and depending on when the request is submitted are posting onto doctor, pep happens on a monthly basis. It's possible that depending on when the interconnection request is received, that additional projects have come in and the amount of ITA. 1253 Jorge Chacon 06:03:51.244 --> 06:04:12.244 And Dr pepper is no longer up to date. So, as part of the initial interconnection application processing, the utilities will be looking at the most current ITA Valley taken into account the most recent information, which account for anything that that has transpired since the time of. 1254 Jorge Chacon 06:04:12.280 --> 06:04:33.274 Posting and Dr pepper and to the extent that there's any reason why the limit to submitted by the applicant, need to be adjusted. The utilities will provide the information to the applicant, letting them know what has transpired reduction after the. 1255 Jorge Chacon 06:04:33.724 --> 06:04:39.064 Customer new MSE limits, except for the minimum value of the. 1256 Jorge Chacon 06:04:39.364 --> 06:04:59.524 Which is not a lot to be reduced. We've spent quite a bit of time talking about this 1st bullet in the other slides. Understand, there's a difference of opinion, and a difference of interpretation on this particular bullet. So, this is conveying the audio use, uh, understanding and interpretation of this particular bullet. 1257 Jorge Chacon 06:05:01.416 --> 06:05:21.186 The 11 or 11 values are subject to being adjusted, we can't adjust minimum value if the profiles below that, then the audio use will be responsible for addressing that particular impact. Customers do not have to resubmit. 1258 Jorge Chacon 06:05:21.454 --> 06:05:42.514 Schedule for evaluations, do you use will provide the values if the reduction is for a short period of time, and only requires changing the current limit value the new value will be communicated via email. If the reduction is determined to be beyond the current month and requires a new set of values, the revised GP values will be provided to the. 1259 Jorge Chacon 06:05:42.542 --> 06:06:03.572 In the same format as required during the interconnection process for all unforeseen events, necessitating curtailment implementation will be required. Immediately if the customer is unable to change settings as previously discussed, this connection will be required until the customer can arrange for the changes and the final bullets. 1260 Jorge Chacon 06:06:03.670 --> 06:06:22.866 We've already had some dialogue on, is that the will require documentation showing that no limits have been applied again does this thing is new. We don't have a whole lot of experience with this. So this is leading us down a path to that sub bullet there on the final bullet. Are there any questions on this slide? 1261 Jorge Chacon 06:06:36.100 --> 06:06:38.044 All right here, and then we can for the next slide. 1262 Jorge Chacon 06:06:46.416 --> 06:06:57.636 So, in the form of the scheduling format, what we are looking at is getting a, a table that sort of looks like the 1 in the right. 1263 Jorge Chacon 06:06:58.926 --> 06:07:08.224 From 1 column and the corresponding limits on the other column, this format is. 1264 Jorge Chacon 06:07:08.854 --> 06:07:29.644 Effectively appropriate, because it's simple to communicate between the LGB customer and the audio use during the connection process and it is simple to communicate between the and the customer for any future reductions on a monthly basis. We think this is the easiest way to to ensure that we're properly understanding what the numbers mean and. 1265 Jorge Chacon 06:07:29.680 --> 06:07:33.366 Winter applicable, only call values, so. 1266 Jorge Chacon 06:07:36.124 --> 06:07:38.222 Do something like this thing. 1267 Jorge Chacon 06:07:42.544 --> 06:07:43.414 There are any questions. 1268 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:07:44.434 --> 06:07:45.514 So, uh, George. 1269 Jorge Chacon 06:07:47.104 --> 06:07:47.554 Yes. 1270 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:07:47.674 --> 06:08:00.694 So, I think there's, uh, maybe it was communication on my part and Brian feel is not here. This was an item he wanted to discuss, but. 1271 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:08:01.534 --> 06:08:20.794 He had to drop off, but I think my recollection this had to do more with when you submit your scheduling, uh, from what I've heard will have their own, uh, you know. 1272 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:08:23.494 --> 06:08:42.994 I think what portals where people type type in, and I think the issue with the topic was more along the lines of why not have just a general schedule that you could, you know, automate instead of submitting. 1273 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:08:43.024 --> 06:09:02.732 It manually, you could, you know, bring in data, hit, enter it, auto populates the schedule. And you submit that whether the final, whether the final product is in a machine readable format or Excel table, you know. 1274 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:09:04.148 --> 06:09:11.582 And then the utilities read it, because from what I have heard, like I said earlier, is that. 1275 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:09:13.684 --> 06:09:28.444 I have heard that customer will literally have to manually punch in the schedule into the utilities, uh, website, instead of just submitting a file. 1276 Jorge Chacon 06:09:31.564 --> 06:09:50.464 Okay, so I think if you're talking about the initial application, and whether that can be automated by enhancing our existing tools, in essence, case or Dr Pepper tool and such a fashion that you can potentially put the button. 1277 Jorge Chacon 06:09:50.706 --> 06:10:11.824 Have that information feed into a, into our interconnection portals? That is something we will have to look at and see if it's something that is feasible to be done. Obviously, the level of effort to do that is something we haven't looked at. 1278 Jorge Chacon 06:10:11.828 --> 06:10:31.802 I do envision, however, maybe possibly simplifying the research and having the ability of for Edison and I'll let that PG E, and speak on their behalf. But for Edison, I can see a simplifying the extraction of the data in a fashion that. 1279 Jorge Chacon 06:10:33.302 --> 06:10:53.582 Who can potentially provide what these values are for the noting question in such a fashion that the customer doesn't have to do the, the due diligence of figuring out what these values are, and then turning around and punching in these, this information into into the portal. 1280 Jorge Chacon 06:10:54.424 --> 06:10:59.674 A separate issue, but whether we can automate all of that process is something we haven't explored. 1281 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:11:00.574 --> 06:11:15.274 Okay, yeah, yeah, I think that what that's what the topic was more along, because that would allow in the future for more flexibility. Uh, you know, but also, like I said, the customer would just import into. 1282 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:11:15.304 --> 06:11:35.344 Whatever platform, they're using to automate their schedule import the data it hit a button. It just auto generated by profile. I can submit that instead of manually. Okay. Now, I gotta type in January to February 2, March 2. 1283 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:11:36.456 --> 06:11:44.436 And we do have a couple of comments in the chat from John bertner and Brian. 1284 Brad Heavner 06:11:45.006 --> 06:11:57.276 I, I have a quick question on the same lines. Maybe I'll discover that, um, because we have a lot of discussion about this earlier, whether this should be a single value per month or 24 hours values in every month. Um. 1285 Brad Heavner 06:11:57.604 --> 06:12:18.722 and if it is according to our interpretation twenty four times twelve then it's more important to have something where you're not having to manually enter two hundred and eighty eight numbers into the portal either us uploading a csb file or as you said you producing the maximum values for those and we just can pull them in from our side that functionality 1286 Brad Heavner 06:12:18.754 --> 06:12:31.232 It seems essential once we go to an hourly format, we don't, I don't know that we need to revisit that whole discussion. We had the discussion this morning. We identified our difference in interpretation, but that comes up here. 1287 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:12:32.312 --> 06:12:39.844 Thank you Brad I think that that's what I was trying to elude when I said more flexibility and Brad, you're hitting on it. 1288 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:12:39.934 --> 06:13:00.274 The, uh, John analytics, uh, comments here, um, John burner says, how is this? 12 value table, uh, consistent with the order of 288 values Brian Ludic response Yep it should be in 288 for the commission. So I will let. 1289 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:13:01.030 --> 06:13:09.214 Brian, and John ask any further clarification questions feel free to jump in guys. 1290 Brian Lydic 06:13:15.784 --> 06:13:16.142 I think. 1291 John Berdner 06:13:16.292 --> 06:13:16.624 That's. 1292 John Berdner 06:13:16.954 --> 06:13:33.454 Sync today, I was just again it's, I guess, you know, the position is that there are 12 monthly values, which consists of 24 identical entries for each month. That doesn't really make sense to me. 1293 John Berdner 06:13:33.458 --> 06:13:54.214 And it kind of raises the question, which we've all been trying to figure out is this disconnect between 12 and 208. so, I guess that's the only only real question. If we're setting up a table, then should the table not be consistent with commission order whether. 1294 John Berdner 06:13:54.610 --> 06:14:09.124 An order, and so it was redundant entries or not it seems that the table should be consistent and if it's going to have to have 280 values, then obviously automated entry would almost become the central. I think. 1295 Jorge Chacon 06:14:12.994 --> 06:14:32.314 Yeah, yeah, yeah, I hear what you're saying. I, I think at the end of the day, it's going to come down to the actual interpretation and and where we go from here. I mean, that's the whole dialogue we were having earlier as far as the user interpretation, being a single point. 1296 Jorge Chacon 06:14:32.706 --> 06:14:53.706 For the month versus the interpretation on your side, reflecting 208 data points is really going to serve to inform whether this table is is what are the automation of a table is absolutely necessary. 1297 Jorge Chacon 06:14:55.624 --> 06:15:11.014 Making a simple so I can provide your introduction and fashion if it turns to only be 12 points, but to understand the question, we have not looked at all of this being implemented. How much will it cost? And how long will it take. 1298 Brian Lydic 06:15:17.884 --> 06:15:38.374 i don't think it's interpretation that we're talking about here is the order does say or the decision says that it would be relayed in the two hundred and eighty eight format so that's just you know i think there's still this question of you know what exactly that means in terms of how they're applied i don't know that that's 1299 Brian Lydic 06:15:39.154 --> 06:15:56.164 If it winds up being 12 values, is there actually a benefit to that? But, you know, that would be a kind of a change from the decision. So, and I was wondering if Francis, if she's still on, if she could weigh in at all on that. 1300 Brian Lydic 06:15:57.424 --> 06:16:05.044 Uh, kind of harmonized approach to, um, maybe a machine readable format um, since Brian is its own. 1301 Frances Cleveland 06:16:06.214 --> 06:16:18.424 Yeah, I can, uh, just pick up quickly on it, which was that part of the 741 process? Uh, we came up with. 1302 Frances Cleveland 06:16:18.456 --> 06:16:39.574 They, uh, proposed schedule based on CSV so Excel spreadsheet that provides the flexibility as well as the machine readable spreadsheets are not perfect, but they're, they're better than than typing in something. 1303 Frances Cleveland 06:16:39.578 --> 06:17:00.694 By hand, uh, so indeed, there is such a, um, proposed scheduling format and it has been reviewed extensively by a small group of people. And then the question is whether it's adequate for. 1304 Frances Cleveland 06:17:00.754 --> 06:17:15.844 Everybody, um, and I think that may be something that should be looked at and reviewed particularly if we do come to the general agreement of 288 instead of 12. 1305 Jorge Chacon 06:17:19.534 --> 06:17:40.204 yeah i i understand the ask again for medicine it would be figuring out if we can automate the information shown in and in such a fashion and create a file that you can later upload as part of the interconnection request them to the web portals whether it's through a tool or the 1306 Jorge Chacon 06:17:40.324 --> 06:17:50.674 Uh, tool again, I'll let the other utilities speak on with regards to their tools. And if there's anything else that they add other tools are concerned. 1307 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:17:52.898 --> 06:18:05.042 This is Alex from PG. E. so for PG E. we was sort of proceeding under the understanding that we were going to require a 12 month, 12 values for the. 1308 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:18:05.704 --> 06:18:26.704 1 value per month to represent the, and this was sort of informed from the discussions that we had, you know, through this week after the decision was issued. Um, I, I seem to recollect that this issue did come up because there was some differences in the order for 1516 950. 1309 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:18:26.740 --> 06:18:47.884 1, so, as far as the tools, you know, that's kind of the direction that we were going. We were the idea was that and we actually made some of these changes. For example, we've made changes to the downloadable file to essentially show prospective customers. What the different. 1310 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:18:47.914 --> 06:19:08.884 Values would be this was supposed to simplify their research phase prior to submitting an application. So they would go to the go to the specific note that they're interested in download that file and then be able to filter for the column that represents the values. And then it will give them the different monthly. 1311 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:19:10.084 --> 06:19:29.854 And then, you know, at that point, then they will go to the application portal was there was mentioning they would put in the CSV line section, which is basically the line section where they're intending to connect to. And the idea is, this is this has not been implemented. It's just an idea at this point is that when they put that line section. 1312 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:19:30.484 --> 06:19:51.334 The portal would then import those values. Um, they would have a column that that's populated with those ICF values. And then what the customer needs to do is either put in 90% of that, to represent the profile, or we may just populate the application portal with 90% of the. 1313 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:19:51.364 --> 06:20:12.482 Your profile, then they just have to put in their profile to be below that number again. This is an idea. It's a proposal. We just we haven't implemented anything with the I. T. team or the application portal, but that's the vision that we were kind of going down down the road, uh, present the profile on the public. So the customers can see what their. 1314 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:20:12.490 --> 06:20:33.484 Table hosting capacity is and then they will then the timing what their profile needs to be to be below 90% of that and then they would go into the application portal put in the and section that they got from the public map, put it in there. And then that would populate the application if you will with the. 1315 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:20:33.724 --> 06:20:41.824 90% of the hosting capacity of the hosting capacity and then the customer would punch in the 12 values to below that number and then submit the application. 1316 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:20:50.344 --> 06:21:03.962 Okay, unless there any other questions, uh, maybe we can, uh, carry this forward on the 2nd workshop, uh, you know, report on the time and costs for implementation in their tools. 1317 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:21:06.068 --> 06:21:08.764 I think I heard someone trying to speak. 1318 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:21:12.544 --> 06:21:14.734 Uh, your team go ahead. 1319 Yochi Zakai, IREC, he/him 06:21:15.994 --> 06:21:37.054 Thanks for that I didn't try to speak earlier, but I just wanted to mention what I put in the chat, which is there's a potential interaction here between, you know, additional needs in the, um, the itself, which is the hourly data is not available currently through the to my knowledge, please. 1320 Yochi Zakai, IREC, he/him 06:21:37.322 --> 06:21:58.204 To me, if I'm wrong, it's only the annual value for each line section that's available in the API and so again to get that data out in machine readable API format to, um, you know, to customers as well as, you know, if I use could could also use that to facilitate communication between. 1321 Yochi Zakai, IREC, he/him 06:21:58.240 --> 06:22:13.054 Print it systems to facilitate, you know, getting that data into the, into the interconnection application. It system, which I'm sure is separate from the system. Thanks. 1322 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:22:24.004 --> 06:22:26.584 All right any other questions or comments. 1323 Roger Salas SCE 06:22:27.454 --> 06:22:41.104 Maybe and the last question can we ask for some some clarification because my understanding is that for at least for I see, we had all the data available for customers to be able to download. 1324 Roger Salas SCE 06:22:42.064 --> 06:22:52.324 And and those are an hourly basis. Uh, so I'm, I'm not, I'm not sure what the question is, uh, on the very last 1 it can. 1325 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:22:52.324 --> 06:23:03.064 So, I'm gonna try, man, this is something converted, um, our experience, um, and assessing data portals for, you know, as part of our. 1326 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:23:03.100 --> 06:23:07.324 Work on the proceeding is that you can download. 1327 Frances Cleveland 06:23:07.354 --> 06:23:08.044 Pretty weak. 1328 Frances Cleveland 06:23:11.882 --> 06:23:12.754 You're hard to hear. 1329 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:23:14.284 --> 06:23:21.812 Uh, crud, I'll, I'll just get very close to my computer and hope it gets better. Um. 1330 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:23:23.614 --> 06:23:43.982 Our experience has been that you can download these data on an individual circus circuit standpoint, but they are not available within, um, each of the utilities APIs. So, if you're doing this for the individual circuit and an individual interconnection. 1331 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:23:45.036 --> 06:23:52.776 Um, you have those data, but if you're trying to do this on a broader, um, basis, um, especially, you know. 1332 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:23:53.860 --> 06:24:15.004 For policy makers on 1 hand, but on the other hand, for developers that are looking at where they might be able to look at places to install things and trying to do a more broad brush approach the api's, um, have issues with that. 1333 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:24:15.124 --> 06:24:36.154 Um, I think this is something that, um, will show up and a future staff goes on this. Um, maybe, um, but I just want to, you know, echo yankee's point, um, that this is a challenge, but I think it might be a little bit outside of. 1334 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:24:36.186 --> 06:24:37.384 Uh, this workshop. 1335 Roger Salas SCE 06:24:38.644 --> 06:24:51.786 Yeah, I'll clarify then I'll, I'll check with our teams, but my understanding is for we have the ability for customers to download the full set of data. Not just not just at the circuit level. So. 1336 Sky Stanfield 06:24:52.144 --> 06:24:57.244 I don't think we should spend on them on this, but we're sure Roger. That's why we had to do those data requests. 1337 Sky Stanfield 06:24:57.308 --> 06:25:18.302 We asked you guys to send us all of the, all of the data that led to the whole process we've been dealing with the medicines is because it's not available that way. But that said, I think that steven's right that for an individual interconnection that they would be able to download the CSB file for that singular node and have. 1338 Sky Stanfield 06:25:18.664 --> 06:25:35.914 The full scale of data, it's just that that full scale data isn't available on a aggregate downloadable basis. But I think that as jose's had at the beginning of this, that we should probably leave those other improvements for that other proceeding at this point. So, I love getting into them. 1339 Jorge Chacon 06:25:44.072 --> 06:26:04.982 The only feedback I'll have with regards to the picking in, with our ity folks and getting a cost. I'm not sure until the timelines between now and the next workshop are sufficient for us to get that. But I'll certainly take that back. And hopefully we can, we can get. 1340 Jorge Chacon 06:26:05.016 --> 06:26:09.456 Answer I just want to set expectations. We may need a little more time. 1341 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:26:10.176 --> 06:26:26.106 Okay all right. Uh, you know, like I said, uh, there's a very high chance that there will be a 3rd workshop here, uh, you know, to finalize things. So we can definitely, uh, you know, once, you know, the timeline for your group there, we can. 1342 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:26:26.374 --> 06:26:27.034 Work with it. 1343 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:26:30.034 --> 06:26:38.314 Say this is Alex didn't you also mentioned that the cost aspect of this would be covered under the phase 2 discussions? Or is that not the case. 1344 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:26:40.536 --> 06:26:54.484 So, these advice letters will feed into phase 2 because phase 2 is making so, you know, we do need, I guess some sort of information here. 1345 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:26:55.294 --> 06:27:01.384 We need time and cost or just the time. Like, how long we think we would take us to. 1346 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:27:01.414 --> 06:27:03.994 Tremendous changes you, do you also need us to provide. 1347 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:27:04.894 --> 06:27:14.644 Well, to be in the right making the rate making portion of the, uh, our 17,787, we would need costs. 1348 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:27:17.014 --> 06:27:19.504 I'm talking about this discussion, these workshops. 1349 Regnier, Justin 06:27:19.504 --> 06:27:26.552 I think Alex is right but I misspoke the cost is probably a longer term proposition. We probably should be suitable for testimony. 1350 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:27:29.822 --> 06:27:50.732 Thanks, Justin. So just to be clear for the, for the remainder of the discussions, uh, for these workshops they ask is to come up with the timeline for implementing, especially with the next several workshops. Right? The 1, we're going to be talking about the actual implementation of so. 1351 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:27:51.186 --> 06:27:59.974 They ask is, uh, you should come up with the time to take us to implement these changes, but not the cost of the changes, right? 1352 Regnier, Justin 06:28:07.082 --> 06:28:12.812 Let me go back to the source documents. I'm sorry. I'm a bit sick. My head's a bit fuzzy. So I have to take that. 1353 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:28:13.382 --> 06:28:13.982 Okay, thank you. 1354 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:28:22.894 --> 06:28:25.596 Okay, uh, any other questions. 1355 Jorge Chacon 06:28:29.854 --> 06:28:43.232 Yeah, non Jose that concludes my presentation and my 3 slides. So next slide is a open question slide. I guess it's what we would refer to as the round table. 1356 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:28:44.552 --> 06:28:48.482 Yeah, so that'd be perfect. Um, I had, uh. 1357 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:28:49.144 --> 06:29:09.694 Better sessions would, uh, take longer. I had scheduled a break, but I think we can go the break since we just had lunch about an hour ago. Um, so, let's, um, right now I'd like to open up to general. Q. and a, the goals, I think would be. 1358 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:29:09.724 --> 06:29:30.844 You know, just for and non non parties to identify items. I need to be addressed for the 2nd workshop. So we do capture them. There's been a lot of discussion going on and I'm glad we. 1359 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:29:30.874 --> 06:29:45.994 Quoted this, because I know I myself will need to, um, give me a 2nd I think I need to. Okay. I think we'll need to. I will need to go back and listen to the recording. So. 1360 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:29:48.242 --> 06:30:00.602 Like I said, so right now, I think, let's, uh, open it up to, uh, parties to, uh, ask any outstanding questions or items that need, uh, discussion and workshop number 2. 1361 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:30:14.944 --> 06:30:15.844 Anybody. 1362 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:30:18.994 --> 06:30:19.774 Go ahead Scott. 1363 Sky Stanfield 06:30:21.154 --> 06:30:39.784 So, I've already laid out a couple of times what I think area that I'm most interested in having more discussion with the utilities on, which is around what I'd like to hear from them. You know, not necessarily on the spot at the moment. But a little bit more about whether there are. 1364 Sky Stanfield 06:30:39.940 --> 06:31:01.084 They're open, or they're to finding a pathway where the risks that I think we've all kind of collectively agreed on exist aren't shouldered by a single generator in light of the potentially low ultimate risk of this happening. But but. 1365 Sky Stanfield 06:31:01.088 --> 06:31:21.902 Another way to sort of move on that conversation, I think, would be to help me help. Everybody understand what how would you assess the risk of this? Is there a way to do an analysis to help us figure out and, I mean, mostly help the commission figure out what the potential costs or risks are from. 1366 Sky Stanfield 06:31:22.324 --> 06:31:43.054 This limited generation profile implementation. We, you know, I feel like what's on the table. Now, to me, seems like an unworkable scenario for an applicant. I just don't think that they have enough clarity, but I don't see how the commissions going to make a decision or how any customer could ever move ahead with. 1367 Sky Stanfield 06:31:43.804 --> 06:32:04.294 Some data or something that would provide that clarity. So, I think my question to the utilities is, have you given any thought to how we would actually understand how likely it is that these events that we're talking about, that could result in longer term curtailment not the, the emergency curtailment. 1368 Sky Stanfield 06:32:05.014 --> 06:32:13.834 Could be better, kind of understood from a, from a frequency and cost standpoint, or we, just in the we're going to be guessing mode. 1369 Frances Cleveland 06:32:20.104 --> 06:32:38.162 I have a somewhat similar question, which is our issue that, uh, really needs to be addressed, which is there must be, uh, other mitigating methods than the ones that have been laid out. 1370 Frances Cleveland 06:32:39.064 --> 06:32:48.994 As rather drastic for the most part, uh, 1st of all the, the whole issue of, um, yeah, 12 versus 288. 1371 Frances Cleveland 06:32:50.044 --> 06:33:10.804 But along with the fact that communications should be available in some form or another, uh, that there should be, um, as the dermis capabilities are more real, uh, that there would be. 1372 Frances Cleveland 06:33:10.808 --> 06:33:27.424 More information on a timely basis on what's happening in the grid and that therefore the utilities could not only identify problem areas, but actually relax. 1373 Frances Cleveland 06:33:27.784 --> 06:33:48.124 Some of the, uh, limits based on more real time information and I know that's sort of the, the optimistic side of all of this. And the pessimistic 1 is the problems. But I think that it's important to see this as a 2 way street. 1374 Frances Cleveland 06:33:48.934 --> 06:34:09.994 If there's, there's benefits for having better, uh, communications, both, um, you know, communication protocol, type communications. But also, you know, Here's what's happening on the grid today. We can relax your limits for this period. 1375 Frances Cleveland 06:34:10.054 --> 06:34:31.174 Time or next week, next month, whatever um, and so that it's it then becomes beneficial for both sides uh, both the and the owner operators to provide the. 1376 Frances Cleveland 06:34:31.180 --> 06:34:51.154 Flexibility to work with each other. So I'm just saying that there are carrots as well as sticks and trying to work together better. And I would like to see some discussion of how to do that going forward. 1377 Roger Salas SCE 06:34:56.344 --> 06:35:13.264 I did this Roger I mean, I think that's probably what we talked about today. I mean, a lot of a lot of it has to do, which is a lot of uncertainty, right? Like, we don't know whether it's a problem not a problem. So, I wonder, I mean, the biggest thing is, we just don't know. 1378 Roger Salas SCE 06:35:13.562 --> 06:35:34.562 Right. You know, they may turn out that this is not a problem, but we don't know. So, I wonder, you know, trying to think about, maybe this seems to be sort of ideal, like, for a pilot where we can sort of, you know, take, you know, whether it's, you know, 1 or 2 years and collect data and see see what. 1379 Roger Salas SCE 06:35:34.654 --> 06:35:50.374 We've seen and and address projects as they come along different ways. But I think the biggest problems that we have is that we just don't know and we don't know whether this wouldn't be a big problem. No problem. 1380 Sky Stanfield 06:35:50.704 --> 06:35:51.094 Right. 1381 Roger Salas SCE 06:35:51.364 --> 06:35:55.774 Some type of data or something to look at this maybe something to. 1382 Sky Stanfield 06:35:58.024 --> 06:36:16.714 I'm thinking the same thing Roger. Sorry, I'll, um, let me respond real quick and then bring in others, too is like, what or I'm going to say I'm open to talk to you about that. Idea what the issue that I'm trying to highlight is I do think that we need some practical experience, or can understand that that would build comfort. I think that. 1383 Sky Stanfield 06:36:17.016 --> 06:36:37.926 The problem is, is that we're not gonna get that experience if no generator can take that risk. So, I think that 1 of the areas that Iraq would be interested and willing to collaborate on is how to lay out a proposal that would where we could pilot. It for a couple of years. 1384 Sky Stanfield 06:36:38.492 --> 06:36:59.072 That would we, we to do that, though, I, I, I'm thinking that the only way to do that is to agree that the cost allocation structure would have to change for that temporary period. But I do, I agree with you Roger, that, like, if we're gonna just be stuck in this, like, and I think that that it's important for the commission to engage in that. 1385 Sky Stanfield 06:36:59.674 --> 06:37:20.374 Either way, because we do need to understand how the January the system is changing in light of electrification and the smart way that can be deployed. So I'll just put that on the table after that I'm thinking on the same direction as you are. And I'd be happy to have some more conversations about what that looks like. It seems to. 1386 Sky Stanfield 06:37:20.404 --> 06:37:30.424 The core elements are, what does the cost allocation look like, and what are the sort of data tracking tools that we need to get to that? And I definitely think it would be interesting to. 1387 Sky Stanfield 06:37:31.836 --> 06:37:35.106 To see what the, the advocate's office also thinks about that. 1388 Roger Salas SCE 06:37:37.984 --> 06:37:38.404 Okay. 1389 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:37:38.734 --> 06:37:58.414 Yeah, thank you Roger and sky. Um, I wanted to say, thank you for bringing that up. Roger cause throughout what I've heard, I've been thinking, more of, uh, I don't want to call it a pilot because, you know, the decision didn't say it's a pilot, but I'm thinking it more. It could be a re, iterative process. 1390 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:37:58.474 --> 06:38:19.594 That let's give it, let's say, for now, just say 1 year, for example, 1 year, take that data, go back what needs to be fixed lessons, learned to improve it and go from go from there. The question would be to, you know, I'm thinking. 1391 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:38:19.624 --> 06:38:20.524 Maybe. 1392 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:38:22.446 --> 06:38:29.554 Identify circuits or type of circuits. That would be more. 1393 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:38:31.384 --> 06:38:42.394 Acceptable to a mitigation, you know, urban areas, rural areas, whatever, and maybe, you know. 1394 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:38:44.462 --> 06:38:45.812 I'm not sure I'm, I'm just thinking. 1395 Sky Stanfield 06:38:46.204 --> 06:39:04.712 More of a time limited than a location limited, because I think that it's still going to be hard to get a generator to do this without the right. Price signals in the market set up. That's the other thing we have to think about now is that there's a little bit of a chicken and egg here and I think we need to create an opportunity to see where people. 1396 Sky Stanfield 06:39:04.720 --> 06:39:14.346 Use this, put a time limit on and see what it costs versus constraining it by locations, which aren't going to give us the best perspective on what it actually would cost system. Why. 1397 Roger Salas SCE 06:39:15.516 --> 06:39:25.506 Yeah, it seems to me that the biggest issue is the cost implications and so, you know, maybe there's, uh, you know, for us, I think the biggest. 1398 Roger Salas SCE 06:39:25.984 --> 06:39:27.154 Problems are gonna be. 1399 Roger Salas SCE 06:39:28.954 --> 06:39:49.804 Are we willing to spend a 1Million dollars just to increase half a megawatt or something like that? Right. Um, so so, maybe something to think about is, like, well, okay, we may be in, you know, currently no, no, I'm going to preface this by saying nothing. No, this is approved so we have to internally with, you know, and only speaking for. 1400 Roger Salas SCE 06:39:50.104 --> 06:40:10.924 Conceptually, we say, okay, tell you what, we'll, we'll pick up small upgrades during this iteration period. If we're willing to pick small projects, small cost projects, you know, but we're not willing to pick large upgrades and, you know, so so there's a little bit of a. 1401 Roger Salas SCE 06:40:11.286 --> 06:40:32.106 Um, I'm gonna say, um, you know, arrangement as to, like, the, the, the, the cost, cause I think about for us so we don't want to pin multi 1Million dollar projects for for something. So small. Right. So if the cost is the issue, then I think an area to think as to look for it. 1402 Roger Salas SCE 06:40:32.164 --> 06:40:43.894 Internal approval now is well, at least for is, like, okay, for this intern approval, we're willing to, you know, I'm going to say, pay for small upgrades, but not for large updates. 1403 Brad Heavner 06:40:44.944 --> 06:40:53.284 Can you define the actual list of of upgrade types that would be on either side of that? 1 of the slide. 1404 Brad Heavner 06:40:53.314 --> 06:41:00.814 Today says that they would return to the approved values. If I deem the upgrade to be low cost. 1405 Roger Salas SCE 06:41:00.934 --> 06:41:01.414 Right. 1406 Brad Heavner 06:41:01.564 --> 06:41:02.614 Okay, that's what you're saying. 1407 Brad Heavner 06:41:05.222 --> 06:41:11.374 Defined, can you say, you know, line extension our high cost everything else is low cost. 1408 Roger Salas SCE 06:41:11.854 --> 06:41:21.482 Yeah, but then I think that's the year to work brought on as to what what exactly that means. I think Gary talked a little bit about what, you know, he viewed or his view as well. 1409 Roger Salas SCE 06:41:21.606 --> 06:41:42.516 To us, but I think that's the area that we can agree on as long as there's something low, you know, and given the fact that it's probably not a big risk. Maybe that's speaking only for and not approved. Maybe that's an area that we can think about. In the interim period, we would cover those. 1410 Roger Salas SCE 06:41:43.384 --> 06:41:53.434 Small level, those low level cost, uh, while the customer or the skin pay for the large level cost, or agreed to reduce permanently. 1411 Brad Heavner 06:41:53.704 --> 06:42:03.784 Back in the working group at 1 point, we talked about a line of line extensions greater than 5 polls. I don't know if that's something that you use. 1412 Brad Heavner 06:42:03.790 --> 06:42:07.384 As a threshold, but that that came up in our discussions. 1413 Sky Stanfield 06:42:07.714 --> 06:42:13.744 I don't understand how that approach would actually make this workable for a generator though. You what you're saying is the generator. 1414 Sky Stanfield 06:42:15.902 --> 06:42:27.514 Wouldn't be responsible for low cost upgrade, but we're responsible for the ones that would destroy the whole project from a cost standpoint. Right? Like, I get I get why that makes sense for medicine standpoint but I think. 1415 Brad Heavner 06:42:27.992 --> 06:42:28.624 To return. 1416 Sky Stanfield 06:42:28.832 --> 06:42:36.212 How that actually makes this workable for a generator. Now I'm not representing any any developer in here and I really. 1417 Sky Stanfield 06:42:36.220 --> 06:42:44.256 We hear from Brad and others about what their risk threshold is, but saying that they would have to bear the cost for the most significant upgrades doesn't seem to resolve anything. 1418 Roger Salas SCE 06:42:44.826 --> 06:42:45.066 Well. 1419 Brad Heavner 06:42:45.096 --> 06:42:52.956 Well, I think the way that would dash out is you would accept the lower and a permanent basis. If it were high cost to do otherwise. 1420 Sky Stanfield 06:42:52.986 --> 06:42:57.366 But but how why would they, how would somebody plan around that like. 1421 Sky Stanfield 06:42:57.394 --> 06:43:18.514 It was the same it's the same problem as any of the scenarios. Right Brian is like, I think the other option I put in the chat would be like, if the really high upgrade costs thing had to be done. Maybe what the option is, is that we don't do the upgrade, but we find some way to compensate the generator and have that as an established compensation rate. So they can evaluate. 1422 Sky Stanfield 06:43:18.542 --> 06:43:31.472 The risk, and it may not be what they would have earned otherwise, but they have a clear way to finance the project as opposed to just oh, and you might end up having to pay for a 2Million dollar upgrade. 1423 Roger Salas SCE 06:43:31.922 --> 06:43:32.282 Yeah. 1424 Sky Stanfield 06:43:32.402 --> 06:43:38.252 Like something so that that gives them more predictability that they can bring to their finances essentially. 1425 Roger Salas SCE 06:43:38.612 --> 06:43:38.882 Yeah. 1426 Roger Salas SCE 06:43:39.696 --> 06:43:51.124 Tell me whatever that may be right. I'm saying is that it requires a lot of discussion. I mean, at the end of the day, I think for us is we're trying to protect as well. Our customers not to pay for exorbitant costs. 1427 Sky Stanfield 06:43:51.154 --> 06:43:51.516 Yeah. 1428 Roger Salas SCE 06:43:51.756 --> 06:44:00.814 Um, so it's, it's, it's a given take, um, but bottom line is, we don't have experience and is we don't have any so to extend that we can sort of agree on. 1429 Roger Salas SCE 06:44:00.844 --> 06:44:13.412 Hey, pull a pilot call it iterate, period. Maybe. I mean, we need to find a way to get some experience under our belt and for this particular process. 1430 Frances Cleveland 06:44:14.104 --> 06:44:21.632 So, Roger, would that include a, a 288? Uh, let's assume that 1 way or another that. 1431 Frances Cleveland 06:44:22.896 --> 06:44:34.566 Um, approved as, or even more than 288, uh, you know, 1, per hour per 1, uh, each hour of the year has a different, uh, limit. 1432 Roger Salas SCE 06:44:35.916 --> 06:44:43.086 At this point, I mean, we can go back to all the arguments that we made for for the previous working group. But, uh, you know. 1433 Roger Salas SCE 06:44:43.894 --> 06:44:55.114 In my opinion, a lot of operating problems and so that's, you know, you know, I would say, still 12, um, with some type of pilot to I mean, to learn from it. I mean, I think we talked about. 1434 Frances Cleveland 06:44:55.504 --> 06:44:57.244 Learning for learning purposes. 1435 Roger Salas SCE 06:44:57.574 --> 06:44:57.964 Because. 1436 Frances Cleveland 06:44:57.964 --> 06:45:04.234 I think that again, if you include more communications. 1437 Frances Cleveland 06:45:04.268 --> 06:45:25.142 So that there can be a, a more flexible reaction so it's not absolute limit and you can't go over it. Whoops. Today we're going to have to tell you to, you know, have a different limit. But this is purely during this transition process during this learning process. 1438 Frances Cleveland 06:45:25.536 --> 06:45:33.994 I think the more flexibility that there is on both sides, the more likely we'll come up with a better result. 1439 Roger Salas SCE 06:45:36.186 --> 06:45:44.044 Yeah, there's no, there's not gonna be any communication at this point for these systems. I mean, especially, you know, we don't have to limit real time telemetry. 1440 Brad Heavner 06:45:44.884 --> 06:45:46.564 Well, mostly we're talking about systems larger the ones. 1441 Brad Heavner 06:45:46.594 --> 06:45:47.254 They go out here. 1442 Roger Salas SCE 06:45:48.604 --> 06:45:48.874 Yep. 1443 Brad Heavner 06:45:49.052 --> 06:45:49.472 You will have. 1444 Roger Salas SCE 06:45:49.562 --> 06:45:52.082 I don't know, maybe I call it, but I don't know. 1445 Sky Stanfield 06:45:54.994 --> 06:45:55.414 Cross. 1446 Sky Stanfield 06:45:56.440 --> 06:46:01.534 Those upgrades, but it doesn't actually that's not the best thing for repair. Ironic about it. 1447 Sky Stanfield 06:46:02.104 --> 06:46:06.694 And you had your hand basically raised and we've been talking with right over you just to jump in. 1448 Younes, Amin 06:46:07.204 --> 06:46:23.222 Yeah, um, so that's kind of thinking of the other direction versus the pilot not, um, not that we shouldn't do a pilot, but this is not what was on my mind. Um, what I was thinking about was what, what kind of, uh, light we can shed on this through some sort of data. 1449 Younes, Amin 06:46:23.254 --> 06:46:44.374 Modeling approach, um, and it seems like it would be reasonably straightforward. I mean, this is not my area of expertise, but the utilities to do something like like, look at a variety of circuits, some, some sampling in which some hours of the day, there's no capacity or some hours of the year rather. 1450 Younes, Amin 06:46:45.034 --> 06:46:52.834 In which there are large loads and in which there are large generators and look at what would happen if the load were removed. And then. 1451 Younes, Amin 06:46:54.482 --> 06:47:15.392 Use the counterfactual in which that generation facility is a larger facility that uses a limited generation profile. So, it takes advantage of the gaps and see what would happen again if that large facility were removed and try to try to get some idea of what is, do we actually see an increase frequency of, uh, violations? Um, and I don't know exactly what what level. 1452 Younes, Amin 06:47:15.424 --> 06:47:36.542 And how many data points, or anything like that but it seems like you get a reasonable idea of of how much riskier is the is the cause it's just been talking about it. I think we, we kind of agree if it's if it's 12 values, it's somewhere between the same level of risk and 12 times as much risk. Um, those are 2, pretty different things. Um, so, so, getting some. 1453 Younes, Amin 06:47:36.548 --> 06:47:41.884 Some understanding of that, I think would be really helpful. 1454 Younes, Amin 06:47:43.684 --> 06:48:04.744 And I guess on the idea of a pilot, I think that's, uh, it does seem just me. Me personally I can't really speak for the, the whole public advocate's office. Um, it seems like a pretty good approach because, as, I think has been pretty well argued. Um, if there is, if there's risk of the of the capacity going away at any moment, it's going to be very hard to get developers to sign up. And then we'll never figure out whether they're. 1455 Younes, Amin 06:48:06.244 --> 06:48:27.276 Thing actually works out and will never go anywhere with and it does seem like there's a a pretty significant potential, um, broadly with a limited generation profile to, um, to increase the capability of, uh, or to increase the value that society gets from these that are on the grid, um, so. 1456 Younes, Amin 06:48:27.308 --> 06:48:33.454 So kind of stopping it here, because we have this chicken and egg situation. It seems like it could be, um, it'll be bad for it for everybody. 1457 Roger Salas SCE 06:48:41.436 --> 06:48:42.186 How you end up. 1458 Sky Stanfield 06:48:42.516 --> 06:48:49.956 Yeah, but maybe I had any questions or following that, but I think maybe if you Roger, if you or others want to respond to his. 1459 Roger Salas SCE 06:48:50.286 --> 06:48:50.586 Yeah. 1460 Sky Stanfield 06:48:51.154 --> 06:48:56.074 Could we do this in a meaningful way to get the data, which I think was what I was originally asking is. 1461 Roger Salas SCE 06:48:56.106 --> 06:48:56.346 Yeah. 1462 Roger Salas SCE 06:48:56.494 --> 06:49:02.554 I mean, my general, my general response to this is you can do all the modeling you want. 1463 Roger Salas SCE 06:49:03.482 --> 06:49:23.704 But not not, not normally will take away to say you have 0 risk. So we'll end up with the same bullets that we have before because you still don't have everything you have any of you do even if you do modeling, you may find out that. Yeah, it's low risk, which is what we're saying, but it. 1464 Roger Salas SCE 06:49:23.708 --> 06:49:44.854 Doesn't take away that there's still a risk and the fact that it's a risk is what's driving this problem. So I just don't want to do a lot of modeling work, because I don't know that it's really going to get us anything. I think it's just going to get to the same conclusion like, yes, probably not going to happen, but. 1465 Roger Salas SCE 06:49:44.884 --> 06:49:49.894 There's still a risk you'll end up with still with that with that answer at the end of the day. 1466 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:49:54.874 --> 06:50:00.482 Oh, go ahead. Oh, well, after sky after your comments uh, I see Alex had this racing too. 1467 Sky Stanfield 06:50:02.464 --> 06:50:03.574 Okay. 1468 Sky Stanfield 06:50:06.094 --> 06:50:25.744 I have to turn 2 parts to this. 1 is, I think, and this Joanne utility is going to need to answer this right now that I can order you to answer anything. But, um, it does seem to me, like, my perspective from is that the idea of having generators do a limited generation profile is so that. 1469 Sky Stanfield 06:50:25.774 --> 06:50:46.892 We can benefit solve some grid problems that California has by group. I mean, energy problems that California has in terms of peak loads and needing to serve those loads with clean energy. And I think the weather and how we shift those risks is kind of hide with who captures those benefits. And if there's a savings for the utilities versus. 1470 Sky Stanfield 06:50:46.924 --> 06:51:07.504 The individual generator, and I'd like the utilities to take it back. If you haven't already and think about could there be a case where it does make sense for you guys to bear some of the risk? Because there could be potentially large savings associated with it. I'm not clear if you guys are the ones who are capturing those savings or not that's going to be a big intellectual question. 1471 Sky Stanfield 06:51:08.374 --> 06:51:29.194 So, I'm just gonna put a cap in that as, like, I do think that anytime you're going to allocate risks, it's based upon whether there's an understanding of the benefits and who those travel to as well, to some extent separately. 1 of the questions I have, and I just don't know the answer to this cause I'm not tracking all of the potential procurement programs and rate discussions that happen in California. 1472 Sky Stanfield 06:51:29.226 --> 06:51:42.126 Yeah, but whether or not, we do a 12 month profile or a 288 profile kind of comes, especially if we're talking about doing some sort of pilot time, limited pilot to learn from the beginning. 1473 Sky Stanfield 06:51:43.324 --> 06:52:04.414 Whether we pursue 1, or the probably depends on where the price signal is that would encourage a generator to actually do this. We have some prices do what are the different procurement programs? And are they signaling on a monthly basis, or or a quasi seasonal basis, or more on an hourly basis? 1474 Sky Stanfield 06:52:04.452 --> 06:52:25.596 Such that again, with the idea is that we need to get some people to pilot it. And part of that may be, where is the actual biggest value going to come from for the generator, who decides to produce more energy in August, but know that they can't produce as much in October and I don't know if anybody has a great sense of where things are now, or will be. 1475 Sky Stanfield 06:52:25.624 --> 06:52:30.094 In the next year or 2, in terms of where those price signals are coming from. 1476 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:52:34.176 --> 06:52:43.356 Hey, this is I'm Stephanie from verdon again. Um, can you hear me this time? Please can you hear me? Give me a thumbs up. 1477 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:52:44.616 --> 06:52:45.154 Uh, yes. 1478 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:52:45.696 --> 06:52:52.266 Okay, great, thank you. Um, so I think there are 2 potential very dramatically different. 1479 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:52:52.594 --> 06:53:13.534 Um, potential revenue streams here, um, 1 is just based on rates and time we use pricing and, um, part of that falls into the, um, the proceeding that's looking at real time rates. I cannot, um, spacing on what the name of that is the other 1 is, um, bundled. 1480 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:53:13.538 --> 06:53:34.682 Then with the high proceeding of looking at the data process, thank you. I mean, the data process of, you know, what can be done to potentially increase, um, and improve the participation, um, within that. And that's really not. 1481 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:53:34.714 --> 06:53:42.784 So much focused on energy, but it's both more focused on capacity and distribution deferral. So, um. 1482 Stephan Barsun - Verdant Associates 06:53:44.642 --> 06:53:56.402 Anyway, I think, you know, those are probably, you know, the 2 primary avenues that I know we would be that I think the compensation might be up for discussion. 1483 Younes, Amin 06:53:59.042 --> 06:54:19.802 I just want to jump in and say that there's potentially 1 more that comes to my mind, which is through that slice of day happening already proceeding. I'm not super looped in on the details there, but but that's gonna approach it with 288 hour profile. Uh, so better alignment there allowing like, exports at 5 to 80 PM could drive significant amounts of, uh, of relative. Um. 1484 Younes, Amin 06:54:19.832 --> 06:54:20.882 To the the ers. 1485 Sky Stanfield 06:54:21.932 --> 06:54:29.342 Are those are projects that are gonna be interconnected at the, for the, uh, the W or W, instead of 221. 1486 Younes, Amin 06:54:31.536 --> 06:54:31.894 But. 1487 Roger Salas SCE 06:54:32.016 --> 06:54:32.706 Yeah. 1488 Sky Stanfield 06:54:33.786 --> 06:54:35.256 We should do this for W2. 1489 Roger Salas SCE 06:54:36.902 --> 06:54:57.874 Communications guy that as an most of our exporting generators are, and that way that's not going to follow this profile. And I don't know how many we probably have a handful of exporting rule. 21 projects. Don't think that we have that many. So this is most likely a. 1490 Roger Salas SCE 06:54:57.878 --> 06:55:02.104 About to exporting. That is more than 1. 1491 Sky Stanfield 06:55:02.464 --> 06:55:18.094 Agreed, I think that's important, but I also think we should we have an opportunity to learn here to inform the WWW dot development as well where this bigger amount could be captured. But I do think that's an important point is that we do have this sort of false jurisdiction or real jurisdictional line false, in terms of where the electrons. 1492 Younes, Amin 06:55:19.624 --> 06:55:39.514 But there's also whatever it gets as Stefan mentioned whatever is developed in the demand flexibility proceeding that could could create an export signal for row, 21, um, an export price signal for real, 21, new connections, as I understand. And my understanding of the of the schedule there is that there'll be an expansion of existing dynamic rate pilots. 1493 Younes, Amin 06:55:40.178 --> 06:55:58.082 Through 2023 essentially, and that, uh, starting in 2025, uh, the would be developing through applications those, um, those BI, directional potentially, I think BI, directional signals that this is just based on my reading of the of the scoping memo. Um. 1494 Sky Stanfield 06:55:59.042 --> 06:56:01.322 The other thing that's been bugging me about. 1495 Sky Stanfield 06:56:01.356 --> 06:56:22.474 The distinction between just doing a 12 month profile, versus having some sort of profile within the month is that we're basically capturing no energy storage value. Correct me if I'm wrong. But conceptually, we're, we're this is not doesn't involve any storage benefit. If it's if it's a monthly. 1496 Sky Stanfield 06:56:22.504 --> 06:56:43.624 Profile, whereas if you get into some sort of daily profile, where you can distinguish between how much you charge when, and how you charge the solar panels to get more expert, that's the only way you're capturing. Really? The flexibility added by the storage system. Correct me if I'm wrong and people see a storage use case on. 1497 Sky Stanfield 06:56:43.654 --> 06:56:44.884 Monthly level. 1498 Roger Salas SCE 06:56:48.064 --> 06:56:51.004 I don't know about that, but I would think that you would be able to I mean. 1499 Roger Salas SCE 06:56:52.596 --> 06:57:12.786 I mean, it's less granular. I, I give you that, but we'll see why you wouldn't be able to have a storage facility. That has a solar and storage. And then you only manage the storage based on the on the monthly limits. Which could be a lot higher than the minimum value. 1500 Roger Salas SCE 06:57:13.836 --> 06:57:32.616 This is not maybe not as granular as yes. As folks with 1. but, you know, I don't see why you wouldn't be able to change the charging. I mean, this charging limits on the monthly value, which are likely, gonna be much higher than the minimum. I see as. 1501 Roger Salas SCE 06:57:36.124 --> 06:57:41.972 I mean, it's not the whole thing, but definitely it's better than better than the minimum. 1502 Brian Lydic 06:57:43.024 --> 06:57:48.364 Yeah, basically you'd be adjusting the benefit of self supply from month to month. 1503 Brad Heavner 06:57:49.624 --> 06:58:03.874 I've been looking this to the discussion we had a minute ago about price signals during grid emergencies, especially you want storage devices to be able to export at full power from 7 to 9 PM. 1504 Brad Heavner 06:58:04.052 --> 06:58:25.142 August in September, you know okay. So in are saying, how much can you give us as much as possible? We need kilowatts right now we need megawatts. It's 70 PM on September 6 and if that's limited by some, some grid capacity. 1505 Brad Heavner 06:58:25.174 --> 06:58:27.874 City constraint at noon. 1506 Brad Heavner 06:58:29.824 --> 06:58:30.874 Bad for the grid. 1507 Roger Salas SCE 06:58:33.124 --> 06:58:33.364 Yeah. 1508 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:58:37.684 --> 06:58:48.604 Okay, Alex has had his hand up for a while. I don't know if that's a, an error or not, but I don't want him to lose consciousness in his hand. 1509 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:58:51.604 --> 06:59:11.674 Thank you so, I, I just, uh, I didn't want to interrupt the discussion, but my question was, I was seeking some clarification on this pilot phase issue that's being discussed. Um, cause the decision has some timelines, um, by. 1510 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:59:11.732 --> 06:59:26.284 The has to be implemented, right? So, once the standards have been established is in a certain timeline where we have to build the tools and then start accepting this project. So, is is the idea that's being thrown around that. 1511 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:59:29.764 --> 06:59:49.534 When we would normally been required to implement projects the pilot phase would begin at that time. And we would only accept, like, so many projects until, you know, 12 months or 24 months until we got comfortable. Then we would go back to accepting more projects. Is that what what's being discussed here? I'm not I'm not really tracking that. 1512 Alex Mwaura PG&E 06:59:49.832 --> 06:59:50.882 Pilot phase issue. 1513 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 06:59:50.972 --> 07:00:10.802 Yeah, Alex, I, I think that's why I said that I didn't want to call it a pilot. I wanted to call it a iterative process where is implemented and then based on experience you go back and, you know. 1514 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:00:12.722 --> 07:00:28.534 You know, uh, I don't want to use the term fix, but change it based on experience learned. So it is not really a pilot, but it is more like a living actual, you know. 1515 Sky Stanfield 07:00:29.732 --> 07:00:38.222 Like, we do offer 21 reset. Like, we're gonna learn for this for 2 years and then we're gonna report back and decide if something needs to change after after a defined period. 1516 Alex Mwaura PG&E 07:00:45.394 --> 07:00:49.866 Projects, what was that? Sorry? 1517 Sky Stanfield 07:00:50.856 --> 07:00:52.536 Sorry, you cut out, can you just say that again? 1518 Alex Mwaura PG&E 07:00:54.064 --> 07:00:54.484 Was. 1519 Alex Mwaura PG&E 07:00:55.714 --> 07:00:57.214 I thought somebody has to speak of speaking. 1520 Sky Stanfield 07:00:58.474 --> 07:00:59.104 I didn't hear anybody. 1521 Alex Mwaura PG&E 07:00:59.824 --> 07:01:15.754 I can think, okay, so I guess what I'm asking is so once once you're required to start implementing projects, then we will accept as many projects as come in. And then after a certain period of time, once we've connected these projects, we've had experience that's going. 1522 Alex Mwaura PG&E 07:01:15.786 --> 07:01:23.044 Inform some decision making, and we will come back to the table and have further discussions to see if we can refine policy. Is that the idea. 1523 Sky Stanfield 07:01:24.876 --> 07:01:32.826 That's what I'm, I was thinking, okay but I think, I think Alex just to be clear what we're all here to negotiate or or work on it together. So I think this is just. 1524 Alex Mwaura PG&E 07:01:32.856 --> 07:01:33.126 Okay. 1525 Sky Stanfield 07:01:33.216 --> 07:01:44.916 Yeah, out there, I think we need to decide to me because of the number of, as far as we know, at least like that we have to find a way to get projects to the table here. 1526 Sky Stanfield 07:01:45.394 --> 07:02:06.514 The idea of allowing some limited some term, where we track, what happens and then revisit it turns out. I mean, it's what I think what we all agree is actually the most likely scenario is that there are going to be no cost at all, but we can't guarantee that and that's the concern. Right? But it could be that. We run this program for 2 years, and we come back and we find that. 1527 Sky Stanfield 07:02:06.662 --> 07:02:18.962 There was, there were no upgrades required. Um, and then we have that doesn't mean that after 2 more years, there are no more costs required, but it will give us something to work on and see how the system performed. 1528 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 07:02:21.272 --> 07:02:27.662 So, talking from developers from perspective, the low cost upgrades. 1529 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 07:02:27.694 --> 07:02:41.434 Isn't as big of concern as the long term financial impacts means that we have like, for example, like, we have a 3 megawatt project and the minimum. 1530 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 07:02:41.792 --> 07:03:02.882 Bandwidth 1 megawatt right? So, and then, and then monthly we know like an average you can export maybe like 2 and a half. So, let's say, like, okay, we'll do this. But then we know the minimum is 1 megawatt. So we are concerned what we're concerned about. It's like 3 years down the road there's some future. 1531 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 07:03:02.944 --> 07:03:24.034 Great condition changes and now the project has to be limited to 1 micro and that's a huge huge financial impact to the project that's no comparison to like, 200 K upgrades that we would have paid from the, at the beginning of the project. So doing this interim process, it's. 1532 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 07:03:24.096 --> 07:03:39.814 Fine, but then the 1 year data wouldn't guarantee that. So that's my main concern of this interim process. It's still doesn't give us the confidence that or the data we need to proceed with this option. 1533 Sky Stanfield 07:03:40.176 --> 07:03:45.214 What, if I would propose just to be clear from perspective is that if this pilot is gonna go. 1534 Sky Stanfield 07:03:45.246 --> 07:04:06.366 The generators that propose a limited generation profile interconnect they have to be. It's not that we go back on you 2 years later and say, actually, now you bear the cost. I know that that's not realistic. We'd have to agree. And there, we'll have to build the parameters of that agreement, but I think that anybody who interconnects in that period has to have. 1535 Sky Stanfield 07:04:06.394 --> 07:04:27.484 Te of being able to do their limited generation profile with the exception of emergency conditions and then we got to talk about, is there anything additional and that Robert perspective was that the project would still be on the hook for large upgrade I just don't know. It's going to be workable, but I would love to hear from you and others on that. But my proposal was not that you guys. 1536 Sky Stanfield 07:04:27.542 --> 07:04:36.902 Essentially, the ones who applied in that, period would be being piloted indefinitely, because I don't see how that you guys could ever do that. 1537 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 07:04:38.042 --> 07:04:48.572 What we are rely on, like, when you do the economics, right W, W, where we are lying for the long term economics, is that we will be able to export to. 1538 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 07:04:48.668 --> 07:05:09.662 Honestly, I see value now the minimum, I say value, right? So, if for some reason 35 years down the road, we have to be limited to the minimum. I see a value that would be a disaster to the, to the project. And I don't think our customer will be willing to take that. That's just too high. 1539 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 07:05:09.820 --> 07:05:15.304 That financial impact is higher than any upgrades. 1540 Brad Heavner 07:05:16.356 --> 07:05:30.876 Yeah, that sounds right to me, the only way to make this work is to start doing it and costs if there are any upgrade costs, they're rate based. And if we find after some period of time that. 1541 Brad Heavner 07:05:31.206 --> 07:05:51.936 Too much of that happening, then we shut it down for projects going forward for the new projects installed after that that's really the only way to make this work and, you know, if I can try to re, characterize a little bit here of the shifting of risk discussion we had a few minutes ago, um, the, the customers are being. 1542 Brad Heavner 07:05:52.144 --> 07:06:13.204 Trade is getting away with murder here. Like, they're getting some special treatment in reality. I mean, you could say the utilities have benefited for a long time by rate basing upgrades according to a very conservative assumption of what's needed in building too much. And so we want to make use of the existing capacity right now it's already bought. 1543 Brad Heavner 07:06:13.352 --> 07:06:34.412 For, and a customer that comes forward eva's company installed the 3 megawatt system, according to that's a plus we want that to happen and yes, it is this means we're operating the greater to higher capacity factor that's more difficult to do than over building the system. That's true but. 1544 Brad Heavner 07:06:34.444 --> 07:06:48.094 We want to operate the grid at a higher capacity factor. That's a benefit to rate pairs and everybody. So we have to just start moving forward. If, at some point we find it's just too much. It's causing problems. Then you stop it. 1545 Regnier, Justin 07:06:54.124 --> 07:07:05.524 If I understand the way this risk has been characterized, though, it's really a question of departing load that I could like, massive amounts of load department. 1546 Sky Stanfield 07:07:06.514 --> 07:07:06.934 Yeah. 1547 Sky Stanfield 07:07:08.464 --> 07:07:28.866 And that we all know, is, you know, not in the forecast at a, at a system basis, although I think the so the, the risk we can really most likely get down to again. Individual feeders are going to vary. But is that large, some large industrial customer going out of business and that. 1548 Sky Stanfield 07:07:29.434 --> 07:07:48.392 Based on our data requests again doesn't happen that often and is somewhat predictable when it does. So, but, yeah, I think that's the right point Justin because we talked about anyway. No, 1, no, 1 is to blame under this in, in that in that scenario of who who's bearing the responsibility. 1549 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 07:07:53.612 --> 07:08:06.392 Or they, they go solar, right? Or they install, like, large onsite, solar, um, and have a lot of low reduction. That's possible. Also under the most recent um. 1550 Eva Wang TotalEnergies 07:08:07.478 --> 07:08:18.722 21 or the decision number to avoid going to definitely that some of our customer, rather than not experts right. To stay with in 21. 1551 Sky Stanfield 07:08:19.354 --> 07:08:28.624 Right, well, and this is this is that issue you're highlighting of us is scheduled for phase 2 of this proceeding, which is what's gonna happen with non exporting customers the utilities position. 1552 Sky Stanfield 07:08:28.654 --> 07:08:49.774 Is that they should bear upgrade costs for reducing their load? But again, that's a whole other phase 2 issue. But I will say that the data requests that I've been referencing that we've been doing, have been in preparation of that. And there isn't really evidence of that happening. Yet. I potential. We can all agree. There's some potential for load to go away in a variety of ways. But there. 1553 Sky Stanfield 07:08:50.014 --> 07:09:04.294 The utilities haven't said we we know this is happened yet or going to happen in with any specific magnitude. So it's still kind of the same risk cost benefit question again. 1554 Sky Stanfield 07:09:07.416 --> 07:09:10.146 Roger, I think you're on mute. 1555 Roger Salas SCE 07:09:12.724 --> 07:09:33.456 Yeah, we'll, uh, we'll, we'll take a look at the discussion, I think, a good discussion somehow. We think the main thing I think is getting some experience and the implementation of LGB, you know, obviously, for us, the, the biggest concern is ensuring that we. 1556 Roger Salas SCE 07:09:33.634 --> 07:09:54.634 Safety reliability, I mean, you know, for us, you know, make me know, uh, as, um, as planners and engineers, you know, obviously we want as much margin as as we as, as we can see as, as, you know, makes makes us sleep, better in the night. But when we are trending very close to the value. 1557 Roger Salas SCE 07:09:55.054 --> 07:10:15.784 Much more often than there's a lot more chances something can go wrong and therefore, you know, not as much of a peace of mind as I would I would want. So, but some of our risk, and we'll take in consideration what this discussion and maybe that's. 1558 Roger Salas SCE 07:10:15.788 --> 07:10:17.822 Something that we can bring up next time. 1559 Sky Stanfield 07:10:18.722 --> 07:10:22.532 And just to be clear, there's also benefits on the table this. 1560 Roger Salas SCE 07:10:22.532 --> 07:10:23.462 Is. 1561 Sky Stanfield 07:10:24.212 --> 07:10:36.392 There is benefit to you guys in the grid and the customers from, from operating at a higher capacity factor as of now. I know that's all in the future. We don't nobody has any numbers to put on either end of the table here. But I. 1562 Sky Stanfield 07:10:37.084 --> 07:10:46.834 If if we just think about risk, we're not going to want to do anything you're doing this because there is like, real significant true actual lead here to be addressed. 1563 Frances Cleveland 07:10:47.164 --> 07:10:56.734 You know, and and that's what I thoroughly agree with and I think that's where it, it's really important to see this as where the future will be. 1564 Frances Cleveland 07:10:58.144 --> 07:11:18.574 Managing it for the benefit of the, all the right payers and others and the stakeholders as well as the utilities, rather than taking, you know, hard positions. And this is what, you know, the rule says, therefore, I'm not going to move an inch. I think this is a time for some. 1565 Frances Cleveland 07:11:19.356 --> 07:11:39.786 Flexibility I understand the monetary risk. Um, but it's it really is a time for learning and if we don't do that, then we're stuck forever in sort of old ways. And part of the solution is to minimize the risk by having better information. 1566 Frances Cleveland 07:11:40.804 --> 07:11:55.474 For a real time, I won't say real time and having that near real time information will allow you Roger to go to sleep at night because, you know, somebody is watching and can take action. If there really is a problem. 1567 Frances Cleveland 07:11:58.776 --> 07:11:59.436 Part of that. 1568 Roger Salas SCE 07:11:59.886 --> 07:12:08.346 And the problem with that would be great when that happens. And we have terms that we have communications and we have visibility. 1569 Frances Cleveland 07:12:10.356 --> 07:12:10.506 We. 1570 Roger Salas SCE 07:12:11.972 --> 07:12:23.194 Then, at that point, you think the possibilities and a lot more to sort of push the envelope to the Max that we can. I'm hoping that well, without any visibility. 1571 Frances Cleveland 07:12:24.212 --> 07:12:32.524 Right, well, I think we need to plan for that and you plan for that because you may need to. 1572 Frances Cleveland 07:12:33.422 --> 07:12:53.402 You may need to modify the contracts in order to get the kind of information that you need to let you sleep at night. So, I really feel that there needs to be the learning and the flexibility at this time before we lock things in. 1573 Frances Cleveland 07:12:53.974 --> 07:13:14.644 Rigidly and, in fact, part of the results should be flexibility where you have not only risks, but you have benefits. And I think that's what Skype what's also saying there are benefits to this for everybody. So, I really believe that we need to work at. 1574 Frances Cleveland 07:13:15.094 --> 07:13:16.414 With that mindset. 1575 Roger Salas SCE 07:13:17.674 --> 07:13:36.004 Yeah, maybe the mindset should be continuous improvement over time where we get better over time. I mean, I know that we have been working on this for years. And so someone say been being here for 7 years to prevent that from happening, just maybe slowly, but surely. 1576 Roger Salas SCE 07:13:36.010 --> 07:13:42.574 Moving forward, learning, putting some pilots or whatever we're going to use. 1577 Frances Cleveland 07:13:45.124 --> 07:13:48.124 Wg since the beginning so I know all about that. 1578 Roger Salas SCE 07:13:48.276 --> 07:13:57.154 I know I appreciate all the work. You, you've put into, you know, put us where we are today. But, you know, I just moving to. 1579 Roger Salas SCE 07:13:57.632 --> 07:14:02.642 Without the right information notice, as you say. 1580 Frances Cleveland 07:14:02.792 --> 07:14:11.104 It's it's, you know, back and forth, but, yeah, it needs to move forward with both risk and benefit in mind. 1581 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:14:13.562 --> 07:14:18.212 And we have to to the shop and then David. 1582 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:14:25.684 --> 07:14:27.724 Just drop his hand, so. 1583 David Schiada 07:14:30.846 --> 07:14:32.856 Hey, Jose, can you hear me okay understood. 1584 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:14:33.724 --> 07:14:34.266 Uh, David. 1585 David Schiada 07:14:34.294 --> 07:14:38.314 Yes, can you try it? Let's see. Just a question. 1586 David Schiada 07:14:39.724 --> 07:14:45.394 In terms of as we regroup and kind of take into account the discussions today, um. 1587 David Schiada 07:14:47.044 --> 07:15:07.624 These workshops were were scheduled for the resolution 201 and our ultimate goal here, at least, for the avenues we have to file and advice letter after the workshops. I think it's around January 8. um, we'll hopefully as much, you know, addressing what I think are the core elements of, as, as I saw in the resolution. 1588 David Schiada 07:15:07.658 --> 07:15:28.652 About how to implement, uh, 15 and 16 when, when we hear discussions around things like, you know, potentially having an interim implementation um, maybe having some kind of dollar thresholds for a kind of a checkpoint or. 1589 David Schiada 07:15:28.922 --> 07:15:45.422 Having upgrades paid by certain customers certain sets of customers are before we go too far down the road, are those envisioned is being in scope and something that we could respond to in our January 8 advice letters. 1590 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:15:52.894 --> 07:16:09.364 Uh, let me get back to you on that David. Uh, actually, I will, uh, get back to everybody who who's in the distribution list and who attended today's workshop uh, I do, uh, reminding, uh, people now, having said that. 1591 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:16:09.996 --> 07:16:21.006 To email, Mary, if you're, uh, we're forwarded, uh, invite and not received a, uh, direct, uh, invite from us. 1592 David Schiada 07:16:22.684 --> 07:16:42.814 Okay, yeah, no, I appreciate that. Now, the reason I ask it just trying to be mindful of, you know, as we look to develop a, we'll have 1 now, it looks like 2 more additional workshops and and trying to work together here. Um, just to kind of make, make sure we're, we're utilizing the time as best. We can. If there's something that's in scope that we should be considering. 1593 David Schiada 07:16:44.042 --> 07:17:00.632 You could help drive this towards a consensus right? I think that's that seems to be something that we should consider, but if it's just want to make sure we're effectively utilizing the time and and addressing the requirements, particularly for the in terms of responding to the, the resolution. So. 1594 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:17:00.812 --> 07:17:04.682 Yeah, so, uh, David, what I'm going to do, uh, you know, once we get. 1595 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:17:04.714 --> 07:17:25.834 Recording is going to go back and listen to it again. But my 1st, impression here is that it is because it goes back to the whole weather and how, uh, reductions will be implemented. So that feeds into. 1596 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:17:25.866 --> 07:17:28.324 The process, um. 1597 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:17:31.026 --> 07:17:47.346 So, that's really what's drive these, you know, uh, today's, uh, discussion. So, my preliminary assessment is that it is in scope, but, you know, once and there's been a lot to absorb here today. 1598 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:17:48.454 --> 07:18:09.454 You know, once I, uh, listen to the recording again, I'll have a better idea and that should be hopefully we'll get the recording by tomorrow at the latest. And then we'll be able to also post it on the website by either tomorrow or Wednesday. So people can play it. Why. 1599 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:18:09.634 --> 07:18:14.434 Sleep so they can dream about this. 1600 David Schiada 07:18:15.904 --> 07:18:16.714 Okay, thank you. 1601 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:18:21.786 --> 07:18:27.006 So, uh, Joseph, uh, could you bring up the slides again? Please. 1602 Haga, Joseph 07:18:31.892 --> 07:18:32.282 Please. 1603 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:18:46.144 --> 07:18:49.624 Yeah, so, uh, I think Thank you everybody. 1604 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:18:52.534 --> 07:19:08.704 So, I think we've covered a lot of the next steps right now, you know, uh, and getting some, uh, good feedback for a workshop number 2. uh, I think, uh, my 1st, well, my. 1605 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:19:10.534 --> 07:19:31.174 1st, sub, sub bullet is premature at the moment considering we don't have a concrete proposal yet. Uh, but, you know, we have identified up sending topics or clarifications again. You know, I will ask, I'm asking the and participants to. 1606 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:19:31.356 --> 07:19:48.606 Once the, uh, recording is posted to review that and capture any topics or clarifications needed, uh, within, let's say within 1 week and we could circulate that to the distribution list here. 1607 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:19:50.434 --> 07:20:02.222 You know, I think next steps are to get proposals and not how you party proposals on the table based on our discussions today. Uh. 1608 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:20:04.116 --> 07:20:23.914 I think the whole, uh, iterative process is a good idea, you know, to make this, uh, workable, uh, in the future, based on learnings and to also make the, uh, you know, the requirements of the decision that can be implemented. 1609 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:20:24.908 --> 07:20:45.934 The decision did not did not have any caveats that it could not be refined. So, I think, uh, and this is pending energy division, uh, you know, talking with our legal department here. You know, I think that is a. 1610 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:20:46.056 --> 07:20:59.642 Possibility, uh, also, uh, you know, uh, discuss, uh, you know, bring up any items to us that you think should be able just to kind of workshop, uh, which is scheduled again for November, 29. 1611 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:21:01.624 --> 07:21:11.586 Uh, so having said that, you know, I'd like to open it up to any last minute. 1612 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:21:17.644 --> 07:21:21.456 You know, in the last minute comments before we wrapped up. 1613 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:21:33.574 --> 07:21:38.434 Okay, I do not hear anything. Uh, so again, um. 1614 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:21:41.914 --> 07:22:00.784 I'm trying to think what it would be the best way to get all the topics for workshop to, uh, does everybody think they should just email the, you know, everybody that's on the, uh, today's invite with ideas? Or do you guys think any division should be. 1615 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:22:00.812 --> 07:22:21.932 The, you know, gather topics like we did the 1st time around and then develop the agenda from there towards the latter because it seems easier instead of going back and forth, you know, through various emails. So. 1616 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:22:22.444 --> 07:22:23.824 Would everybody agreed with that? 1617 Sky Stanfield 07:22:25.774 --> 07:22:31.324 So the latter the idea that people are going to email you and Jose, you'll kind of coordinate and organize the agenda. 1618 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:22:32.164 --> 07:22:34.024 Yes, just like we did the 1st. 1619 Sky Stanfield 07:22:34.054 --> 07:22:42.784 Yeah, that makes sense to me. And I think speaking for Iraq, I think what we're going to have to digest obviously look at the recording and think about but I. 1620 Sky Stanfield 07:22:43.116 --> 07:23:04.234 What I would like to do between now and the next workshop but that might not be possible from a time standpoint is to reach out to the utilities. And I'd like it to be that. We don't have competing proposals. That we work together on 1 through this. But if it needs to be for the next workshop, we have kind of outlines of what we've been talking about that looks like from different. 1621 Sky Stanfield 07:23:04.266 --> 07:23:22.506 Perspective that would help us get there. I just think that that framing it end up making it a little bit more competitive than it needs to be. But I do think that that's what we need to do is start laying out what the basic framework is. So that everyone can decide what their, what their endpoints are on there. 1622 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:23:23.224 --> 07:23:25.294 Yeah, and collaboration, so it was. 1623 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:23:26.404 --> 07:23:31.714 You know, that's always been my, uh, uh, M. 1624 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:23:32.440 --> 07:23:33.274 That's the right term. 1625 Sky Stanfield 07:23:33.364 --> 07:23:35.224 Yeah, and I guess so. 1626 Sky Stanfield 07:23:35.464 --> 07:23:53.404 Question for you, Jose on this. This is only historically that's been hard for all of us. Is that I think since we're in the advice letter stage what we should be. What we need to understand is what, what are we trying to get to through this consensus? And it seems to me, like, what we'd need to get to is actual terrifying. 1627 Sky Stanfield 07:23:54.664 --> 07:24:01.324 Which is the big left obviously versus just a framework agreement? Is that right? 1628 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:24:02.224 --> 07:24:10.356 Yes, exactly. And right now, based on today's discussion, I had originally proposed here under next steps, advice, letter language. 1629 Sky Stanfield 07:24:10.506 --> 07:24:10.894 Yeah. 1630 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:24:10.956 --> 07:24:14.164 Uh, unless we can do a lot of. 1631 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:24:15.154 --> 07:24:35.884 Work in the next 3 weeks, uh, outside the workshop to arrive at a consensus proposal the advice, which is for the next workshop may be premature but, you know, the next workshop is in 3 weeks. So if sky, if there is. 1632 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:24:35.974 --> 07:24:39.244 It's a way that the utilities and the non. 1633 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:24:40.954 --> 07:25:00.994 Participants can work on and develop some sort of consensus proposal given that there may be some differences of opinions here and there and you could definitely separate those, you know, then we could arrive at the advice letter, you know, which, uh. 1634 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:25:01.292 --> 07:25:01.742 Sure. 1635 Sky Stanfield 07:25:02.732 --> 07:25:11.882 Yeah, and I don't think it's verbal. Correct me if I'm wrong with like, I don't think we actually had terra language in these advice letters that were actually. 1636 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:25:12.392 --> 07:25:15.722 No, no, this was more a proposal. 1637 Sky Stanfield 07:25:15.842 --> 07:25:17.132 Right, that's what I. 1638 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:25:17.162 --> 07:25:17.522 Yeah. 1639 Sky Stanfield 07:25:17.762 --> 07:25:19.052 I should know we processed. 1640 Sky Stanfield 07:25:22.562 --> 07:25:41.042 Okay, well, like I said, I, I will certainly commit to working, um, as much as we can on this, both reaching out to a whole diversity of parties to the extent they are willing to work with us, um, and try to help make this happen. I think this was a super good and pretty productive discussion for day 1 for my. 1641 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:25:41.042 --> 07:25:43.504 Yeah, but even without needing. 1642 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:25:43.744 --> 07:25:46.116 Language, you know, the language. 1643 Sky Stanfield 07:25:46.144 --> 07:26:04.624 Yeah, and we should start with a basic framework, because, as I know, like writing the actual term language is hard, but I actually think that's super important. So that we don't end up fighting about this. And by the way we have with the vice letters, and the last many that have come out of this decision, but I think 1st, we need to come up with a framework on what this looks like at all before we get. 1644 Sky Stanfield 07:26:04.720 --> 07:26:05.316 Yes, yeah. 1645 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:26:05.856 --> 07:26:24.876 I was just going to say, you know, uh, even though it may not be advice, language, the language itself in the advice letter needs to be something agreed upon cause. Otherwise, like, 1 word may just alter the entire thing. And, you know, the threats will come apart. 1646 Sky Stanfield 07:26:25.894 --> 07:26:27.304 All or any, for example. 1647 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:26:30.274 --> 07:26:33.154 Or more like, Shawn will could. 1648 Sky Stanfield 07:26:35.164 --> 07:26:35.464 Great. 1649 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:26:37.294 --> 07:26:44.014 So, okay, so I think everybody has their homework assignment, memorize the recording. 1650 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:26:46.894 --> 07:26:51.964 So all right, so any last minute comments or questions before we wrap up. 1651 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:26:57.756 --> 07:27:03.064 Okay, hearing none. Thank you very much. Um. 1652 Haga, Joseph 07:27:03.696 --> 07:27:06.964 I think Alex, uh, Maura had a a comment. 1653 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:27:07.596 --> 07:27:08.346 Oh, Alex. 1654 Alex Mwaura PG&E 07:27:09.664 --> 07:27:11.016 No, it was a mistake. Sorry? 1655 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:27:11.554 --> 07:27:15.124 Oh, okay. You were too excited to hit. 1656 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:27:15.246 --> 07:27:16.626 Exit you hit. 1657 Alex Mwaura PG&E 07:27:17.616 --> 07:27:20.286 I was trying to get the hands to club and I clicked on. 1658 Rottman, Mary 07:27:22.686 --> 07:27:24.936 Oh, we'll work that out for the next. 1659 Alex Mwaura PG&E 07:27:24.936 --> 07:27:25.116 No. 1660 Haga, Joseph 07:27:26.196 --> 07:27:27.606 That's in their reactions. 1661 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:27:32.704 --> 07:27:50.072 Thank you everybody for, uh, you know, and thank you that utilities for putting this last minute, uh, updated slide together. You know, I think it's, uh, really contributed to the, uh, discussions here. And I think it's a good. 1662 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:27:51.878 --> 07:28:12.994 Step forward to getting this all resolved. So okay, so again, everybody email energy division email me, uh, for topics and I will, uh, you know, set the agenda for workshop to email Mary for any workshop logistics. 1663 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:28:13.054 --> 07:28:34.114 Invites additions to the distribution list, uh, stuff like that um, or you could CC both of us and, you know, we'll divvy up the assignments based on our roles. And again, uh, you know, I do encourage, you know, um, collaboration between non non. I. 1664 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:28:34.204 --> 07:28:55.292 Parties and you'll use feel free to CC us in those emails. So we are aware of what's going on. If, you know, there is work that can be done in the next 3 week that, uh, you know, it enables some sort of collaboration and agreement to get to our end. 1665 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:28:55.330 --> 07:28:56.346 Faster. 1666 Aliaga-Caro, Jose 07:28:59.582 --> 07:29:06.902 So, uh, having said that we are actually ending on time despite, uh, the 1st topic, taking longer. 1667 Rottman, Mary 07:29:09.874 --> 07:29:10.924 Thank you everyone. 1668 Roger Salas SCE 07:29:12.992 --> 07:29:13.534 Hey, buddy. 1669 Sky Stanfield 07:29:14.492 --> 07:29:14.972 Is everyone. 1670 Regnier, Justin 07:29:16.142 --> 07:29:16.594 Except. 1671 Rottman, Mary 07:29:21.514 --> 07:29:21.814 Huh.