Common use of Subject of the Advice Letter Clause in Contracts

Subject of the Advice Letter. PG&E requests that the Commission issue a resolution no later than February 2012, approving the PPA and the QF Modifications in their entirety, all payments to be made by PG&E under the PPA, the Amended QF Agreement, and the Extended QF Agreement, and containing the findings required by the definition of CPUC Approval adopted by Decision (“D.”) 00-00-000 and D.08-04-009.1 This requested timing is needed for the project to begin and complete construction in order to qualify for the cash grant (“Treasury Grant”) in lieu of the Federal Investment Tax Credit (“ITC”) from the U.S. Department of the Treasury under Section 1603 of Division B of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“ARRA”). As discussed in more detail below and in the confidential appendices, the PPA has a high valuation, competitive contract price, high viability, and is a moderate portfolio fit. PG&E found from its least-cost, best-fit (“LCBF”) analysis that the PPA is reasonable, and the Project meets PG&E’s current renewable resource needs. The Project is located 1 As provided by D.00-00-000 and D.00-00-000, the Commission must approve the PPA and payments to be made there under, and find that the procurement will count toward PG&E’s RPS procurement obligations. Advice 3893-E - 3 - August 18, 2011 in a known wind resource area and is being developed by a viable counterparty. The Project will help PG&E achieve compliance with the RPS requirements at a competitive market price. Furthermore, the Project is in-state, located within PG&E’s service territory, and interconnected directly to the California Independent System Operator (“CAISO”) grid. The PPA is a result of bilateral negotiations. Consistent with the protocol used for review of RPS contracts resulting from the 2009 RPS Request for Offers (“RFO”), PG&E has included Confidential Appendices A through G and Public Appendix H, which demonstrate the reasonableness of the PPA. As discussed below, PG&E requests confidential treatment for the information contained in Appendices A through G.

Subject of the Advice Letter. The Commission’s approval of the Shiloh III PPA will authorize PG&E to accept deliveries of RPS-eligible energy from a California wind generator within PG&E’s service territory. The Project is located in the same area as other operational wind facilities, including enXco’s Xxxxxx XX project, which has been delivering renewable energy to PG&E since February 2009. The fact that enXco has already successfully developed a similar project in the same area supports the high viability of Shiloh III. The PPA resulted from bilateral negotiations. enXco first proposed the offer for the Project in September 2009, after the 2009 RPS Solicitation had ended in August 2009. Because the Project has an early commercial operation date, is competitive both in terms of price and market valuation, and is highly viable, PG&E chose to enter into bilateral negotiations, rather than waiting until the 2010 Solicitation during which time the Project could have been sold to another entity. By moving forward with the bilateral negotiation, Advice 3735-E - 2 - September 30, 2010 PG&E was able to secure a PPA for a highly viable project that provides for deliveries of RPS-eligible power starting in 2012. PG&E requests that the Commission issue a resolution no later than February 2012, April 2011 approving the Shiloh III PPA in its entirety and the QF Modifications in their entirety, all payments to be made by PG&E under the PPA, the Amended QF Agreement, and the Extended QF Agreement, PPA and containing the findings required by the definition of CPUC Approval adopted by Decision (“D.”) 00-00-000 and D.08D.00-0400-009.1 This requested timing is needed for the project to begin and complete construction in order to qualify for the cash grant (“Treasury Grant”) in lieu of the Federal Investment Tax Credit (“ITC”) from the U.S. Department of the Treasury under Section 1603 of Division B of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“ARRA”)000. As discussed in more further detail below and in the confidential appendices, the PPA has a high valuation, competitive contract price, high viability, and is a moderate portfolio fit. PG&E found from its “least-cost, best-fit fit” (“LCBF”) analysis indicates that the this PPA is reasonable, reasonable and meets the Project meets needs of PG&E’s current renewable resource needsportfolio. The As discussed above, the Project is located 1 As provided by D.00-00-000 and D.00-00-000, the Commission must approve the PPA and payments to be made there under, and find that the procurement will count toward within PG&E’s RPS procurement obligations. Advice 3893-E - 3 - August 18, 2011 service territory in a known wind resource area and is being developed by a viable counterparty. enXco has substantial experience developing and operating hundreds of megawatts of wind farms in North America. enXco has ordered REpower 2.05 MW turbines for the Project. The REpower turbines are manufactured by an established turbine manufacturer with thousands of installed and commercially operational turbines. Moreover, enXco has site control for the project, and the project is not contingent upon tax incentives. Finally, no significant transmission upgrades are necessary for this project. Not only is the project highly viable and competitively priced, but the Project also has an expected commercial online date of May 2012 and will help PG&E achieve compliance with deliver directly to the RPS requirements at CAISO controlled grid for 20 years. As a competitive market price. Furthermoreresult, the Project is in-state, located within will contribute to PG&E’s service territory20-percent-by-2010 RPS goals through flexible compliance, and interconnected directly to the California Independent System Operator (“CAISO”) grid. The PPA is a result of bilateral negotiationsas well as longer-term RPS goals. Consistent with the protocol used for review of RPS contracts resulting from the 2009 RPS Request for Offers (“RFO”)Solicitation, PG&E has included Confidential Appendices A through G and Public public Appendix H, which demonstrate provide further details demonstrating the reasonableness of the PPA. As discussed below, PG&E requests confidential treatment for the information contained in Appendices A through G.

Subject of the Advice Letter. The Commission’s approval of the Shiloh III PPA will authorize PG&E to accept deliveries of RPS-eligible energy from a California wind generator within PG&E’s service territory. The Project is located in the same area as other operational wind facilities, including enXco’s Xxxxxx XX project, which has been delivering renewable energy to PG&E since February 2009. The fact that enXco has already successfully developed a similar project in the same area supports the high viability of Shiloh III. The PPA resulted from bilateral negotiations. enXco first proposed the offer for the Project in September 2009, after the 2009 RPS Solicitation had ended in August 2009. Because the Project has an early commercial operation date, is competitive both in terms of price and market valuation, and is highly viable, PG&E chose to enter into bilateral negotiations, rather than waiting until the 2010 Solicitation during which time the Project could have been sold to another entity. By moving forward with the bilateral negotiation, PG&E was able to secure a PPA for a highly viable project that provides for deliveries of RPS-eligible power starting in 2012. PG&E requests that the Commission issue a resolution no later than February 2012, April 2011 approving the Shiloh III PPA in its entirety and the QF Modifications in their entirety, all payments to be made by PG&E under the PPA, the Amended QF Agreement, and the Extended QF Agreement, PPA and containing the findings required by the definition of CPUC Approval adopted by Decision (“D.”) 00-00-000 and D.08D.00-0400-009.1 This requested timing is needed for the project to begin and complete construction in order to qualify for the cash grant (“Treasury Grant”) in lieu of the Federal Investment Tax Credit (“ITC”) from the U.S. Department of the Treasury under Section 1603 of Division B of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“ARRA”)000. As discussed in more further detail below and in the confidential appendices, the PPA has a high valuation, competitive contract price, high viability, and is a moderate portfolio fit. PG&E found from its “least-cost, best-fit fit” (“LCBF”) analysis indicates that the this PPA is reasonable, reasonable and meets the Project meets needs of PG&E’s current renewable resource needsportfolio. The As discussed above, the Project is located 1 As provided by D.00-00-000 and D.00-00-000, the Commission must approve the PPA and payments to be made there under, and find that the procurement will count toward within PG&E’s RPS procurement obligations. Advice 3893-E - 3 - August 18, 2011 service territory in a known wind resource area and is being developed by a viable counterparty. enXco has substantial experience developing and operating hundreds of megawatts of wind farms in North America. enXco has ordered REpower 2.05 MW turbines for the Project. The REpower turbines are manufactured by an established turbine manufacturer with thousands of installed and commercially operational turbines. Moreover, enXco has site control for the project, and the project is not contingent upon tax incentives. Finally, no significant transmission upgrades are necessary for this project. Not only is the project highly viable and competitively priced, but the Project also has an expected commercial online date of May 2012 and will help PG&E achieve compliance with deliver directly to the RPS requirements at CAISO controlled grid for 20 years. As a competitive market price. Furthermoreresult, the Project is in-state, located within will contribute to PG&E’s service territory20-percent-by-2010 RPS goals through flexible compliance, and interconnected directly to the California Independent System Operator (“CAISO”) grid. The PPA is a result of bilateral negotiationsas well as longer-term RPS goals. Consistent with the protocol used for review of RPS contracts resulting from the 2009 RPS Request for Offers (“RFO”)Solicitation, PG&E has included Confidential Appendices A through G and Public public Appendix H, which demonstrate provide further details demonstrating the reasonableness of the PPA. As discussed below, PG&E requests confidential treatment for the information contained in Appendices A through G.