Agenda packet, first session — Glendale City Council, December 12, 2023 (part 1 of 4)

A G E N D A

GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
Meetings

are

broadcast

live

Glendale

TV,

viewable

Spectrum

Cable,

channel

and

AT&T

U-
verse,

channel

99. Meetings

are

also

streamed

live

high

definition

(HD)

the

City

webpage,
glendaleca.gov/live
,

YouTube.com/myglendale
,

and

Apple

TV,

Roku,

Amazon

Fire,

iOS

and
Android

devices

using

free

app

called

Cablecast

and

choosing

"Glendale

TV"

from

the

menu.

Meetings

are

also

archived

the

City

Website

for

viewing

anytime

glendaleca.gov/agendas
.

Call

(818)

548-4013

for

program

schedules.

For

public

comments

and

questions

during

the
meeting,

call

(818)

937-8100.

Public

comments

specific

agenda

item

will

taken

when

that
agenda

item

discussed.

you

have

any

question

about

matters

the

agenda,

requests

for
assistance, please contact the City Clerk at (818) 548-2090 during regular business hours.

PLEASE TURN OFF CELLULAR PHONES WHILE INSIDE THE MEETING LOCATION In

compliance

with

the

Americans

with

Disabilities

Act

(ADA)

1990,

auxiliary

hearing

aids,

sign
language

translation,

and

Braille

transcripts

are

available

upon

request.

Assisted

listening

devices
are

available

same-day

upon

request.

The

City

Clerk’

office

should

notified

72 hours

(three
business

days)

soon

practicable

for

requests

regarding

sign

language

translation

and
Braille

transcription

services.

All

documents

open

session

items

this

agenda

that

are
received

less

than

72 hours

prior

this

meeting,

and

are

public

records,

will

available

for

review
in the Office of the City Clerk, 613 E. Broadway, RM 110, Glendale, CA 91206.

Translation

services

are

provided

for

meetings

through

the

use

bilingual

staff

for

speakers

who
wish

utilize

the

service

available.

Speakers

should

state

their

request

contacting

the

City
Clerk’s

office

(818)

548-2090,

least

72 hours

prior

the

scheduled

meeting

soon

as
practicable.

Please

specify

the

language

for

which

you

require

translation.

The

exclusive

use

City
provided

interpreters

not

required

and

persons

are

welcome

use

their

own

interpreter

speak
in their native language.

DECEMBER 12, 2023

ROLL CALL

1. CLOSED SESSION
– 1:00 PM ( To Commence at 3:00 PM)

Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Paragraphs (d)(2) and (e)(1) of Government Code Section 54956.9: One potential case

1 TYPED 12/8/2023 9:19:02 AM
12 12 23
CC

Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Paragraphs (d)(2) and (e)(2) of Government Code Section 54956.9: One potential case
c.

Conference with Labor Negotiators. The City-designated negotiators attending the closed session are: Roubik Golanian, John Takhtalian, Michael J. Garcia, Gillian van Muyden, Paula Adams, Aymee Martin, Greg Fish, Jason Bradford and Laura Kalty.

The name of the employee organization is: Glendale Fire Fighters’ Association d.

2. REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA
– 6:00 PM
Roll Call
a.

Flag Salute: Mayor Dan Brotman
b.

Invocation: Dr. Suzie Abajian, City Clerk
c.

Report of the City Clerk, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the December 12, 2023 Regular Meeting of the Glendale City Council was Posted on December 7, 2023, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

3. PRESENTATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
a.

Agenda Preview for the Meetings of Tuesday, December 19, 2023 b.

Reappointment of Talin Shahbazian to the Planning Commission (Asatryan/Devine, 12/05/23)
c.

Reappointment of Stephen Ryfle to the Vector Control District (Brotman, 12/05/23)

4. CONSENT ITEMS
(Including Minutes)
The following are Routine and May be Acted Upon by One Motion. Any Member of Council or the Audience Requesting Separate Consideration May do so by Making Such Request Before Motion is Proposed.
a.

City Clerk, re: Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of December 5, 2023 b.

Community Services and Parks, re:

State of California, Department of Industrial
Relations, Division of Apprenticeship Standards, State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant in the amount of $1,408,000 from May 1, 2023, to June 30, 2025 to continue the expansion of Early Care & Education Registered Apprenticeship program

1. Motion to Approve a contract amendment and accept additional funds from the State of California, Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Apprenticeship Standards, State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant (SAEEI) in the amount of $1,408,000 from May 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025 to continue the expansion of Early Care & Education Registered Apprenticeship program for a grant total amount of $2,000,000, as approved and recommended by the Verdugo Workforce Development Board; Approve the additional award of SAEEI grant funds to the ECEPTS program, a project of The Tides Center, in the amount of $1,267,200 from May 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025, for a total contract amount of $1,800,000 as approved and recommended by the Verdugo Workforce Development Board; and Authorize the City Manager, or a

2 TYPED 12/8/2023 9:19:02 AM
12 12 23
CC

designee, to execute all agreements, certifications, and documents necessary to accept and implement the funding

2. Resolution of Appropriation to appropriate Division of Apprenticeship Standards, State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant (SAEEI) in the amount of $1,408,000
c.

Community Services and Parks, re: Amendment Twelve for FY 2023-2024 Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department, California Department of Aging (CDA), American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding allocation of $20,000 for Elderly Nutrition Program (ENP)

1. Motion to accept $20,000 in CDA ARPA funding from Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department for the FY 2023-2024 Elderly Nutrition Program; and authorize the City Manager or a designee to execute Amendment Twelve to the ENP202106 Subaward period July 2020 – June 2024 to accept and implement funding

2. Resolution of Appropriation to appropriate $20,000
d.

Public Works, re:

Award of Construction Contract for North Brand Boulevard Complete Streets Demonstration Project

1. Motion awarding a construction contract to Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC in the amount of $842,380, approving a 10 percent contract contingency in the amount of $84,238 and authorizing the City Manager or a designee to execute the contract

2. Resolution of appropriation in the amount of $926,618 for the North Brand Boulevard Complete Streets Demonstration Project
e.

Public Works, re:

Resolution to Accept the Volkswagen Mitigation Trust Fund grant for three battery-electric buses

1. Resolution authorizing the advancement of an application for Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust Funding for the replacement of Beeline buses and signing of certificates and assurances with respect to applications to the zero- emission transit, school and shuttle bus project
f.

Public Works, re:

Re-Advertising for Industrial Pump Maintenance and Repair Services

1. Resolution adopting Specification No. 3963R for Industrial Pump Maintenance and Repair Services and directing the City Clerk to advertise for bids

5. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS

6. COMMUNITY EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTS (3-Minutes)

7. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES

8. ACTION ITEMS
a.

Glendale Water and Power, re: 2024 Integrated Resource Plan

1. Resolution Adopting the 2024 Glendale Water and Power Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) in compliance with the requirements of California Senate Bill (SB) 350

9. HEARINGS

10. REPORTS - INFORMATION

11. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

3 TYPED 12/8/2023 9:19:02 AM
12 12 23
CC

12. DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS
a.

Mayor Brotman’s Request for a Report on a Coyote Management Plan (moved from 12/05/23)
b.

Mayor Brotman’s Request to Review the Board and Commission Nominating Panel Rotation Process

13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Discussion is Limited to Items NOT a Part of this Agenda. Each Speaker is Allowed 5 minutes.

Council May Question or Respond to The Speaker But There Will be no Debate or Decision.

The City Manager May Refer the Matter to the Appropriate Department for Investigation and Report.

14. NEW BUSINESS

15. ADJOURNMENT

4 TYPED 12/8/2023 9:19:02 AM
12 12 23
CC

5 of 839

6 of 839

7 of 839

8 of 839

9 of 839

1 4A

M I N U T E S

GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor Glendale, CA 91206
DECEMBER 5, 2023

ROLL CALL

1.CLOSED SESSION – 5:09 PM
a. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Paragraphs (d)(2) and (e)(1) of Government Code Section 54956.9: One potential case
City Attorney Mike Garcia indicated that action is not anticipated. Council recessed to closed session at 5:10 p.m.

2.REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA – 6:04 PM
Roll Call – All Present
a. Flag Salute: Mayor Dan Brotman
b. Invocation: Suzie Abajian, City Clerk
c. Report of the City Clerk, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the December 5, 2023 Regular Meeting of the Glendale City Council was Posted on November 30, 2023, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

3.PRESENTATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
a. Agenda Preview for the Meetings of Tuesday, December 12, 2023 Asst. City Manager John Takhtalian provided the preview. b. Appointment of Rima Gregorian Cameron to the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee (Brotman/Najarian, 11/07/23)
Vote as Follows
a.
c. Appointment of Jeffrey Head to the Historic Preservation Commission (Devine/Brotman, 11/28/23)
Vote as Follows
b.
d. Identification of Nominating Panel for Civil Service Commission (Asatryan/Brotman)
e. Identification of Nominating Panel for Civil Service Commission (Brotman/Devine) Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
10 of 839

2 4.CONSENT ITEMS (Including Minutes)
The following are Routine and May be Acted Upon by One Motion. Any Member of Council or the Audience Requesting Separate Consideration May do so by Making Such Request Before Motion is Proposed.
a. City Clerk, re: Minutes of the Special City Council and Regular City Council Meetings of November 28, 2023
Moved: Najarian Seconded: Devine
Vote as Follows
c.
b. Glendale Water and Power, re: Adoption of Plans and Specification for the Park Manor Slope Repair and Debris Mitigation Project

1. Resolution 23-186 adopting Specification No. 3972 and Plan No. 6979 for Park Manor Slope Repair and Debris Mitigation Project and directing the City Clerk to advertise for bids
Moved: Najarian Seconded: Devine
Vote as Follows
d.

5.CITY COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS
Mayor Brotman requested to review the Boards and Commission nominating panel rotation process. He attended the annual electric vehicle test-drive event and stated that this year, the city added electric bicycles to the test rides. Brotman conducted a site visit to look at an area which is adjacent to Chevy Chase Road in the canyon that’s been identified by the Arroyo Foothills Conservancy as a potential wildlife crossing location. Mayor Brotman renominated Stephen Ryfle to the Vector Control District.

Councilmembers attended several events including the Christmas Tree lighting in the City Hall Parcher Plaza and the Montrose Christmas Parade. Najarian asked everyone to be safe while driving, crossing the streets, and to be vigilant during the holidays. Devine wished that the Christmas spirit is felt all year long. Asatryan asked staff to make the tree lighting ceremony more inclusive of the diverse cultural traditions and religious holidays celebrated within the city. Brotman commented that all councilmembers rode eco-friendly surrey bikes for the Montrose Christmas Parade.

Councilmembers Asatryan and Devine renominated Talin Shahbazian to the Planning Commission. Asatryan asked staff to coordinate with AT&T to get more information on the Affordable Connectivity Program for low-income residents. Asatryan asked staff to hire temporary security for residential areas impacted by recent robberies. City Manager Roubik Golanian stated that the Glendale Police Department is working on a plan and will inform the public and council when it is finalized.

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
11 of 839

3 6.COMMUNITY EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTS (3-Minutes)

7.ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES

8.ACTION ITEMS
a. Police Department, re: Police Department Brand Standardization with procurement provided by Axon Enterprise Inc., hardware, and software upgrades to include In- Car Video systems, Body Worn Cameras, Drones, Interview room cameras and technology to support the Real Time Intelligence Center Presenting:

Sean Riley, Police Lt.

1. Resolution 23-187 adopting Axon Enterprise Inc.’s In-Car Video systems, Body Worn Cameras, Drones, Interview room cameras, storage, technology, licenses, hardware, and software as the City's standard for the Police Department and dispensing with competitive bidding authorizing the City Manager or designee to procure related hardware, software, parts, maintenance, and services
Moved: Devine Seconded: Kassakhian
Vote as Follows
e.

2. Resolution 23-188 of Appropriation
Moved: Devine Seconded: Kassakhian
Vote as Follows
f.
b. City Manager, re: Direction on the Formation of Human Relations Coalition Staff Comment:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager
Presenting:

Armineh Hoonanian, Principal Administrative Officer
Public Comment:

Araik Sinanian

1. Motion to Note and File Report

2. Motion Directing Staff
Direction was provided to staff and was unanimously agreed on.

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
12 of 839

4 c. City Attorney, re: Discussion of Potential Ballot Measures Amending City Charter Presenting:

Mike Garcia, City Attorney

1. Resolution Authorizing Placing on the Ballot Questions of Amending the Charter of the City of Glendale to Allow for Alternate Locations for Council Meetings, for the Council to Prescribe the Standards and Procedures for Awarding City Contracts, for Certain Urgency Ordinances for the Immediate Preservation of Public Health, Safety or Welfare to Be Introduced and Adopted at the Same Meeting, and to Make Other Miscellaneous Changes to the Charter; Directing City Attorney to Prepare Impartial Analysis

2. Motion Directing Staff Regarding Potential Charter Amendments

3. Resolution 23-190 Calling for Arguments for and Against the Ballot Measures Moved: Najarian Seconded: Devine
Vote as Follows
g.

Alternate Resolution 23-189 Authorizing Placing on the Ballot the Question of Amending the Charter of the City of Glendale to Allow for the Council to Prescribe the Standards and Procedures for Awarding City Contracts
Moved: Najarian Seconded: Devine
Vote as Follows
h.
d. Community Services and Parks, re: Dog Park Feasibility Study Staff Comment:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager
Presenting:

Onnig Bulanikian, Director of Community Services and Parks Zachary Mueting, RJM Design Group
Joseph Gonzalez, Park Planner
Public Comments:

Stephen Meek
Allan Durham
Michael Belzer
Joel Vanderspek
Holly Keenan
Carol Brusha
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
13 of 839

5 Jen Rosser
Allan Dish
Susan Wolfson
Patty Silversher
Zuzka Eggena
Hank Schwinger

1. Motion approving the draft Dog Park Feasibility Study report

2. Motion approving a location(s) for a new dog park(s) and directs CSP staff to request proposals from design consultants to prepare design alternatives and cost estimates for the approved dog park location(s) for subsequent Council consideration
Motion to direct staff to prioritize the Garfield location, sett-up a small and temporary dog park in Palmer Park, and while continuously looking for a possible location Moved: Kassakhian Seconded: Devine
Vote as Follows
i.

9.HEARINGS
a. Community Development, re: 1326 N. Maryland Avenue: Consideration of Glendale Register Nomination and Request for a Mills Act Historic Property Contract Hearing opened at 8:51 p.m. and closed at 9:08 p.m.

Presenting:

Jay Platt, Principal Planner
Public Comments:

Allan Durham
Allen Dish
Elizabeth Stasuc

1. Resolution 23-191 to designate the residential property at 1326 N. Maryland Avenue as a historic resource in the Glendale Register of Historic Resources, as the Wyman House, and authorize the City Manager to enter into a Mills Act Historical Property Contract with the property owner
Moved: Asatryan Seconded: Kassakhian
Vote as Follows
j.

2. Motion to deny the request of the property owner to designate the residential property at 1326 N. Maryland Avenue as a historic resource in the Glendale Register of Historic Resources
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
14 of 839

6 10.REPORTS – INFORMATION

11.WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

12.DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS
a. Councilmember Asatryan’s Request for a Report Regarding Childcare Services for City Employees
Moved: Asatryan Seconded: Kassakhian
Vote as Follows
k.
b. Councilmember Kassakhian’s Request to Explore Litigation Against Citibank for its Secret Practice of Rejecting Credit Card Applications Because Applicants Had Armenian Surnames
Moved: Kassakhian Seconded: Asatryan
Vote as Follows
l.
c. Councilmember Kassakhian’s Request re: Translation Services for Council meetings
Moved: Kassakhian Seconded: Asatryan
Item approved without objection.

Public Comments:

Ramella Eraghi
Allen Dish
d. Councilmember Najarian’s Request to Write a Letter to Jerusalem Leaders Regarding Recent Events in the Armenian Quarter of Jerusalem Moved: Najarian Seconded: Kassakhian
Item approved without objection.
e. Councilmember Kassakhian’s Request for a Report on Addressing Loopholes and Enforcement Issues Related to Short Term Rentals
f. Councilmember Kassakhian’s Request to Schedule a Discussion During the 2024- 25 Budget Process on Adding a State Misdemeanor Prosecution Unit to the City Attorney’s Office
Moved: Kassakhian Seconded: Najarian
Item approved without objection.

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
15 of 839

7 g. Councilmember Kassakhian’s Request for a Report on a Summary of the Agreements Governing the Americana at Brand
h. Mayor Brotman’s Request for a Report on a Coyote Management Plan Item is moved to next week’s agenda.

13.ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Discussion is Limited to Items NOT a Part of this Agenda. Each Speaker is Allowed 5 minutes. Council May Question or Respond to The Speaker But There Will be no Debate or Decision. The City Manager May Refer the Matter to the Appropriate Department for Investigation and Report.

Aram Alajajian
Meline Melconian
Diana Galoostian
Paul Karapetian
Vartan Gharpetian
Allan Durham
Vahe Muradyan
Levon Aroyan
Ramella Eraghi
Peter Hebert
Allen Dish
Mary Cruz Moreno
Maria Hernandez
Maria Moreno
Jen Rosser
Tina Kurtluyan
Alex Hernandez
Giselle Reynoso
Jordan Henry

14.NEW BUSINESS

15.ADJOURNMENT – 11:11 p.m.

Moved:Devine Seconded: Najarian
Mayor of the City of Glendale
City Clerk of the City of Glendale
16 of 839

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: State of California, Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Apprenticeship Standards, State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant in the amount of $1,408,000 from May 1, 2023, to June 30, 2025 to continue the expansion of Early Care & Education Registered Apprenticeship program

1. Approve a contract amendment and accept additional funds from the State of California, Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Apprenticeship Standards, State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant (SAEEI) in the amount of $1,408,000 from May 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025 to continue the expansion of Early Care & Education Registered Apprenticeship program for a grant total amount of $2,000,000, as approved and recommended by the Verdugo Workforce Development Board;

2. Approve the additional award of SAEEI grant funds to the ECEPTS program, a project of The Tides Center, in the amount of $1,267,200 from May 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025, for a total contract amount of $1,800,000 as approved and recommended by the Verdugo Workforce Development Board; and

3. Authorize the City Manager, or a designee, to execute all agreements, certifications, and documents necessary to accept and implement the funding.

4. Resolution of Appropriation to appropriate Division of Apprenticeship Standards, State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant (SAEEI) in the amount of $1,408,000.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for December 12, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The SAEEI Grant was awarded by the State of California Department of Industrial Relations Division of Apprenticeship Standards, to the VWDB, in partnership with Early Care & Education Pathways to Success (ECEPTS), a project of The Tides Center.

The VWDB oversees the administration of the project and manages the grant funds to ensure that all contract deliverables and performance goals are met. ECEPTS brings together partners, provides technical assistance, and assist partnerships in implementing 17 of 839

24b
4 8
0 5
Early Childhood Education (ECE) pre-apprenticeships and apprenticeships in communities throughout the State of California, including the Verdugo region. The contract amendment modifies the project start date from July 1, 2022 to May 1, 2023 and adds $1,408,000 to the initial award of $592,000, bringing the total award to the VWDB to $2,000,000. The ECEPTS contract shall be increased by $1,267,200 from the originally approved amount of $532,800 bringing their total contract not to exceed $1,800,000.

RECOMMENDATION
(1) Approve a contract amendment and accept additional funds from the State of California, Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Apprenticeship Standards, SAEEI Grant in the amount of $1,408,000 from May 1, 2023, to June 30, 2025 for a total grant amount of $2,000,000 to continue the expansion of Early Care & Education Registered Apprenticeship program, as approved and recommended by the VWDB;
(2) Approve the additional award of SAEEI grant funds to the ECEPTS program, a project of The Tides Center, in the amount of $1,267,000 for a total contract amount of $1,800,000 from May 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025, as approved and recommended by the Verdugo Workforce Development Board; and (3) Authorize the City Manager, or their designee, to execute all agreements, certifications, and documents necessary to accept and implement the funding. (4) Resolution of Appropriation to appropriate Division of Apprenticeship Standards, State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant (SAEEI) in the amount of $1,408,000.

ANALYSIS
On November 4, 2022, the Verdugo Workforce Development Board (VWDB) staff received notification from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards that the State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation (SAEEI) Grant was awarded to the VWDB, in partnership with Early Care & Education Pathways to Success (ECEPTS), a project of The Tides Center. ECEPTS is a non-profit organization administered by the Tides Center and dedicated to implementing apprenticeships to expand the number of Early Childhood Education (ECE) teachers and teacher aides which in turn, expand the childcare and ECE opportunities for children of our communities. While the SAEEI is a statewide project, the VWDB and Verdugo Jobs Center (VJC) staff have worked with ECEPTS over the past year to design apprenticeship programs that can be implemented in the Verdugo Region and partnered with this organization to serve as the administrative and passthrough entity for the SAEEI grant.

The VWDB is the planning and policy body for the Verdugo Consortium. The Verdugo Consortium is a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) comprised of the cities of Glendale, 18 of 839

34b
4 8
0 5
Burbank, and La Cañada Flintridge. The purpose of VWDB is to provide employment and training programs within the three cities and to allocate and award all Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) funds and general grant funds toward its goals.

Through the JPA, the City of Glendale is given responsibility for the administration of all Consortium activities, including acting as the recipient of WIOA and all other general grant funds received by the VWDB. As the administrative entity for the Verdugo Consortium, the City of Glendale and the Glendale City Council must approve all contracts and funding awards recommendations by the VWDB, which includes WIOA and non-WIOA funds.

As an experienced and effective grant administrator, VWDB was selected in November 2022 to assist in implementing this statewide project and administrating the grant funds.

The grant was awarded on July 1, 2022; however, DAS did not generate the sub- agreement until January 2023, and both DAS and ECEPTS turned to VWDB to administer the grant through the sub-agreement to ensure its success. The grant requires that administration of the funds be conducted by a local workforce board, such as the VWDB for the statewide project. With childcare and ECE being a primary need of Verdugo participants who are trying to reenter the workforce, ECE has become a priority for the VWDB and VJC.

On March 21, 2023, the City Council approved the acceptance of the initial grand award of $592,000 and the allocation to ECEPTS in the amount of $532,800, based on the recommendation and approval of the VWDB. In addition, the Council approved an allocation to College & Career Engagement, LLC. to support the VJC staff by overseeing partnerships, reviewing documentation of progress, reviewing the tracking and reporting of performance, coordinating projects and partnerships, and monitors training provider contracts (Exhibit 1 – City Council Meeting Motion, March 21, 2023). The total amount of both contracts will not exceed the amount of $542,800, the remaining grant funds of $49,200 will be used to cover Workforce staff costs.

On August 30, 2023, the VWDB approved the contract amendment to accept the additional $1,408,000 of SAEEI Grant funds for the period of May 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025 bringing the total award to VWDB of $2,000,000, and to allocate $1,267,200 to ECEPTS for a total allocation of $1,800,000 to continue the implementation of the ECE apprenticeship for the period of May 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025 (Exhibit 2 – VWDB Meeting Minutes, September 26, 2023).

The VWDB has been funded as the pass-through entity to oversee the administration of the project and manage the grant funds to ensure that all contract deliverables and performance goals are met. ECEPTS will bring together partners, provide technical assistance and assist partnerships in implementing ECE pre-apprenticeships and apprenticeships in communities throughout the State of California, including the Verdugo region. The VWDB contract with DAS will be increased from $592,000 to $2,000,000. The ECEPTS contract shall be increased from $532,800 to an amount not to exceed 19 of 839

44b
4 8
0 5
$1,800,000. No additional funds will be awarded to College & Career Engagement, LLC; therefore, the contract shall not exceed $10,000 based on prior approval. The total amount remaining for the VWDB to administer the project through June 30, 2025 is $190,000.

The contract amendment also changes the start date of the contract from July 1, 2022 to May 1, 2023 although the end date remains the same at June 30, 2025. DIR/DAS explained that the change in date is a result of an audit by the United States Department of Labor which determined that the DIR/DAS grant agreements’ performance period did not coincide with the sub-recipient's grant agreement execution date. To resolve this finding, the DIR/DAS was instructed to amend all sub-recipient's SAEEI grant agreements' performance period start dates to align with the first day of the month in which the contract was executed. The execution date of the VWDB’s SAEEI grant agreement is May 2, 2023 and therefore, the performance period is being revised to commence on May 1, 2023. (Exhibit 3 – Letter dated November 6, 2023 from the California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Apprenticeship Standards) Neither the VWDB nor the City of Glendale on behalf of the Verdugo Consortium incurred any costs prior to May 1, 2023. No costs were incurred until after the contract was executed which was on May 2, 2023; therefore, there is no fiscal impact as a result of the change in beginning date of the project.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The SAEEI partners will target English Language Learners, including immigrants, refugees and asylees, for this project. Parents that are low-income including those that receive public assistance, will also be a primary focus of this project. Partners will recruit participants from their own Headstart and ECE classes they operate. Parents must demonstrate they are low-income in order for their children to participate in Headstart and ECE; therefore, these parents comprise the target population for this project.

FISCAL IMPACT
The additional grant from the State of California, Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Apprenticeship Standards, State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant (SAEEI) total $1,408,000, which was not included as a part of the FY 2023-24 budget. Therefore, staff is requesting for an appropriation of $1,408,000 from grant revenue, of which $1,267,200 will be used for the ECEPTS program contract amendment. The appropriation request is outlined below:

Requesting Appropriation
Amount From (Account String) To (Account String) Funding Source
$140,800 GL: 32610-2060-CSP-
0020-P0000
PL: CSP00952AG
GL: 41100-2060-
CSP-0020-P0000-
PL: CSP00952AG
Workforce Fund
$1,267,200 GL: 32610-2060-CSP- GL: 43110-2060- Workforce Fund 20 of 839

54b
4 8
0 5
Requesting Appropriation
0020-P0000
PL: CSP00952AG
CSP-0020-P0000-
PL: CSP00952AG

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
Because no possibility exists that the activity in question (expanding ECE apprenticeships to create additional ECE teacher assistants) may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA review under the commonsense exemption set forth in 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3).

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Do not authorize to award the contracts as recommended herein. This would prevent services being provided under the SAEEI grant.

Alternative 2: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Onnig Bulanikian, Director of Community Services & Parks Prepared by:

Judith Velasco, Workforce Development Administrator
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Minutes of the meeting of the Verdugo Workforce Development Board, September 26, 2023.

Exhibit 2: Minutes of the meeting of the Glendale City Council, March 21, 2023.

Exhibit 3: Letter from the California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Apprenticeship Standards.
21 of 839

1 MOTION
Moved by Council Member ____________________________________________, seconded by Council Member _____________________________________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby:

1. Approve a contract amendment and accept additional funds from the State of California, Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Apprenticeship Standards, SAEEI Grant in the amount of $1,408,000 from May 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025 for a total grant amount of $2,000,000 to continue the expansion of Early Care & Education Registered Apprenticeship program, as approved and recommended by the VWDB;

2. Approve the additional award of SAEEI grant funds to the ECEPTS program, a project of The Tides Center, in the amount of $1,267,000 for a total contract amount of $1,800,000 from May 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025, as approved and recommended by the Verdugo Workforce Development Board;

3. Authorize the City Manager, or their designee, to execute all agreements, certifications, and documents necessary to accept and implement the funding; and

4. Resolution of Appropriation to appropriate Division of Apprenticeship Standards, State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant (SAEEI) in the amount of $1,408,000.
22 of 839

2 Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
23 of 839

24 of 839

25 of 839

MOTION
Moved by Council Member ___ A_s_a _try.,,_a_n __________ , seconded by Council Member Brotman , that the Council of
the City of Glendale hereby:

1. Accepts grant funds from the State of California, Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Apprenticeship Standards, State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant (SAEEI) in the amount of $592,000 from July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2025 to implement the expansion of Early Care & Education Registered Apprenticeship program;

2. Approves the award of SAEEI grant funds to the ECEPTS program, a project of The Tides Center, in the amount of $532,800 from July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2025 and to College & Career Engagement LLC, in the amount of $10,000 from July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2025, as approved and recommended by the Verdugo Workforce Development Board (VWDB); and

3. Authorizes the City Manager, or a designee, to execute all agreements, certifications, and documents necessary to accept and implement the funding Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Brotman, Devine, Najarian, Kassakhian
None
None
None
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF:

TUESDAY1 MARCH 211 2023.
4D1
26 of 839

VERDUGO WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD

FULL BOARD MEETING MINUTES
9/26/2023
9:00 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.

VWDB Full Board Minutes 9/26/2023 Page 1 of 2
MEMBERS PRESENT: Luiza Balyan, Jose Barba, Vicki Brannock, Onnig Bulanikian, Marisol Espinoza, Nick Hacopian, Mary
Hamzoian, Iskra Martinez, Steve Kaplan, Debbie Kukta,
Pamela Marcello, Stephanie O’Keefe, Veronica Romero,
Teresa Sánchez, Soua Vang, Terry Walker
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ara Aslanian, Greg Astorian, Alexis Carter, Lee Casady, Michael Ritterbrown, Julio Ruiz

COMMUNITY &

OTHER AGENCY
REPRESENTATIVES:

STAFF PRESENT: Judith Velasco, Leona Balalians, Diana Montecino, MaryAnn Pranke, Melissa Younesian
CALL TO ORDER: 9:01 am by Vice Chair Marisol Espinoza

I. Introductions
A. Vice Chair Marisol Espinoza welcomed the board and thanked them for joining the special meeting, which was being held to vote on the consent items.

II. Minutes of June 28, 2023 and August 30, 2023
A. Minutes presented and reviewed. MOTION: Pamela Marcello 2nd: Iskra Martinez Action: APPROVED

III. Action Items
A. Approval to accept an additional $1,408,000 of State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation Grant funds, to continue the implementation of the Expansion of Early Care & Education Registered Apprenticeship Program for a total grant amount of $2,000,000 to provide services from May 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025

B. Approval of contract amendment with Early Care & Education Pathways to Success, a project of The Tides Center, to add funding in an amount not to exceed $1,267,200 in State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity and Innovation Grant funds, for a total contract amount of $1,800,000 for their continued implementation of the statewide early childhood education apprenticeships from May 1 2023 to June 30, 2025

C. Approval of contract amendment with Biocom Institute California to add $7,000 for a total contract amount not to exceed $102,625 to administer conference expenses for BioTC Collaborative members to present the digital industry credential at workforce development and education conferences from November 1, 2022 to March 31, 2024

D. Approval to designate Glendale Youth Alliance as the board’s Youth Provider and to enter into contract with Glendale Youth Alliance for Fiscal Year 2023-2024 in an amount not to exceed $607,330 in Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act funding for Youth Services

E. Approval to accept funds from the Los Angeles County Department of Economic Development for Fiscal Year 2023-2024 in the amount of $530,700 for the Youth@Work program and to enter into contract with Glendale Youth Alliance, in an amount not to 27 of 839

VERDUGO WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD

FULL BOARD MEETING MINUTES
9/26/2023
9:00 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.

VWDB Full Board Minutes 9/26/2023 Page 2 of 2
exceed $482,937 for the Youth@Work program

F. Approval of Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Slate of Officers for the Verdugo Workforce Development Board

G. Approval of the Verdugo Workforce Development Board’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2023- 2024

H. Approval to accept an additional $5,494 in California Workforce Development Board funds for a total amount of $117,691 to implement the State Prison to Employment program and assist justice involved individuals in entering or reentering the workforce

I. Approval to award funds in the amount not to exceed $24,500 in California Adult Education Program funding to the Foundation for California Community Colleges to provide Work Experience payroll services

J. Approval to enter into contract with Biocom Institute California for the contract period of November 1, 2023 through October 31, 2025 in an amount not to exceed $186,579 in Regional Equity and Recovery Partnership Grant funds to provide work experience and stipends or incentives as required by the grant to eligible participants in Biotechnology or Biomanufacturing career pathway

MOTION FOR CONSENT ITEM A-J: Motion: Debbie Kukta 2nd: Soua Vang Abstained for items C and J: Vicki Brannock

IV. Other Business and Announcements
A. Steve Kaplan shared that in the late evening hours of Sunday, September 24, 2023, the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television and Writers Guild of America (WGA) reached a tentative agreement after an approximate 170-day writer’s strike protesting contract negotiations. The terms have not been released yet; however, relative posts on social media have indicated that this agreement is one of the most significant and substantial agreements drafted since the last writer’s strike, which took place in 2008. Some of the concerns that were brought to light with this strike were that of a financial nature due to recent cutbacks of writers’ rooms and the fear of these jobs being replaced by Artificial Intelligence (AI) Technology utilized by the industry.

During the Sunday evening negotiations, there were apparently very significant gains achieved in almost all aspects of the terms that were being negotiated.

B. The next scheduled Full Board meeting is for Wednesday, November 1st.

C. Board members interested in attending the Burbank Chamber of Commerce’s State of the City or the Glendale Youth Alliance’s 30th Anniversary Luncheon can email Diana Montecino.

V. Public Comments: None

VI. Adjournment: 9:11 am

28 of 839

STATE OF CALIFORNIA GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

DIVISION OF APPRENTICESHIP STANDARDS
1515 Clay Street, Suite 1902
Oakland, CA 94612
Tel: (415) 703-4920
Fax: (510) 286-1448
November 6, 2023
Verdugo Workforce Development
Board
Attn: Judith Velasco, MPA, MS
Executive Director
1255 South Central
Avenue
Glendale, CA 91204
Re: Re: Modification of Performance Period for the State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation (SAEEI) Expansion of Early Care Education Registered Grant Apprenticeship Program (ECEPTS) Verdugo Grant Agreement Amendment
Grant # SAEEI001-A1
Dear Ms. Velasco,
The purpose of this letter is to respond to your request for an explanation regarding the modification of your SAEEI grant agreement’s performance period to start on May 1, 2023, and not July 1, 2022. The California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), Division of Apprenticeship Standards (DAS), recently underwent a SAEEI grant monitoring review with the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment, and Training Administration (ETA) and that review was completed on March 30, 2023. Under the monitoring review, the ETA determined that the DIR/DAS grant agreements’ performance period did not coincide with the sub-recipient's grant agreement execution date. To resolve this finding, the DIR/DAS was instructed to amend all our sub-recipient's SAEEI grant agreements' performance period start dates to align with the first day of the month in which the contract was executed. The execution date of your SAEEI grant agreement is May 2, 2023 and therefore the performance period is being revised to commence on May 1, 2023.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Adele Burnes – Deputy Chief
Division of Apprenticeship Standards
29 of 839

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Amendment Twelve for FY 2023-2024 Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department, California Department of Aging (CDA), American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding allocation of $20,000 for Elderly Nutrition Program (ENP).

2. Resolution of Appropriation to appropriate $20,000 in CDA ARPA funding as follows:
a. C-1 Congregate Meals Program $10,000
b. C-2 Home Delivered Meals Program $10,000

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for December 12, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Community Services & Parks (CSP) Department is requesting Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department (AD) grant funds in amount of $20,000 from California Department of Aging (CDA) APRA for FY 2023-2024 to provide senior meals as follows:
•$10,000 C-1 Congregate Meals Program
•$10,000 C-2 Home Delivered Meals Program
Funding from CDA ARPA will allow the ENP program to purchase general supplies for the congregate meal program and to deliver an additional 2,105 meals in the home delivered meal program through June 30, 2024.

The City has a contract with caterer TRIO Community Meals, LLC Inc to provide meal services from December 1, 2022, through November 30, 2026. 30 of 839

24c
4 8
1 1

RECOMMENDATION
Accept and authorize the City Manager signee to execute Amendment Twelve to the ENP202106 Subaward period July 2020 – June 2024 to implement $20,000 in CDA ARPA funding from Los Angeles County AD for the FY 2023-2024 Elderly Nutrition Program; and appropriate the funds as follows:
a. C-1 Congregate Meals Program $10,000
b. C-2 Home Delivered Meals Program $10,000

ANALYSIS
CSP has been providing meal service to seniors 60 years and older in the Greater Glendale area since 1979 with grant funding administered from Los Angeles County AD through the federal Older Americans Act. The ENP provides an important opportunity for social contact and is the only meal many seniors receive in a day.

The ENP program is operated through the Senior Services Unit which provides comprehensive, long-term services that include: Congregate Meals (C-1), Home Delivered Meals (C-2), Emergency Meals, Telephone Reassurance and Supportive Services. The primary goal of these services is to assist the elderly in maintaining their independence and live in their own home.

The City’s ENP Congregate Meals program operates three congregate meal sites serving lunch seven days per week at the Adult Recreation Center, five days per week at Sparr Heights Community Center, and three days per week at Pacific Community Center. An average of 4,000 meals per month are served to over 400 unduplicated seniors.

The ENP Home Delivered Meals program is for homebound seniors requiring food delivery assistance due to physical and/or medical reasons and is substantiated by a doctor’s order before beginning program services. Program services include a weekly delivery of seven frozen meals including bread, fruit, milk, and dessert. The Emergency Meals Program is part of the Home Delivered Meals program and provides three days’ worth of shelf stable meals to unduplicated clients enrolled in the program. Telephone Reassurance Program is also a part of the Home Delivered Meals, which ensures seniors who are shut-in receive a weekly well-being phone call to check on their status.

The City contracts with TRIO Community Meals, LLC to provide congregate and home delivered meal catering services for the ENP program. The contract period is from December 1, 2022 through November 30, 2026. The cost per meal rate is as follows:
•Congregate Meals $4.56 per meal
•Home Delivered Meals $4.75 per meal
CSP was originally awarded an ENP grant Los Angeles County AD for baseline funding in FY 2023-24 through a noncompetitive process where the City entered into a subaward agreement for a one year term, commencing July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021, with 31 of 839

34c
4 8
1 1
three additional options to renew annually for an anticipated total subaward term of four years. Baseline funding for the program requires a 15% cash match. Amendment Twelve is part of year four of the four-year subaward term.

On November 8, 2023, LA County informed the City of additional grant funds from CDA ARPA in the amount of $20,000 to be used for congregate ($10,000) and home delivered meals ($10,000) program for FY2023-24 from July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024.

CDA ARPA is a reimbursable grant with a 12% cash match. The LA County AD reimbursement rate for ENP funding for meal service delivery for FY 2023-24 is as follows:

Meal Type Funding Source Reimbursement Rate Per Meal
Congregate Meals CDA ARPA $7.08
Home Delivered Meals CDA ARPA $7.39

The additional $20,000 will enable the City to purchase general supplies for the congregate meals program and deliver an additional 2,105 home delivered meals through June 30, 2024.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The Elderly Nutrition Program is part of the Senior Services Unit which operates out of the Adult Recreation Center and has two additional meal sites at Sparr Heights Community Center and Pacific Community Center. Program services are advertised quarterly in the CSP Leisure Guide, periodically in the CSP Newsletter, on the department website and outreach is conducted with other community agencies to ensure the public is aware of the available services.

FISCAL IMPACT
The $20,000 in additional grant funds will allow the City to serve additional meals and purchase general supplies for the ENP. The CDA ARPA grant award of $20,000 was not appropriated as a part of the FY 2023-2024 budget. Therefore, staff is requesting for an appropriation of $20,000 from grant revenue.

The appropriation request is outlined below:

Requesting Appropriation
Amount From (Account
String)
To (Account String) Funding Source
$10,000 31240-2700-CSP-0020-
P0000
CSP01120AG
45350-2700-CSP-0020-
P0000
CSP01120AG
Nutritional Meals Grant
Fund
$10,000 31240-2700-CSP-0020-
P0000
CSP01121AG
43110-2700-CSP-0020-
P0000
CSP01121AG
Nutritional Meals Grant
Fund
The 12% cash match is available in the current budget as part of the general fund transfer. 32 of 839

44c
4 8
1 1

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
Because no possibility exists that the activity in question (accepting grant funding) may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA review under the commonsense exemption set forth in 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3).

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
N/A

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Do not approve acceptance or appropriation of $20,000 in CDA APRA funding from Los Angeles County AD for FY2023-2024 ENP, which will result in fewer senior meals being served.

Alternative 2: The City Council may consider any alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Onnig Bulanikian, Director of Community Services & Parks Prepared by:

Aylin Isayan, Community Services Supervisor
Maggie Kavarian, Community Services Manager
Tereza Aleksanian, Deputy Director of Community Services & Parks Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
n/a
33 of 839

1 MOTION
Moved by Council Member ____________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the Council authorizes the acceptance of FY 2023-2024 California Department of Aging (CDA) American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding of $20,000 for Congregate Meals ($10,000) and Home Delivered Meals ($10,000) for the provision of Elderly Nutrition Program from County of Los Angeles Aging and Disabilities Department as set forth in the Report to Council dated December 12, 2023; and authorizes the City Manager or a designee to execute Amendment Twelve to the County of Los Angeles Aging and Disabilities Department Contract Subaward Number ENP202106 Subaward period July 2020 – June 2024 to accept and implement Los Angeles County AD funding.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
34 of 839

35 of 839

36 of 839

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Award of Construction Contract for North Brand Boulevard Complete Streets Demonstration Project
1) Motion awarding a construction contract to Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC in the amount of $842,380, approving a 10 percent contract contingency in the amount of $84,238 and authorizing the City Manager or a designee to execute the contract. 2) Resolution of appropriation in the amount of $926,618 for the North Brand Boulevard Complete Streets Demonstration Project.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Item
Approved for December 12, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The North Brand Boulevard Complete Streets Demonstration Project will improve pedestrian and bicycle safety and connectivity along the corridor and throughout the neighborhood. On October 25, 2023, two bids were received for the North Brand Boulevard Complete Street Demonstration Project, and after a thorough review, staff found Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC’s bid to be a responsive bid from a responsible bidder.

The intent of this item is for the City Council to award a construction contract to Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC. for $842,380 with a 10 percent contract contingency of $84,238.

Additionally, a resolution of appropriation is needed to transfer funds from an existing project in the Gas Tax Fund to fully fund this project. 37 of 839

24d
4 8
1 5

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the motion authorizing a construction contract with Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC for the North Brand Boulevard Complete Streets Demonstration Project in the amount of $842,380 plus a 10 percent contract contingency of $84,238 and approve the resolution of appropriation to transfer funds in the amount of $926,618 within the Gas Tax Fund to the North Brand Boulevard Complete Streets Demonstration Project.

ANALYSIS
A complete street is a street designed and maintained for all transportation users including such as drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists and public transportation users.

According to the Center of Disease Control and Prevention, active transportation infrastructure encourages people to be physically active improving health and quality of life.

The City of Glendale was awarded $500,000 to fund a quick-build project for the Brand Boulevard Complete Street Demonstration Project to improve active transportation along the corridor. The design of the project is administered and managed by SCAG through their consultant, KOA Corporation, with design input and direction from the City of Glendale. Once a quick-build design alternative was selected, the construction of the project was bid out and will be managed by the City of Glendale.

The project limits are Brand Boulevard between Glenoaks Boulevard and Mountain Street. The corridor is approximately a half-mile-long and the street contains two travel lanes in each direction with a center two-way left-turn lane and an on-street diagonal parking lane in each direction. There are signalized intersections at Glenoaks Boulevard, Dryden Street, and Stocker Street, as well as a marked crossing currently controlled by a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon system at Fairview Avenue. Land uses along the corridor consist of a mix of retail, industrial/office, place of worship, a school south of Stocker Street, and heavy multi-family residential north of Stocker Street. Most retail use include dedicated off‐street parking and the diagonal on-street parking is used during daytime hours south of Stocker Street and has high turnover, while the diagonal on- street parking north of Stocker Street is used all day for multi-family residential users.

The speed limit on Brand Boulevard is posted at 30 mph, and a recently completed Engineering and Traffic Survey confirmed the average 85th percentile speed for both directions at 36 mph.

On June 13, 2023, the City Council adopted the project plans and specification and authorized the city clerk to advertise the project for bids.

On August 23, 2023, the city received one bid from Sterndahl Enterprises LLC which was significantly higher than the engineer’s estimate and after consultation with the City Attorney’s office, the bid received was rejected. This decision was prompted by the presence of a sole bid which significantly exceeded the engineer's initial cost estimate.

Afterwards, plans and specification were updated to incorporate construction mobilization and traffic control within the respective construction items, converting the restoration 38 of 839

34d
4 8
1 5
phase of this project to an additive bid item to allow staff to move forward with the base bid item of completing the demonstration project, updating the construction cost to reflect current market pricing, and the project was re-advertised for bids.

On November 1, 2023, the city received two bids from contractors as follows:

1. Bedrock Group, Inc. $ 1,199,052

2. Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC $ 1,245,050
Upon review of the bid documents and after consultation with the City Attorney’s office, staff found Bedrock Group Inc.’s bid to be non-responsive in accordance with the bidding requirements as follows:
a. Contractor’s References – All Projects: Bidder fails to identify at least three projects that have been completed within the past 5 years as a prime contractor, a minimum qualification.

Upon review of the second lowest bidder, Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC’s bid documents, staff finds the bid of Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC to be the lowest responsive bid from a responsible bidder. After removal of certain additive optional bid items as allowed, the bid of Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC. in the amount of $842,380 is 16 percent below the engineer’s estimate of $1,000,000.

In addition, staff recommends a reserve for contingencies in the amount of $84,238 or 10 percent of the bid amount. The contingency is based on previous experience with projects, and this is in conformance with the nature of this project. This will also allow staff to account for any incidental work, unforeseen field conditions that could be encountered during construction, underground utilities issues that could arise because of the nature of the project, and any resulting field modifications that may be necessary.

The State of California Contractor’s State License Board website confirms that the license of Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC is current, active, and in good standing. Additionally, Staff contacted the references provided by Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC and found they had satisfactorily completed their projects. Also, Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC has previously completed and still has an active contract for annual on-call pavement striping and markings with the City of Glendale.

The construction of this project is anticipated to begin in February 2024 and is scheduled for completion by April 2024.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
In January of 2022, a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) were formed to help guide the project through the design and outreach phases. The TAC is comprised of a team of city professional staff from multiple departments who collect existing project data, evaluate the data, and suggest improvements for each quick-build alternative. The CAC is comprised of a team of 39 of 839

44d
4 8
1 5
community representatives from nearby corridor businesses and residents, the Incarnation Parish School, the Downtown Glendale Association, the Walk/Bike Glendale community group, the Community Development Department, and the Rossmoyne Neighborhood Association.

In addition to the advisory committee guidance and support, various outreach efforts, including community touchpoint events and engagement surveys were conducted to receive feedback directly from the community. The following is a summary of the outreach efforts to date:
•Bike Audit:
oSunday, May 1, 2022
oBiked the project corridor with the community on a weekend to determine feasibility and viability of a new active transportation mode in the project vicinity.
•Walk Audit:
oThursday, May 19, 2022
oWalked the project corridor on a busy weekday afternoon to share project details, identify areas of improvement, and solicit community feedback from active participants who routinely walk the project corridor. •Community Touchpoint No. 1:
oWednesday, May 25, 2022 through Tuesday, May 31, 2022
oCommunity response tags were left at the light poles at the northwest and northeast corner of Brand Avenue and Glenoaks Boulevard, and the northeast and southwest corner of Brand Avenue and Dryden Street to encourage residents to share their ideas on how to make the street safer to walk, bike, and drive.
•Transportation and Parking Commission
oMonday, June 27, 2022
oShared project details and alternatives with commission members and commission voted unanimously to support Alternative 1A. •In-Person Canvassing Touchpoint No. 2
oWednesday, July 27, 2022
oUsing a door-to-door strategy, project staff spoke directly to businesses and residents along the project corridor to inform them of the Quick Build project.

Project factsheets were distributed to residents and businesses in English, Spanish, and Armenian. A Spanish speaker communicated with residents who did not speak English.
•Dedicated Project Website
oOutreach on this project continues to occur through the dedicated website for the project that is hosted through the City of Glendale domain, as well 40 of 839

54d
4 8
1 5
as the consultant’s domain. The website page introduces the public to the project and to the project team, explains the scope of work and project locations, and provides the public with staff contact information for questions, discussion and/or input.
•City Council Meeting
oTuesday August 23, 2022
oShared project details and alternatives with Council members and Council voted unanimously to support Alternative 1A.

During the August 23, 2022, presentation, Council expressed concerns regarding the need for coordination with the Glendale Fire Department (GFD), accessibility of the project website, effectiveness and validity of the engagement surveys as an accurate representation of the community within the project vicinity, and the importance of effective and ongoing public outreach during the implementation phase.

In response to these concerns, staff collaborated with GFD staff, including the Fire Chief on formulation of the final design plans. The final design plans include adjustments to accommodate firetruck turn maneuvers into and out of the Fire Station #26 such as modifications to nearby intersections discouraging vehicles from blocking egress and ingress from the fire station and providing dedicated fire vehicle parking spots in front of the fire station.

Additionally, staff directed the consultant design team to make updates to the project website to make it more user-friendly. The website improvements ensure viewers can access the necessary information without being redirected to an external website.

Moreover, staff has observed an increase in feedback to the online survey following in- person canvasing at the project site and the City Council meeting. This demonstrates the importance of continued outreach efforts for the project's success.

Furthermore, to continue engaging the public effectively, additional outreach efforts will be conducted before, during, and after the implementation of the demonstration project.

Future outreach efforts are as follows:
•Community Touchpoint No. 3
oWill occur before official construction groundbreaking. oIntended to remind the community, businesses, and residents along the project corridor about the upcoming construction and reintroduce the project design elements and detail the construction process.
•Community Touchpoint No. 4
oOfficial ribbon-cutting event at the completion of construction. •Project Signage
oFour physical project signs will be installed at the northerly and southerly end of the project on Brand Boulevard.
41 of 839

64d
4 8
1 5
oThe project signs will be maintained during the construction of the project. oProject signs will include brief information about the quick build project and will include a QR code to direct public to the project website for more information and to provide feedback.

These additional community touchpoints and project signs will help facilitate effective communication, gather feedback, raise awareness about the quick build project, develop relationships, and drive continuous public feedback on the project during and after the implementation.

Public feedback is one of several factors that will determine if the project will eventually be made permanent. Quick-build projects extend the public comment period beyond implementation. While the design is implemented using “temporary” materials, such as colored paint, soft-hit bollards, or planter boxes, they may end up becoming permanent by replacing them with hardscapes, permanent irrigated landscaping, and more durable thermoplastic pavement striping. By effectively engaging with the community, the project team can create a positive impact and ensure the long-term success and acceptance of the quick build project and potential transition to a permanent improvement. Since the measures are temporary, they are designed to be removed, changed, or modified in response to community feedback.

FISCAL IMPACT
The construction of North Brand Boulevard Complete Street Demonstration Project will cost $842,380 with a 10 percent contract contingency of $84,238, for a total project cost of $926,618, which was not included as a part of the FY 2023-24 approved budget.

Therefore, staff is requesting for an appropriation of $926,618 from shifting of appropriation from another project within the State Gas Tax Fund. The appropriation request is outlined below:

Requesting Appropriation
Amount From (Account String) To (Account String) Funding Source $926,618
GL: 52100-4020-PWD-
0020-P0000
PL: PWD01052AN
GL: 52100-4020-PWD-
0020-P0000
PL: PWD01118AN
State Gas Tax
Fund

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The Project is categorically exempt from environmental review because of CEQA Guidelines §§ 15301.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Do not approve the motion authorizing a construction contract and resolution of appropriation for the North Brand Boulevard Complete 42 of 839

74d
4 8
1 5
Streets Demonstration Project. Doing so, however, will not improve pedestrian and bicycle safety along the corridor and connectivity throughout the neighborhood.

Alternative 2: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Yazdan T. Emrani, P.E., Director of Public Works
Prepared by:

Saumil M. Mody, Project Manager
Armen Avazian, P.E., Principal Civil Engineer
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Project Location Map for North Brand Boulevard Complete Streets Demonstration Project
43 of 839

4d
MOTION
Moved by Council Member , seconded
by Council Member , that the Council of the City of
Glendale hereby:

1. Authorizes the City Manager, or a designee, to execute a construction contract – subject to approval by the City Attorney – with Sterndahl Enterprises, LLC, for the North Brand Boulevard Complete Streets Demonstration Project, Specification No. 3942R, for the amount of $842,380.

2. Authorizes a 10 percent reserve for contingency, equal to $84,238.

Votes as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

City Clerk
44 of 839

45 of 839

N CAMPBELL ST

DWIGHT DR

CUMBERLAND RD

E DRYDEN ST

N CAMPBELL ST N ISABEL STN HOWARD STN LOUISE STN CENTRAL AV

SHERMAN LN

LORAINE ST

E FAIRVIEW AV

VIOLA AV

DOROTHY DR

N COLUMBUS AV

MERRIMAN PL

PALM DR

PARKWOOD LN

N COLUMBUS AV

W DRYDEN ST N GENEVA ST

PIONEER DR

MAURITA PL

MELWOOD DR

HARRINGTON RD

BOHLIG RD

HOWARD STROSS ST

CAVANAGH RD

N JACKSON ST

MOUNTAIN ST

E STOCKER ST

N EVERETT ST

N HOWARD ST

N JACKSON STN ISABEL ST

MONTEREY RDPACIFIC AVE

JACKSON PL

GOODE AV

SANCHEZ DR

MARYLAND PL

ARDEN AVE

COLUMBUS AV

PARKWOOD DR

KENNETH RD

MERRIMAN PL

CEDAR HILL RD

DARRELL DR

HAZBETH LN

VALLEY VIEW RD

SPENCER ST

MOUNTAIN ST

N CENTRAL AV

DWIGHT DR

LOUISE TER

N BRAND BLVD

N MARYLAND AV

N LOUISE ST

N CAMPBELL ST

RANDOLPH ST

LORAINE ST

W STOCKER ST

MELROSE AV

W FAIRVIEW AV

CAMERON PL

SAN RAFAEL AV

GLENOAKS BLVD

ARDEN AVE

BURCHETT ST

N MARYLAND AV
CA-134 (VENTURA FWY)

FREEWAY

PROJECT LIMITS

NORTH BRAND BOULEVARD COMPLETE STREETS

DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
EXHIBIT 1: PROJECT LOCATION MAP

NOT TO SCALE

PRIVATE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
FIRE STATION 26
46 of 839

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Resolution to Accept the Volkswagen Mitigation Trust Fund grant for three battery-electric buses
1) Resolution authorizing the advancement of an application for Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust Funding for the replacement of Beeline buses and signing of certificates and assurances with respect to applications to the zero- emission transit, school and shuttle bus project.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent
Approved for December 12, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Glendale City Council previously approved the purchase of five battery- electric buses. Over the past year, bus manufacturers applied to the contracting agencies and received a price increase due to supply chain cost increases. The grant funds secured and appropriated to purchase the battery-electric buses are insufficient to purchase the battery-electric buses. Staff applied for Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust funds in the amount of $648,000 and are tentatively awarded the funding pending the passage of the attached resolution. The added funds will offset a portion of the price increase with the other portion from another state grant. 47 of 839

24e
4 8
2 0

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the resolution that allows the advancement of the application for the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust funds, sign the required certifications and assurances, and administer funds, if awarded.

ANALYSIS
The Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust (VEMT) provides $423 million for California to mitigate the excess nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions caused by Volkswagen's (VW) use of illegal emissions testing defeat devices in certain VW diesel vehicles. The VEMT is a component of partial settlements with VW and provides funding opportunities for specified eligible actions that focus mostly on "scrap and replace" projects for the heavy-duty sector, including on-road freight trucks, transit and shuttle buses, school buses, forklifts, and port cargo handling equipment, commercial marine vessels, and freight switcher locomotives.

As required, California developed a Beneficiary Mitigation Plan (Plan) through an extensive public process. The Plan was approved in May 2018, and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) reported it to the Trustee, Wilmington Trust, N.A., on June 28, 2018. Implementing California's Beneficiary Mitigation Plan will fully mitigate the excess NOx and additionally commits to long-term air quality and climate goals by investing in zero-emission technologies.

CARB selected the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) to administer the mitigation funding and solicit applications. The Zero-Emission Transit, School, and Shuttle Bus Project provide funding for new zero-emission replacement buses. The program guidelines allow up to $216,000 per battery-electric bus replacement. The City is requesting funding for three replacement buses for a total of $648,000 in VEMT grant funds in the preliminary application.

As part of the VW Settlement fund application process, the City Council must approve the attached resolution to advance the submitted application. The resolution gives authority to the City Manager or his designee to sign the required assurances, grant agreement, and receive the grant funding.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The State of California agreed to the VW Settlement program that included input from the Governor and state legislature.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report. After the grant agreement is finalized, staff will return to the City Council with a request to appropriate the grant funds described in this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This item is considered a ministerial activity and therefore not subject to CEQA/NEPA review.
48 of 839

34e
4 8
2 0

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
Not applicable

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Do not approve the Resolution authorizing the execution of the necessary agreements, and other documents required to accept the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust grant funds. Doing so, however will result in forgoing grant funds to mitigate the price increase in battery-electric buses.

2. The City may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Yazdan T. Emrani, P.E., Director of Public Works
Prepared by:

Martha D’Andrea, Transit Manager
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
N/A
49 of 839

RESOLUTION NO. ___

AUTHORIZING THE ADVANCEMENT OF AN APPLICATION FOR VOLKSWAGEN

ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION TRUST FUNDING FOR REPLACEMENT BEELINE

VEHICLES AND SIGNING OF CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES WITH

RESPECT TO APPLICATIONS TO THE ZERO-EMISSION TRANSIT, SCHOOL, AND

SHUTTLE BUS PROJECT
WHEREAS, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and Project Administrator, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), are making funds available through the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust Fund for the Zero Emission Transit, School, and Shuttle Bus Project through a competitive process; and WHEREAS, several Local, State, and Federal programs allow public transportation providers to apply for administration, capital, and operation assistance programs or grants; and
WHEREAS, the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust Fund is a state program allowing the City of Glendale to apply for capital funding for the purchase of transit buses that replace existing vehicles with battery-electric powered vehicles; and WHEREAS, the City of Glendale wishes to receive grant funds through the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust Fund's Zero-Emission Transit, School and Shuttle Bus Project for the purchase of battery-electric buses; and WHEREAS, the City of Glendale must designate an authorized employee by resolution, as the "Authorized Individual" to make the application and administer the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust Funds.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Glendale City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager, or his designee, to advance an application, sign required certifications and assurances, and to administer the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust funds with respect to applications for Local, State, and Federal programs, projects, or grants on behalf of the City of Glendale. The City Council further authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to execute any documents and agreements necessary for the receipt of the VEMT funds.

Adopted this _____ day of ____________, 2023.
____________________________
Mayor, City of Glendale
ATTEST:
__________________________
City Clerk
50 of 839

24e
4 7
0 4

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )

CITY OF GLENDALE )
I, Suzie Abajian Ph.D., City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. _____________ was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the _____ day of _________________, 2023, the same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain: ___________________________
City Clerk
51 of 839

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Re-Advertising for Industrial Pump Maintenance and Repair Services 1) Resolution adopting Specification No. 3963R for Industrial Pump Maintenance and Repair Services and directing the City Clerk to advertise for bids.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for December 12, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Public Works Department did not receive any bids in its first solicitation for Industrial Pump Maintenance and Repair Services. The city possesses various large industrial pumps that are integral to the city’s sewer, stormwater, and building systems and must be appropriately maintained. Specialized equipment, training and expertise are required to properly diagnose, maintain, and repair this vital infrastructure. The intent of this item is for the City Council to approve a resolution adopting specifications for Industrial Pump Maintenance and Repair Services.
52 of 839

24f
4 8
4 1

RECOMMENDATION
Approve a resolution adopting Specification 3963R, providing for Industrial Pump Maintenance and Repairs Services, and directing the City Clerk to advertise for bids.

ANALYSIS
The Public Works Department is responsible for the operation, maintenance, and repair of all city sewer and storm drain systems. These systems include lift- pumps, stormwater pumps, and sewage ejector pumps. Industrial pumps range from 0.5 to 33.5 horsepower and require specialized equipment and training to ensure the proper care. Historically, the Public Works Department has provided these services via a purchase order contract shared by the Maintenance Services Division for sewer and storm drain pump work and the Facilities Management Division for work at city buildings. However, the city has a departmental annual cap of $50,000 on maintenance of public works purchase orders that the projected cost of these services now exceeds.

Due to the rising cost of labor and materials it is no longer feasible to manage the needed maintenance and repairs of the city’s pumps with an annual purchase order with a $50,000 maximum limit. Staff has recently deferred some repair and replacement work to keep annual costs under the limit; however, to meet the ongoing preventive maintenance schedule and to ensure the ongoing reliability of these systems additional annual contract capacity is required.

The Public Works Department responsibilities are commonly addressed with a strategic combination of in-house staff and contracted services. This strategy allows for sufficient and available resources to address regular assignments, specialty services, and emergency services. To best maintain the integrity of the city's industrial pumps and address tenant and public needs, it is necessary for the Public Works Department to always have sufficient resources available to address all types of infrastructure related issues. To provide safe and reliable services, it is essential for the Public Works Department to maintain available resources for preventive maintenance and repairs to all serviceable assets.

Specification 3963R is requesting 5-years of maintenance and repairs services for industrial pumps. Staff estimates the annual cost of these services to be $100,000.

On October 3, 2023, the City Clerk advertised the specifications and the Public Works Department directly contacted six known vendors that provide the services but did not receive any bids by the October 25, 2023 deadline. Staff contacted the vendors that initially expressed interest and they stated they either did not have enough time to assemble a bid, they were too busy at the time of bid, or they had staffing transitions that prevented them from submitting a timely bid.

However, most prospective bidders expressed interest in being afforded another opportunity to submit a bid. Based on these conversations with prospective 53 of 839

34f
4 8
4 1
bidders, staff expects to receive 2-3 bids if the specifications are re-advertised.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Building maintenance and repair services contracts will augment Public Works maintenance staff services to increase the reliability and conditions of all city facilities.

By combining contractors’ access to sophisticated tools and training with staff’s onsite experience and availability, Public Works can keep city systems in a safe and reliable state. This makes the entire city safer all for residents and visitors.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this request at this time. Staff will return to Council to award the contract.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This item includes routine maintenance and repairs activities and therefore, not subject to CEQA review.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Continue to provide pump maintenance services within annual purchase order limits thereby deferring some needed maintenance and repairs; this would likely decrease reliability of these systems.

Alternative 2: Provide training, equipment, staffing, and associated budget to provide these services in-house; this would likely increase the cost of services provided.

Alternative 3: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Yazdan T. Emrani, P.E., Director of Public Works
Prepared by:

Kevin C. Todd, Asst. Director of Public Works
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager
54 of 839

44f
4 8
4 1

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
None.
55 of 839

4f
RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

ADOPTING THE SPECIFICATION FOR INDUSTRIAL PUMP MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES; AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE:

SECTION 1.The Specification No. 3963R is on file in the City Clerk’s office for the Industrial Pump Maintenance and Repair Services including the various documents incorporated therein, are hereby approved, adopted, and designated SECTION 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to advertise for bids for the work, equipment and materials described in this Specification adopted by this Resolution.

Adopted this _____ day of ____________, 2023.
____________________________
Mayor, City of Glendale
ATTEST:
__________________________
City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )

CITY OF GLENDALE )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. _____________ was Adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the _____ day of _________________, 2023, the same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
_________________________
City Clerk
56 of 839

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: 2024 Integrated Resource Plan.
1) Resolution Adopting the 2024 Glendale Water and Power Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) in compliance with the requirements of California Senate Bill (SB) 350.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for December 12, 2023 Calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) are planning documents required to be developed and submitted to the California Energy Commission every five years pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 350. It is also a critical component of Glendale Water and Power’s strategy to meet future energy needs over the next 20-year horizon.

This report to City Council outlines the comprehensive preparation conducted by GWP to draft the utility’s 2024 Integrated Resource Plan, highlighting the scenarios modeled and their corresponding results. There were six scenarios studied in the IRP, as follows:

Scenario 1: CA Policy – Meets the SB 100 target of 60% RPS by 2030 and 100% zero- carbon resources by 2045, including SB 1020 interim targets of 90% by 2035, and 95% by 2040.

Scenario 2: Zero-Carbon Emissions by 2035: Achieves the City Council’s 100% clean energy goal by 2035.

Scenario 3: Clean by 2045 with REC Purchases for Offsets: Meets RPS and clean energy requirements partially with purchased renewable energy credits (RECs). This scenario is the same as Scenario 1, but with less renewable generation. The lower renewable generation is offset with REC purchases to meet the California mandates.

Scenario 4: High local resources + accelerated electrification by 2035. Focuses on local resources (both customer-sited and utility-scale), while achieving City Council’s clean energy goals (i.e., 100% by 2035, 10% of customers with solar by 2027, reach code, 100 MW of DERs).
57 of 839

2 4
5 4
6 Scenario 5: Moderate local resources + long-duration energy storage by 2042. Achieves 90% clean energy by 2035 and 100% by 2042. Will take a “middle path” on local resource assumptions, assuming higher potential for utility-scale and customer-sited resources than GWP’s baseline, but lower than Scenario 3. This scenario also models a long-duration energy storage (LDES) project built in Glendale during the IRP period.

Scenario 6: Moderate local resources by 2040. Achieves 90% clean energy by 2035 and 100% by 2040. This scenario takes more moderate assumptions on local resource potential compared to Scenario 1 and Scenario 4.

The report also emphasizes GWP’s preferred pathway (Scenario 1: CA Policy) for achieving goals related to system resiliency, increased renewable resource integration, and emission reduction. The proposed approach focuses on balancing reliability, affordability, and environmental sustainability, ensuring a strategic and viable trajectory for the utility’s future energy initiatives.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the GWP 2024 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) and authorize the submission of the IRP report, including potential minor revisions and supporting documents to the California Energy Commission pursuant to the requirements under Senate Bill (SB) 350 before January 1, 2024. The 2024 IRP is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

BACKGROUND
The Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) have been the primary driver for reducing emissions by requiring utilities to increase the use of renewable energy to supply electricity needs. The Clean Energy Act of 2018 (SB 100) requires that 60% of the utility’s retail sales be supplied from renewable resources by 2030. The bill also sets a 100% clean energy electricity goal and establishes a new target to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The passage of SB 1020 in 2022 revises the state policy and adds interim targets of 90% by 2035, and 95% by 2040.

SB 350 requires the governing body of a Publicly Owned Utility (POU) with an annual electrical average load exceeding 700 GWh, to adopt an IRP and provide updates at least once every five years to assist the utility in achieving specified planning goals. SB 350 requirements are further defined in the California Energy Commission’s (CEC) POU IRP Submission and Review Guidelines and prescribe the format and content of the IRP for entities within CEC’s jurisdiction.

In December 2018, the City Council adopted through Resolution 18-221 an interim IRP to meet the regulation’s deadline while the Clean Energy RFP initiative was in progress, with the instruction to update the said IRP in 2019 when the council provides direction on Grayson Repowering and the Clean Energy RFP. In addition, council established the following schedule for updating the IRP:

1. Once every 5 years from December 31, 2018

2. Next IRP update shall be completed no later than January 1, 2024 58 of 839

3 4
5 4
6 3. At any time at the discretion of the City Council or the General Manager of GWP where GWP expects a major change in the portfolio, market conditions, state/federal policies, and/or when new information is discovered that changes or warrants a change in the direction of the IRP strategy.

As directed, the revised IRP which included a local build-out capacity of 93 MW internal combustion engine (ICE) units, 75 MW battery energy storage system (BESS), and 50 MW of distributed energy resources (DER) was filed with the CEC for review in 2019, and determined to be complete and consistent with the requirements of the code by the Energy Commission Executive Director.

The planned build-out of resources outlined in the 2019 IRP encountered setbacks as several key elements failed to materialize. The original staff recommended ICE capacity was reduced by Council direction from 93 MW to approximately 56 MW.

Additionally, the proposed virtual power plant was reduced by half under Council direction due to the original significant cost of the project and was eventually cancelled by the vendor. Anticipated gains in demand response and energy efficiency have not been attained due to low customer participation.

GWP will submit the next IRP update by January 1, 2024, as scheduled. To assist in the development of the 2024 IRP, GWP engaged Ascend Analytics for modeling, with Strategen Consulting as a subcontractor to guide a comprehensive stakeholder engagement effort.

ANALYSIS
GWP has demonstrated unwavering dedication to clean energy, consistently surpassing ambitious targets and achieving remarkable milestones. Our commitment to sustainability has been at the forefront, ensuring a delicate balance between reliability, affordability, and environmental responsibility. The chart below depicts GWP’s persistent clean energy progress throughout the past decade.
59 of 839

4 4
5 4
6 The 2024 IRP considers all the requirements and criteria set forth in SB 350, while considering the increased RPS and clean energy targets under SB 100 and added interim goals in SB 1020.

Load Forecast and Contingency Requirements
The IRP used the CEC Final 2022 IEPR Update, published on February 28, 2023, that included the California Energy Demand Update (CEDU) 2022 report for the mid-demand AAEE energy as a baseline in the modeling process. With Glendale specific load modifiers, it was calculated that by 2035, GWP’s peak demand will reach 416 MW and, on a N-1-1 contingency situation where PDCI and one line of the STS are derated to zero, there would be a shortfall of approximately 40 MW of capacity, as shown below in Table 1:

Available Capacity (MW)
60 of 839

5 4
5 4
6 N-1-1 Resource Contribution MW
Southwest AC Intertie (without the STS line) 113
Grayson Unit 9 48
Magnolia 35
Internal Combustion Engines 54
Battery Energy Storage System 75
Scholl Canyon 8
Eland Solar and Storage 25
City Solar 10
Demand Response 8
Total 376
Peak Load Forecast 416
Capacity Shortfall 40
Table 1
Modeling Methodology, Assumptions, and Results
The fundamental purpose of resource planning is to ensure adequate capacity to generate energy for current and forecasted demand while maintaining reliability and addressing competitive, stable rates in compliance with state regulatory requirements.

Ascend used three models to evaluate each of the six scenarios, specifically:

4.Resource Adequacy Model – to test whether energy flows regardless of the situation such as during very hot or cold days.

5.Capacity Expansion Model – to determine the optimal mix of resources to meet GWP’s energy needs, and to determine the amount of those resources that will be renewable and zero carbon.

6.Production Cost Model - to test the overall cost of the modeled portfolio.

Across all scenarios, the considered candidate resources for incremental buildout were limited only to non-fossil, renewable, and clean energy resources that GWP could realistically procure. This includes wind, solar, BESS, geothermal, green hydrogen, and nuclear small modular reactors.

Table 2 below shows the capacity by resource type in 2035 and 2045 for all scenarios.

Scenarios 1 through 3 assume projected growth in customer-sited resources, such as behind-the-meter solar and demand response, aligned with historical data trends.

Scenarios 4 through 6 assume a more amplified projected growth in these resources which would help offset some of the resource needs from utility-scale resources. 61 of 839

6 4
5 4
6 Capacity in 2035 Capacity in 2045
Scenarios
Resource 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Wind 50 100 50 80 80 80 50 100 50 80 90 90
Solar PV 55 55 55 75 55 55 65 75 65 75 65 65
BTM Solar 38 38 38 98 48 48 48 48 48 100 63 63
Biomass 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 6 6
Hydro 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Natural Gas 140 0 140 0 140 140 140 0 140 0 0 0
Contract 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
Nuclear 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Geothermal 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66
Hydrogen 33 123 33 123 33 33 33 168 33 168 168 168
Storage 180 220 180 240 235 240 190 250 190 250 245 245 Demand Response 7 7 7 15 10 10 8 8 8 24 14 14
Table 2
In scenarios 1 and 3, the natural gas units are retained throughout the planning horizon.

Magnolia is assumed to be substituted with cleaner alternative(s) in scenario 4 by 2038.

To address reliability and system resiliency in scenarios 2,4,5 and 6, the natural gas units transition to green hydrogen as a fuel source.

Table 3 below shows the customer-sited and local utility-owned resource potential values for each scenario assumed in the model. The base resources in Scenarios 1 through 3 are identical.
62 of 839

7 4
5 4
6 Resource Scenarios 1–3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Customer-Sited Resource Potential
Distributed Energy
Resources 50 MW by 2045 100 MW by 2035 75 MW by 2042 75 MW by 2040 Energy Efficiency

1.8% of retail sales through
2031

0.9% of retail sales from
2032–2045

2.7% of retail sales per year
for next 10 years

1.35% of retail sales from
2032–2045

1.8% of retail sales through
2031

0.9% of retail sales from
2032–2045

1.8% of retail sales through
2031

0.9% of retail sales from
2032–2045
Demand Response
Historical growth trends:

6.7 MW of demand
reduced by end of 2028
and 7 MW by end of 2033
1% increase after 2033
10 MW of demand
reduced by end of 2027
5% increase after 2027
8 MW of demand reduced
by end of 2027
3% increase after 2027
8 MW of demand reduced
by end of 2027
3% increase after 2027
Customer Solar
Doubling of solar capacity
over 20 years: 50 MW by
2045
10% of customers adopt
solar by 2027, ramping up
to 100 MW total by 2045
60 MW by 2042 60 MW by 2042
Customer Storage None 10 MW by 2034 10 MW by 2034 10 MW by 2034 Local Utility-Owned Resource Potential
Utility-Owned Solar
10 MW of utility-owned
solar by end of 2030
No defined assumption
post-2030
15 MW of utility-owned
solar by end of 2030
No defined assumption
post-2030
12 MW of utility-owned
solar by end of 2030
No defined assumption
post-2030
12 MW of utility-owned
solar by end of 2030
No defined assumption
post-2030
Utility-Owned
Storage
75 MW with possibility for
increase after 2027
75 MW with possibility for
increase after 2027
75 MW with possibility for
increase after 2027
One long-duration energy
storage project developed
in Glendale
75 MW with possibility for
increase after 2027
Table 3
A summary of the modeling outputs for each of the six scenarios is listed in Table 4 below:
63 of 839

8 4
5 4
6 Legend Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Costs in $Million
(2024–2045)
California
Policy
Carbon Free
2035
California Policy
w/Offsets
Carbon Free
2035; High DER
Carbon Free 2042;
Magnolia Retire 2038
Carbon Free
2040
New Resource Costs $535 $1,251 $491 $1,145 $897 $867
Operating Costs $1,073 $970 $1,098 $1,086 $1,131 $1,142 Total Cost $1,608 $2,221 $1,589 $2,231 $2,028 $2,009
Total Cost with SCC
Sensitivity $1,916 $2,490 $1,917 $2,440 $2,278 $2,274
Cost per MWh $93.97 $129.80 $92.87 $130.39 $118.52 $117.41 Cumulative CO2 Emissions
(tons)
2,597,041 1,642,076 2,765,838 1,434,150 1,816,241 2,035,232 Emissions Reduction in
2035 Compared to 2024
67% 100% 63% 100% 72% 71%
Emissions Reduction in
2040 Compared to 2024
70% 100% 68% 100% 99% 72%
Percent Clean in 2035 91% 109% 84% 129% 103% 95%
Percent Clean in 2040 97% 108% 90% 123% 109% 100%
Percent Clean in 2045 90% 105% 85% 109% 102% 103%
Table 4
All scenarios met required California mandates for RPS and Greenhouse Gas emissions; some have surpassed them. It is important to note that in accordance with the California policy, the calculation of RPS percentages hinges on Retail Sales rather than gross energy production. Transmission and distribution losses are excluded from the calculation and are generally considered to be around 10%.

Of the scenarios examined, the incorporation of green hydrogen as replacement for natural gas units has yielded significantly higher costs. In these scenarios, hydrogen is either produced onsite or piped in from a central hub. Green hydrogen technology is still in its early development, and establishing a definitive cost for modeling is a challenge. As a reference point, the IPP Repowering project capital cost is currently estimated at $5 billion or about $6 million per MW.

Furthermore, a Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) sensitivity test was conducted to assess the impact of carbon emissions on all scenario costs. Using the latest US Environmental Protection Agency’s SCC estimates starting at $208/Ton in 2024 and increasing to $287/Ton in 2045, reveals no significant change in comparative outcomes. The scenarios maintained their relative positions mainly due to the reduced usage of natural gas units, except for scenarios 5 and 6, as shown below:
64 of 839

9 4
5 4
6 Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Costs in $M Net Present
Value (2024 - 2045) CA Policy
Carbon
Free 2035
CA Policy
w/Offsets
Carbon
Free 2035 -
High DER
Carbon
Free 2042 -
Magnolia
Retire 2038
Carbon
Free 2040
Total Costs with CA Carbon
Cost 1,608 2,267 1,589 2,231 2,027 2,009
Total Costs with Social Cost
of Carbon 1,918 2,490 1,917 2,440 2,278 2,274
Table 5
GWP Preferred Scenario
Scenario 1: CA Policy is the preferred resource portfolio. It provides a balance between reliability and sustainability, while keeping costs lower for the residents of Glendale. This scenario also presents the most realistic path forward as it relies mainly on proven renewable and clean energy technologies: wind, solar PV, geothermal, and energy storage.

The path forward in the preferred portfolio includes a mix of geothermal, wind, solar PV, and energy storage while keeping Grayson Unit 9, Magnolia, and the ICE units. Retaining the natural gas units is the most economical option to keep the required capacity and dispatchable firm energy to maintain reliability, particularly during an N-1 and N-1-1 contingency event.

As shown in Table 4 above, Scenario 1 achieves 91% Clean Energy by 2035. While this scenario does not explicitly meet the City Council’s goal of 100% Zero-Carbon by 2035, this is still a significant achievement. Acknowledging that the last 10% is the most challenging and cost prohibitive aspect aligns with the common understanding that the final steps toward complete decarbonization often require innovative solutions and cutting-edge technologies. In fact, several studies have been performed recognizing this concern and suggesting that preparing for possibilities, as well as allowing for time and technologies to fill the gap may be prudent. The following represents a few of those studies:
1) NREL Study Identifies the Opportunities and Challenges of Achieving the U.S.

Transformational Goal of 100% Clean Electricity by 2035 (August 30, 2022) https://www.energy.gov/eere/articles/nrel-study-identifies-opportunities-and- challenges-achieving-us-transformational-goal
“A growing body of research has demonstrated that cost-effective high-renewable power systems are possible, but costs increase as systems approach 100% carbon-free electricity, also known as the "last 10% challenge." The increase in costs is driven largely by the seasonal mismatch between variable renewable energy generation and consumption.” – National Renewable Energy Labs 65 of 839

10 4
5 4
6 2) Getting to 100%: Six strategies for the challenging last 10% (September 21, 2022) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435122004056#abs0010 In their conclusion from modeling the six potential strategies:

The challenges of achieving a 100% carbon-free grid are disproportionately driven by the difficulty of solving approximately the last 10%. There are significant uncertainties and unknowns with all six strategies reviewed; no option matches the (fictional) ideal one (Table 1), and no single strategy is the clear superior choice under all circumstances.
…. If the last 10% strategies ultimately fail to succeed, then emissions reductions will fall short of 100% but will still be significant. After all, a system still needs to reduce emissions by 90% before the last 10% strategies are truly required. 3) SB 100 Joint Agency Report: Charting a path to a 100% Clean Energy Future https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2021/2021-sb-100-joint-agency-report- achieving-100-percent-clean-electricity
Key takeaway from the report:

Gas Capacity Is Retained for Reliability Needs but Cost Reductions and Innovation in Zero-Carbon Firm Resources and Storage May Reduce Gas Capacity Needs.

Natural gas capacity is the most economic option to provide capacity for reliability needs with current resource assumptions and demand scenarios. Cost reductions and innovation in zero-carbon firm resources and storage may reduce the amount of gas generation needed. – California Energy Commission 4) SMUD IRP Section 4 SMUD’s 2030 Zero Carbon Roadmap: A Diverse and Flexible Resource Plan (September 14, 2022)
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=246076&DocumentContentId= 80241
Our adopted portfolio sets SMUD on a path to zero emissions by 2030 with a strong foundation of proven clean resources that reduce our emissions by 90% and a broad portfolio of new technology and business strategies requiring additional research before final implementation to address the remaining 10%.

Prior to committing to new unproven technologies, we will conduct additional research, industry outreach and community consultation. – Sacramento Municipal Utility District
5) LA100 Study Executive Summary
https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/79444-ES.pdf
66 of 839

11 4
5 4
6 Key Distinctions Between Pathways to 100%
The LA100 scenarios show similar cost increases until approximately 80%–90% renewable energy. The pathways diverge with differences in the technologies deployed to meet the last 10%–20% of energy demand that cannot be easily served by wind, solar, and conventional storage technologies—and to maintain reliability in the face of extreme events.
…The resources used to help meet this last 10% and maintain reliability can produce local air emissions, particularly when based on combustion generation.

The CA Policy scenario provides long term viability adaptable to future innovations and changing energy technologies.

Action Plan
GWP’s action plan going forward includes:

7. Sustaining efforts to procure clean energy resources (wind, solar, geothermal, storage). Explore and engage in power purchase agreements that align with the IRP goals.

8. Actively participating in discussions and decisions focused on reducing emissions from Magnolia Power Plant with co-owners, as well as accelerating the transition of the plant to low-carbon technologies.

9. Prioritizing the integration of distributed energy resources, such as rooftop solar, energy storage, and demand response. Looking for innovative models to engage GWP customers and businesses in these programs.

10. Learning from the Intermountain Power Plant’s conversion to hydrogen.

11. Continuing to collaborate with LADWP and the City of Burbank on transmission and renewable resource development.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Effective stakeholder engagement is integral to the IRP process. Strategen lead the community townhalls and STAG sessions, and provided guidance to GWP staff as they conducted extensive outreach efforts aimed at gathering input and ensuring diverse perspectives were considered.

Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group
The Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG) was comprised of 14 individuals who live and/or work in Glendale who could provide consistent and detailed community input to the IRP process. The STAG was formed using a two-pronged approach:

1. GWP sent invitations to 12 organizations that represent important segments of the community (including renters, homeowners, environmental 67 of 839

12 4
5 4
6 advocates, the Latino and Armenian communities, and others). From these invitations, eight organizations ultimately confirmed their interest in serving on STAG.

2. Simultaneously, GWP issued an open call for STAG members with an application available on the GWP website and at the first IRP community townhall. GWP received 22 applications from this process. Strategen Consulting reviewed the applications based on a set of pre-established and publicly transparent criteria listed on the GWP website. After applying these criteria, Strategen narrowed the applicants down to the top seven who were then invited to join.

The STAG’s size was reduced from 15 original members to 14 due to one applicant’s absence to the first STAG meeting and unresponsiveness to communication requests.

Strategen opted not to replace this member with another applicant, given that any replacement member would already have missed the STAG orientation.

A posted list of all STAG members and their organizations (if any) is available at the following website: www.glendaleca.gov/2024IRP/STAG. GWP and Strategen sought to make the STAG as widely representative as possible of the Glendale community, although there were challenges in doing so. The diversity of the STAG was limited by the number and demographic of the applicants, as well as the invited organizations’ representative. Despite these demographic constraints, diverse opinions existed in the STAG that made for robust discussions and considerations of a wide range of issues in IRP decision-making.

STAG Sessions
July 12, 2023 Introduction to members and their priorities. Presentation on integrated resource plans, the basics of GWP’s system, and the IRP modeling process, group discussion.

July 19, 2023 Additional information on GWP’s system, based on member questions. Debrief on community preferences
expressed at first townhall. Brief brainstorming activity on STAG’s preferred clean energy timeline, resource
preferences, and resource concerns. Discussion of the
planning constraints and resource options STAG should
consider in its scenarios.

August 2, 2023 Debrief on outcomes of last meeting’s brainstorming activity and second townhall. Presentation of the planned modeling scenarios and potential options for STAG’s
scenarios. Discussion of STAG’s scenario preferences,
with a first scenario concept agreed upon by the end of the meeting.
68 of 839

13 4
5 4
6 August 9, 2023 Presentation and discussion of example modeling results (illustrative only). Presentation of inputs and assumptions on Glendale’s load forecast, market and resource prices, and local resource potential. Presentation of survey results of STAG scenario preference, conducted prior to this
meeting. Brainstorming and discussion on STAG scenario
2, with a concept agreed upon by the end of the meeting.

September 6, 2023 Presentation and discussion of initial modeling results from two of GWP’s scenarios. Brainstorming and decision-
making on STAG scenario 3, with a concept agreed upon
by the end of the meeting.

November 1, 2023 Presentation and discussion of final modeling results from the six scenarios, including key findings, cost, emission reductions and RPS percentages.

Community Townhall Sessions
Thursday, June 29, 2023
Pacific Community Center
Introduction to integrated resource plans, the basics
of GWP’s system, and the IRP modeling process.

Community resource preference activity to gather
input on preferred and non-preferred energy
resources. Attendees: 35
Monday, July 24, 2023
Sparr Heights Community
Center
Additional details on GWP’s system (local vs. remote
resources, customer-sited resources). Update on
GWP’s planned modeling scenarios and the STAG
process. Community preference activity to gather
input on preferred clean energy timeline, community
cost sensitivity, and preferred local vs. remote energy resources. Attendees: 35
Saturday, August 12, 2023
Brand Studios
Presentation of modeling inputs and assumptions.

Update on STAG process and all proposed modeling
scenarios. Discussion of scenarios and other topics.

Attendees: 17
Thursday, November 16, 2023
Sparr Heights Community
Center
Presentation of modeling results for the six scenarios, including key findings, capacity build-out, costs,
emission reduction and RPS percentages. Discussion
on the GWP preferred scenario and action plans.

Attendees: 17
Summary of community input integrated in the IRP process:
69 of 839

14 4
5 4
6 3. Two additional townhalls and two additional STAG meetings

4. Addition of a third community-informed scenario for modeling, for a total of six scenarios

5. Application of social cost of carbon sensitivity analysis to all scenarios

6. Compilation of a public “key assumptions” spreadsheet from Ascend Analytics, referenced above as Table 3.

Recordings and presentations from these townhalls and minutes from STAG meetings have been posted to the City’s IRP website (https://www.glendaleca.gov/2024IRP).

STAG Final Surveys and Results
Following the sixth and final STAG meeting, Strategen issued two surveys that asked STAG members to indicate their preferred scenario. All STAG members responded to these surveys.

The surveys had two parts. First, STAG members chose their top three scenarios in no particular order of priority. STAG was then asked to allocate 100 points across their three selections to indicate which scenario they preferred, and how strongly. Members could allocate points any way they chose, including giving no points to one or more of their scenarios. The only requirement was that the total points allocated by a member had to equal 100.

This survey was conducted twice to capture STAG’s perspective at different points as results were validated and updated. The first survey took place shortly after the final STAG meeting, but before GWP had decided on its preferred scenario and presentation to the GWP Commission. Sometime after the Commission meeting, a review of the model’s cost inputs revealed that there was an inaccuracy in the cost assumptions for hydrogen. The costs were later updated, which changed the overall cost of each scenario that STAG had used to make its decision in the first survey. Ascend Analytics also completed its analysis of operating costs for all scenarios, further clarifying the original costs presented to STAG. Since STAG voted on its preferred scenario using the prior data, it was agreed to ask that STAG should revote on their preferred scenario with the complete and adjusted costs. These corrected costs are reflected in the first few rows of Table 4 above.

First Stag Survey Results
STAG’s top three scenarios:

In the first survey, every scenario was selected by at least one person for their top three.

The scenarios that most members chose for their top 3 were:

1.GWP 1 (9 people)

2.STAG 2 (9 people)

3.STAG 1 (6 people)

4.STAG 3 (6 people)
70 of 839

15 4
5 4
6 Table 6
STAG’s scenario weighting:

When asked to weigh their top three scenarios by allocating 100 points across them, a different picture emerged. While STAG 2 and 3 were among STAG’s most selected scenarios for the first question, they did not receive many points in the weighting exercise.

In total, GWP 1 received the most points, with 530.
•This scenario was the top choice for six members. That represents 55% of STAG, and 67% of the 9 people who put this scenario in their top three. •Three members allocated all 100 of their points to GWP 1 (27% of STAG).

STAG 1 received the second most points, with 375.
•A difference of 155 points separated STAG 1 and GWP 1. •One member allocated all 100 of their points to STAG 1 (9% of STAG).

•Although STAG 1 was not chosen in as many members’ top three scenarios compared to GWP 1 (6 compared to 9), the people who chose it strongly preferred it. This scenario was the top choice for five members (46% of STAG). Five out of six members who put it in their top three ultimately chose it as their top choice (83%).

While STAG 2 was tied with GWP 1 for the greatest number of people who put it in their top three, only two members selected it as their top scenario, suggesting STAG 2 was a backup option for many.
•Three of the people who selected STAG 2 as one of their top scenarios ultimately allocated no points to it because they put all 100 toward GWP 1.

STAG 3
STAG 2
STAG 1
GWP 3
GWP 2
GWP 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Top three scenario selections (Survey 1)
Number of members who selected scenario as part of their top three 71 of 839

16 4
5 4
6 Scenario Points
allocated
# of members who put
scenario in their top 3
# of members who allocated
any points to scenario (i.e.,
more than 0 points)
GWP 1 530 9 9
STAG 1 375 6 6
STAG 2 180 9 6
STAG 3 135 6 5
GWP 2 70 5 4
GWP 3 10 4 1
Table 7
Table 8
Respondent comments:

1. Many of the members who chose GWP 1 as their top choice expressed that part of their reasoning for doing so was because of the technological uncertainty and cost of getting to true zero emissions sooner than 2045:
a. “We must remain grounded with technologies that are available today to achieve our goals… We have to face affordability and reliability realities in front of us at this moment.”
b. “Most of the expensive scenarios rely on high-risk new technologies that might not be built or will underperform.”
c. “I believe rushing to zero emissions can be at high costs and choosing resources too soon as new technology continues to emerge.” 135
180
375
10 70
530
STAG 3
STAG 2
STAG 1
GWP 3
GWP 2
GWP 1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
STAG scenario preference, by total points allocated per scenario (Survey 1)
72 of 839

17 4
5 4
6 2. Concern about the use of renewable energy credits (RECs) in GWP 3 made that option unattractive for several members:
a. “I am not confident in the use of offsets.”
b. “I do not consider [RECs] to be effective in actually reducing carbon emissions.”
c. “I think offsets are a scam, so I do not support that option.”

3. Many of the members who chose STAG 1 or other STAG scenarios as their top option referenced the need to advance progress toward clean energy goals and increase the role for renewables:
a. “A net zero target of 2045 is no longer acceptable…” b. “Future costs are largely fictional at this time, so we need to go for the greatest reduction of carbon by 2030.”
c. “We need forward-thinking, local dependence, harnessing freely available resources like sun, wind, water, wave energy, etc.”
d. “Considering the city’s transmission constraints, the immediate solution should be to emphasize local rooftop solar through the 10% resolution plan.”
Second Stag Survey Results
STAG’s top three scenarios:

Again, in the second survey, every scenario was selected by at least one person as among their top three. STAG’s selection of its top three scenarios differed only slightly from the last survey iteration. In this survey, the group’s top scenarios were:

1. STAG 2 (9 people)

2. GWP 1 (8 people)

3. STAG 1 (7 people)
STAG 2 was the group’s top choice this time around, with 9 members selecting it (the same number as the last time). One fewer person selected GWP 1 as among their top three (for a total of eight members), instead opting to replace that slot with STAG 1 (selected by seven members, up one from the last survey). Selections of the last three scenarios remained unchanged.
73 of 839

18 4
5 4
6 Table 9
Comparison of top 3 scenario selections between survey 1 and survey 2 Survey 1 Survey 2 Difference
GWP 1: California policy 9 8 -1
GWP 2: Zero emissions by 2035 5 5 Same
GWP 3: CA policy with offsets 4 4 Same
STAG 1: High local resources, zero emissions by
2035
6 7 +1
STAG 2: Zero emissions by 2042, long-duration
storage
9 9 Same
STAG 3: Zero emissions by 2040 6 6 Same
Table 10
STAG’s scenario weighting:

As with the first survey, a different picture emerged when looking at STAG’s weighting of its top three scenarios. The results of this second survey remain overall the same as the first iteration with GWP 1, or the California Policy scenario, still receiving the most points, with the distance between STAG’s first and second choices shrinking sizably.

In total, GWP 1 received the most points, with 525.
•This scenario was the top choice for 6 members, the same number as the first survey. That represents 55% of STAG, and 75% of the eight people who put this scenario in their top three.
•Again, three members allocated all 100 of their points to GWP 1 (27% of STAG).

STAG 3
STAG 2
STAG 1
GWP 3
GWP 2
GWP 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Top three scenario selections (Survey 2)
Number of members who selected scenario as part of their top three 74 of 839

19 4
5 4
6 Again, STAG 1 received the second most points, with 480. •The gap between GWP 1 and STAG 1 shrunk considerably in this survey. In the first survey, the scenarios were separated by 155 points. In this survey, they were separated by 45.
•Two members allocated all 100 of their points to STAG 1 (15% of STAG). This is one more member than the last time.
•This scenario was the top choice for 6 members (55% of STAG). 6 out of 7 people who put it in their top three ultimately chose it as their top choice (86%).

While STAG 2 had the greatest number of people who put it in their top three, only 2 members selected it as their top scenario (one of these members had STAG 2 tied with GWP 1 for their top choice). As with the first survey, this suggests STAG 2 was a backup option for many.
•Also seen in the first survey, three of the people who selected STAG 2 as one of their top scenarios ultimately allocated no points to it because they put all 100 toward GWP 1.

Table 11
40 170
480
30 55
525
STAG 3
STAG 2
STAG 1
GWP 3
GWP 2
GWP 1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
STAG scenario preference, by total points allocated per scenario (Survey 2)
75 of 839

20 4
5 4
6 Comparison of points allocation results between survey 1 and survey 2 Survey 1 Survey 2 Difference
GWP 1: California policy 530 525 -5
GWP 2: Zero emissions by 2035 70 55 -15
GWP 3: CA policy with offsets 10 30 +20
STAG 1: High local resources, zero emissions by
2035
375 480 +105
STAG 2: Zero emissions by 2042, long-duration
storage
180 170 -10
STAG 3: Zero emissions by 2040 135 40 -95
Table 12
As can be seen above, in the second survey, members concentrated their points more heavily around the two scenarios that received the most points in the first iteration (GWP 1 and STAG 1) and decreased their support for GWP 2, STAG 2, and STAG 3.

These differences in voting behavior may stem from several sources. One potential reason is that the updated scenario costs changed the way STAG members weighed their preferences, making them more strongly support their top choice. Another possibility is that seeing the results of the first survey before responding to the second may have influenced the way members voted, encouraging them to concentrate their attention on the scenarios that got the most support in the first survey while reducing the emphasis placed on those scenarios that did not rise to the top initially. While all scenario options were still on the table in this survey, the second iteration may have therefore acted somewhat like a runoff election, with members narrowing down their choices between the first round’s top two options. While the change in voting behavior is worth noting, ultimately the reasons for these differences are not as important as the results themselves.

Respondent comments:

Many of STAG’s comments in the second survey reflected perspectives that were raised in the first iteration.

1. Respondents who chose GWP 1 continued to raise points around affordability and the uncertainty of new technologies:
a. “I am representing a group who provided feedback to me that affordability and reliability are of key importance. [This scenario] provides for a path to a sustainable future with the most affordable option…”
b. “GWP 1 (following CA policy) is most cost effective for ratepayers.” Other scenarios “rely on underdeveloped infrastructure… We should decarbonize, but being the first to do so is just too costly and risky.” 76 of 839

21 4
5 4
6 c. “We have real challenges on affordability, and it will get worse over [the] next few years. We have to balance cost while trying to make progress toward the transition to clean energy. The state’s goals of transition by 2045 are already ambitious.”

2. Respondents who chose scenarios that aimed for a clean energy transition before 2045 again emphasized a desire to reach clean energy goals as quickly as possible. They also expressed that some of these scenarios’ costs may come down with technology developments. Some respondents who selected the 2040 or 2042 scenarios stated that they offered a balance between emissions reductions and cost.
a. “My goal is to reduce carbon emissions as quickly as possible.” b. “I generally chose the STAG scenarios over the GWP scenarios because they get us to true carbon-free. They’re not that much more expensive and they result in significantly lower CO2 emissions, particularly STAG 1.” c. “Technology improvements will reduce the costs [of the 2035 scenarios]… We need to act now to start moving our city to clean energy!” d. “If we are seeking to reach carbon free, then 2042 achieves this at substantial cleaner air and not an aggressive cost impact.”

3. Respondents who chose STAG 1 as their top scenario indicated that this scenario’s high solar and distributed energy resource (DER) assumptions were a central driver in their decision.
a. STAG 1 has “the greatest outcomes with DER and SOLAR.” b. “I chose STAG 1 because it puts the most resources into solar.” The STAG survey results highlight that, regardless of the perspectives of any one individual or any one group, the Glendale Community as a whole is concerned about the implications of the utility’s decisions for how we maintain reliability, enforce sustainability, and do so with a tempered eye towards preserving some level of affordability.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action herein is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and, therefore, an environmental review is not required pursuant to Sections 15378, and 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
Not Applicable.
77 of 839

22 4
5 4
6 ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Adopt the 2024 GWP IRP (Scenario1).

Alternative 2: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Mark Young, General Manager – Glendale Water and Power
Prepared by:

Scott K. Mellon, Assistant General Manager – Power Management Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS / ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A: 2024 GWP IRP
78 of 839

1 RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE GLENDALE WATER & POWER 2024

INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN

WHEREAS, the City of Glendale, through the Glendale Water & Power Department (“GWP”), operates a municipal utility for the distribution of electrical energy to the citizens of the City of Glendale, with an annual electrical demand exceeding 700 gigawatt hours as determined on a three-year average commencing January 1, 2013; and

WHEREAS, Senate Bill 350 (De Leon, Chapter 547, Statutes of 2015) (“SB 350) requires that, on or before January 1, 2019, the governing body of a publicly-owned utility with an annual electrical demand exceeding 700 gigawatt hours, as determined on a three-year average commencing January 1, 2013, must “adopt an integrated resource plan and a process for updating the plan at least once every five years” to ensure the utility achieves specified objectives; and

WHEREAS, an integrated resource plan does not authorize specified actions, but rather, is a planning document designed to provide Glendale with guidance to establish policies regarding GWP’s electricity supply over the period from January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2030; and

WHEREAS, the Clean Energy Act of 2018 (SB 100) requires that 60% of the utility’s retail sales be supplied from renewable resources by 2030. The bill also sets a 100% clean energy electricity goal and establishing a new target to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The passage of SB 1020 in 2022 revises the state policy and adds interim targets of 90% by 2035, and 95% by 2040; and

WHEREAS, SB 350’s integrated resource planning requirement applies to GWP; and

WHEREAS, on July 23, 2019 the Glendale City Council approved an the GWP 2019 Integrated Resource Plan; and

WHEREAS, On February 24, 2020, the CEC adopted a resolution finding Glendale Water and Power’s Integrated Resource Plan consistent with Public Utilities Code (PUC) section 9621; and

WHEREAS, the next cycle of CEC’s 5-year IRP filing deadline is January 1, 2024; and

WHEREAS, in anticipation and preparation of the upcoming integrated resource plan to be completed no later than January 1, 2024, on February 1, 79 of 839

2 2023 GWP staff issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) soliciting proposals from consulting firms to assist with the preparation of GWP’s integrated resource plan due in 2024 (2024 IRP); and

WHEREAS, on May 2, 2023, the City Council awarded a Professional Services Agreement to Ascend Analytics, LLC (“Ascend”) to assist GWP with the development of the 2024 IRP; and

WHEREAS, the 2024 IRP was subject to the review of the Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG) comprised of individuals who live and/or work in Glendale to provide consistent and detailed community input to the IRP process; and

WHEREAS, six STAG sessions and four community townhall sessions were held relating to the IRP as described in the Report Dated December 12, 2023 by the General Manager of GWP; and

WHEREAS, GWP has now completed the development of the 2024 IRP and has presented same to the City Council as a part of the Report Dated December 12, 2023 by the General Manager of GWP.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF GLENDALE:

Section 1. Notice of the public meeting at which this Resolution was considered was properly given, and all oral and written presentations made to and heard by the City Council were properly considered.

Section 2. The Council hereby adopts the 2024 IRP including potential minor revisions and supporting documents as they substantially conform to the 2024 IRP attached as Exhibit 1 to the Report Dated December 12, 2023 by the General Manager of GWP to the City Council, and authorizes the submission of same to the California Energy Commission before January 1, 2024 pursuant to the requirements of Senate bill 350.

Section 3. Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act. The City Council finds and determines that this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and, therefore, an environmental review is not required pursuant to Sections 15378, and 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3.

Section 4. Severability. If any Section, subsection, clause, phrase, sentence or word of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is for any reason held invalid, the validity of the remainder of the Resolution or the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall not affect any other Section, subsection, 80 of 839

3 clause, phrase, sentence or word of the Ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid Section, subsection, clause, phrase, sentence or word of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Resolution and each Section, subsection, clause, phrase, sentence and word hereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more Sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, sentences or words or the application hereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid.

Adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale on this ___ day of _________, 2023.

________________________________
Mayor

ATTEST:

_____________________________________
City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS.

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )

I, Suzie Abajian PhD, City Clerk of the City of Glendale, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. _______________ was adopted by a majority vote of the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the ______ day of ______________________, 2023, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

________________________
City Clerk
81 of 839

EXHIBIT A
82 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP ii
PREFACE This Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) was developed in accordance with the mandates set forth in Senate Bill 350 (SB 350), enacted to advance California’s commitment to sustainable energy practices. This report investigated six scenarios, each offering a nuanced perspective on the City’s energy future, including the accelerated adoption of 100% Clean Energy by 2035. The comprehensive analysis of these scenarios formed the basis for the strategic decision-making to ensure the IRP is robust, adaptable, and aligned with the dynamic nature of the energy sector. The IRP is not merely a document prepared to fulfill regulatory obligations; it serves as GWP’s blueprint for a future where energy is both reliable and sustainable, while safeguarding the welfare of the City and its residents for generations to come. The preparation of the IRP was a collaborative effort, drawing on the expertise of Ascend Analytics, Strategen Consulting, and dedicated internal staff. GWP appreciates the community and Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG) members for their invaluable contributions, support, and dedication in shaping the trajectory of Glendale’s energy landscape. The STAG members are: Zanku Armenian, Armenian National Committee (ANC) Mike Borisov, Resident at-large member Anita Quiñonez Gabrielian, Glendale Latino Association (GLA) Peter Hebert, Resident at-large member Karin Kachler, Resident at-large member Karen Kwak, Glendale Tenant’s Union (GTU) Grant Michals, Glendale Homeowners Coordinating Council (GHCC) Gustavo Moreno, Resident at-large member Glenn Pittman, Resident at-large member Kurt Sawitskas, Resident at-large member Greg Tan, Glendale Chamber of Commerce Pierre Thompson, Glendale Unified School District (GUSD) Jack Walworth, Glendale Environmental Coalition (GEC) 83 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 | Ascend Analytics iii
Table of Contents 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 1-1 The Results of Integrated Resource Planning ..................................................................................................... 1-1 The Preferred Resource Portfolio ................................................................................................................................ 1-2 Timeline for Acquiring Resources ................................................................................................................................ 1-4 IRP Key Findings ................................................................................................................................................................ 1-6 Developing this IRP .......................................................................................................................................................... 1-7 Six Portfolio Scenarios ...................................................................................................................................................... 1-8 Resource Capacity Mix in 2035 ..................................................................................................................................... 1-9 Acting on the IRP Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 1-10 2. THE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLANNING PROCESS .......................................................... 2-1 The Inception of the Integrated Resource Plan ................................................................................................. 2-2 Customer-Oriented Priorities ........................................................................................................................................ 2-2 Planning Horizon ................................................................................................................................................................ 2-3 The IRP Planning Process .............................................................................................................................................. 2-3 Overriding IRP Goals ......................................................................................................................................................... 2-3 Additional Planning Objectives for the IRP ............................................................................................................. 2-4 Steps of the IRP Framework ........................................................................................................................................... 2-5 Stakeholder Participation .............................................................................................................................................. 2-8 Townhall Attendee Participation .................................................................................................................................. 2-8 Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group Participation .......................................................................................... 2-9 Implementing the IRP .................................................................................................................................................. 2-11 3. ABOUT GLENDALE WATER & POWER ...................................................................................... 3-1 The City of Glendale ........................................................................................................................................................ 3-1 About Glendale Water & Power ................................................................................................................................ 3-2 GWP Customers .................................................................................................................................................................. 3-3 Award Winning Grid Reliability and Service ........................................................................................................... 3-3 Membership in SCPPA ...................................................................................................................................................... 3-3 Energy Mix ............................................................................................................................................................................. 3-4 Clean energy Progress .................................................................................................................................................... 3-5 Resource Generation Portfolio ................................................................................................................................... 3-6 Upcoming Generation Projects ............................................................................................................................... 3-12 Natural Gas Transportation Pipelines ................................................................................................................... 3-13 4. 2019 IRP OUTCOMES ........................................................................................................................ 4-1 2019 IRP Recommended Portfolio ........................................................................................................................... 4-1 Energy Efficiency, Demand Response, and Behind-the-Meter Batteries ................................................... 4-2 Distributed Solar and Storage ....................................................................................................................................... 4-2 Internal Combustion Engines and Battery Energy Storage Systems ........................................................... 4-3 Additional Capacity ............................................................................................................................................................ 4-3 84 of 839

Table of Contents
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP iv

5. STATUTORY DRIVERS AND REGULATORY FACTORS ......................................................... 5-1 Statutory Drivers ................................................................................................................................................................ 5-1 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Statutes ...................................................................................................... 5-2 Renewable Portfolio Standard and Zero-Carbon Resources .......................................................................... 5-4 Subsidies for Customer Rooftop Solar Statutes .................................................................................................... 5-6 Cap-and-Trade Program and Market Statutes ...................................................................................................... 5-6 Energy Efficiency and Demand-Side Management ............................................................................................. 5-7 Transportation Electrification ........................................................................................................................................ 5-7 Regulatory Factors ............................................................................................................................................................ 5-8 Transportation Electrification Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 5-8 Building Electrification Impacts .................................................................................................................................... 5-9 Adopting Energy Reach Code Standards .............................................................................................................. 5-10 City Clean Energy Goals ................................................................................................................................................ 5-11 6. PLANNING FORECASTS AND REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................... 6-1 Forecast Methodology ................................................................................................................................................... 6-1 Load Forecasts .................................................................................................................................................................... 6-3 Energy Demand Forecast ................................................................................................................................................ 6-3 Peak Demand Forecast ..................................................................................................................................................... 6-3 Rooftop Solar PV Installations ....................................................................................................................................... 6-5 Energy Efficiency Savings Forecast .............................................................................................................................. 6-5 Transportation Electrification Impacts ....................................................................................................................... 6-7 Power and Natural Gas Price Forecasts .................................................................................................................. 6-8 Power Price Forecast ......................................................................................................................................................... 6-9 Natural Gas Price Forecast ........................................................................................................................................... 6-10 Resource and Carbon Cost Forecasts .................................................................................................................. 6-11 California Carbon Price Forecast ............................................................................................................................... 6-11 Social Cost of Carbon Forecast .................................................................................................................................. 6-12 Green Hydrogen Fuel Cost Forecast ....................................................................................................................... 6-13 Candidate Resource Cost Forecasts ........................................................................................................................ 6-14 7. COST OF SERVICE AND RATE IMPACTS ................................................................................... 7-1 Rates ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 7-1 Cost of Service and Rate Design Process .............................................................................................................. 7-2 8. ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES ........................................................... 8-1 Conservation and Utility Modernization .................................................................................................................. 8-1 Contributions to Peak Demand ................................................................................................................................. 8-2 Energy Efficiency Programs ......................................................................................................................................... 8-3 Commercial and Industrial Energy Efficiency Programs ....................................................................................... 8-3 Residential Energy Efficiency Programs .................................................................................................................... 8-4 Conservation Voltage Reduction Programs ............................................................................................................ 8-6 Energy Efficiency Portfolio Results .............................................................................................................................. 8-7 Setting Energy Efficiency Potential Targets ............................................................................................................. 8-9 Demand Response Programs .................................................................................................................................. 8-11 Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification Studies ......................................................................................... 8-12 Current Low Income Programs ............................................................................................................................... 8-13 Community Solar ........................................................................................................................................................... 8-14 85 of 839

Table of Contents
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP v
Transportation Electrification Initiatives .............................................................................................................. 8-14 Transportation Electrification Program History .................................................................................................. 8-15 Electric Vehicle Infrastructure ..................................................................................................................................... 8-16 Grants .................................................................................................................................................................................... 8-17 The Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee ................................................................. 8-18 Low Carbon Fuel Standard Program Credits ....................................................................................................... 8-18 Electric Vehicle Charging Initiatives ...................................................................................................................... 8-19 Southern California Public Power Authority EV Working Group ................................................................. 8-19 Electric Vehicle Level 2 Charger Rebates ............................................................................................................... 8-20 Electric Vehicle Guest Drive Events ........................................................................................................................... 8-20 Electric Vehicle Infrastructure and Customer Programs ................................................................................. 8-20 New Programs for Disadvantaged and Low-Income Customers ........................................................... 8-22 Localized Air Pollution and Disadvantaged Communities ............................................................................. 8-22 Transportation Electrification in Disadvantaged Communities .................................................................... 8-23 9. TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION ........................................................................................ 9-1 Bulk Transmission System ............................................................................................................................................. 9-1 Transmission Load Pocket Bottleneck ....................................................................................................................... 9-4 Transmission Utilization ................................................................................................................................................... 9-5 The Need for More Transmission Capacity .......................................................................................................... 9-6 System Reliability Requirements ............................................................................................................................... 9-6 Distribution System .......................................................................................................................................................... 9-8 Distribution System Capital Improvements ............................................................................................................ 9-8 Updated Electric Services Master Plan ...................................................................................................................... 9-9 Cause of Outages ............................................................................................................................................................ 9-11 10. RPS COMPLIANCE AND RESOURCES ................................................................................... 10-1 RPS Compliance Requirements ............................................................................................................................... 10-1 Renewable Energy Credits ........................................................................................................................................... 10-2 Portfolio Balance Requirements ................................................................................................................................ 10-3 GWP Compliance Status ............................................................................................................................................... 10-3 RPS Procurement ........................................................................................................................................................... 10-5 Long-Term Contracts ..................................................................................................................................................... 10-5 Excess Procurement and Historic Carryover ........................................................................................................ 10-6 Procurement Plan and Cost Containment ............................................................................................................ 10-6 RPS Enforcement Procedures .................................................................................................................................. 10-7 Determination ................................................................................................................................................................... 10-7 Complaint ............................................................................................................................................................................ 10-8 Hearing and Final Decision .......................................................................................................................................... 10-8 Penalties ............................................................................................................................................................................... 10-8 Renewable Resources and Clean Energy ........................................................................................................... 10-9 Renewable Generation ................................................................................................................................................ 10-11 GWP Clean Energy Projections ................................................................................................................................ 10-12 11. PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS AND RESULTS ................................................................................. 11-1 Modeling and Analysis Framework ....................................................................................................................... 11-2 Input Assumptions and Portfolio Modeling ........................................................................................................ 11-3 Modeling Constraints ..................................................................................................................................................... 11-3 Candidate Resources ...................................................................................................................................................... 11-4 Candidate Portfolio Options Procurement Plan ................................................................................................ 11-5 Modeling Process for Portfolio Scenarios .......................................................................................................... 11-7 Six Modeled Scenarios .................................................................................................................................................. 11-7 Scenario Assumptions ................................................................................................................................................... 11-8 86 of 839

Table of Contents
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP vi
Modeling Results ............................................................................................................................................................ 11-9 Preferred Candidate Portfolio Scenario ............................................................................................................ 11-19 Risk Analysis ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11-20 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................................ 11-21 12. ACTION PLANS .............................................................................................................................. 12-1 Capacity Expansion Action Plan .............................................................................................................................. 12-1 Customer-Oriented and Reliability Driven Action Plans ............................................................................. 12-5 Distributed Energy Resources Action Plan ........................................................................................................... 12-5 Transportation and Distribution Action Plan ....................................................................................................... 12-5 Integrating Community Input .................................................................................................................................... 12-5 A. IRP GUIDELINES CROSS-REFERENCE ........................................................................................ A-1 B. GLOSSARY AND DEFINITIONS ..................................................................................................... B-1 C. STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH ............................................................................................................ C-1 Community Townhalls ................................................................................................................................................... C-2 Townhall 1: Thursday, June 29, 2023 .......................................................................................................................... C-3 Townhall 2: Monday, July 24, 2023 ............................................................................................................................. C-8 Townhall 3: Saturday, August 12, 2023 .................................................................................................................. C-13 Townhall 4: Thursday, November 16, 2023 .......................................................................................................... C-19 Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG) ............................................................................................... C-25 The STAG’s Role in the IRP .......................................................................................................................................... C-25 How the STAG Was Formed ....................................................................................................................................... C-25 About the STAG Meetings ......................................................................................................................................... C-30 STAG Meeting 1: Wednesday, July 12, 2023 ........................................................................................................ C-32 STAG Meeting 2: Wednesday, July 19, 2023 ........................................................................................................ C-42 STAG Meeting 3: Wednesday, August 2, 2023 ................................................................................................... C-50 STAG Meeting 4: Wednesday, August 9, 2023 ................................................................................................... C-62 STAG Scenario Preference Survey Results ............................................................................................................ C-73 STAG Meeting 5: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 ........................................................................................... C-90 STAG Meeting 6: Wednesday, November 1, 2023 ......................................................................................... C-104 D. STANDARDIZED TABLES ................................................................................................................ D-1 Capacity Resource Accounting Table (CRAT) ........................................................................................................ D-1 Energy Balance Table (EBT) ............................................................................................................................................ D-2 Resource Procurement Table (RPT) ........................................................................................................................... D-3 GHG Emissions Accounting Table (GEAT) ................................................................................................................ D-4 E. KEY MODELING ASSUMPTIONS .................................................................................................. E-1 Generation Resource Cost Forecasts ....................................................................................................................... E-2 Renewable Generation Cost Forecasts ...................................................................................................................... E-2 BESS Cost Forecasts ........................................................................................................................................................... E-2 Power and Natural Gas Fuel Price Forecasts ....................................................................................................... E-4 87 of 839

Table of Contents
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP vii
F. POWERSIMM PLANNER ................................................................................................................... F-1 PowerSIMM Overview .................................................................................................................................................... F-1 Simulations in PowerSIMM ............................................................................................................................................ F-1 Dispatch in PowerSIMM .................................................................................................................................................. F-2 Resource Planning Modeling ...................................................................................................................................... F-3 Production Cost Modeling ............................................................................................................................................. F-3 Capacity Expansion Optimization ................................................................................................................................ F-4 Resource Adequacy Analysis ......................................................................................................................................... F-5 Simulation Details ............................................................................................................................................................. F-7 Weather Simulation ........................................................................................................................................................... F-7 Load Simulation ................................................................................................................................................................... F-8 Wind and Solar Simulation ........................................................................................................................................... F-10 Small Hydro Simulation ................................................................................................................................................. F-12 Forward Price Simulation .............................................................................................................................................. F-13 Spot Price Simulation ...................................................................................................................................................... F-14 Basis Price Simulation ..................................................................................................................................................... F-14 G. ENERGY RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY ..................................................................................... G-1 H. UTILITY MODERNIZATION REPORT .......................................................................................... H-1 I. ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM RESULTS ................................................................................. I-1 J. CITY COUNCIL CLEAN ENERGY RESOLUTION ......................................................................... J-1 88 of 839

Table of Contents
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP viii
FIGURES Figure 1. California Policy Preferred Portfolio Annual Energy Produced and Consumed .................................... 1-2 Figure 2. California Policy Preferred Portfolio Capacity Build-Out ................................................................................ 1-3 Figure 3. California Policy Preferred Portfolio Resource Additions and Retirements ............................................ 1-4 Figure 4. Preferred Portfolio Annual Cost of New Resources ......................................................................................... 1-5 Figure 5. Resource Capacity Mix in 2034: All Scenarios .................................................................................................... 1-9 Figure 6. GWP Clean Energy Progress .................................................................................................................................... 1-11 Figure 7. Integrated Resource Planning Process .................................................................................................................. 2-6 Figure 8. Glendale Water & Power Service Territory .......................................................................................................... 3-2 Figure 9. GWP Customer Count .................................................................................................................................................. 3-3 Figure 10. GWP Energy Consumed .............................................................................................................................................. 3-3 Figure 11. 2022 Energy Resource Mix ......................................................................................................................................... 3-4 Figure 12. GWP Clean Energy Progress ...................................................................................................................................... 3-5 Figure 13. Grayson Power Plant ..................................................................................................................................................... 3-7 Figure 14. Magnolia Power Plant .................................................................................................................................................. 3-7 Figure 15. Intermountain Power Project .................................................................................................................................... 3-8 Figure 16. High Winds ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3-8 Figure 17. Pebble Springs Wind .................................................................................................................................................... 3-9 Figure 18. Townsite Solar Plant ..................................................................................................................................................... 3-9 Figure 19. Star Peak Geothermal Energy Project .................................................................................................................... 3-9 Figure 20. Whitegrass No.1 Geothermal Plant ...................................................................................................................... 3-10 Figure 21. Tieton Hydropower Project ...................................................................................................................................... 3-10 Figure 22. Hoover Dam Power Plant ......................................................................................................................................... 3-11 Figure 23. Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station .............................................................................................................. 3-11 Figure 24. Scholl Canyon Biogas Project (rendering) .......................................................................................................... 3-12 Figure 25. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Legislation ........................................................................................... 5-2 Figure 26. RPS and Zero-Carbon Requirements Legislation .............................................................................................. 5-4 Figure 27. Customer Rooftop Solar Installation Legislation ............................................................................................... 5-6 Figure 28. Cap-and-Trade Program Legislation ...................................................................................................................... 5-6 Figure 29. Energy Efficiency and Demand-Side Management Legislation ................................................................... 5-7 Figure 30. Transportation Electrification Legislation ............................................................................................................. 5-7 Figure 31. Annual Zero-Emission Vehicles Sales Targets for the Advanced Clean Cars II Rule ........................... 5-9 Figure 32. Energy Forecast .............................................................................................................................................................. 6-3 Figure 33. Peak Demand plus Reserve Margin Forecast ...................................................................................................... 6-4 Figure 34. Solar PV Distributed Energy Resources Forecast .............................................................................................. 6-5 Figure 35. Energy Efficiency Savings Forecast ......................................................................................................................... 6-6 Figure 36. Medium- and Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicle Population Forecast ................................................................ 6-7 89 of 839

Table of Contents
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP ix
Figure 37. Transportation Electrification Demand Forecast ............................................................................................... 6-8 Figure 38. Southern California SP-15 Power Price Forecast ............................................................................................... 6-9 Figure 39. SoCal City Gate Natural Gas Price Forecast ....................................................................................................... 6-10 Figure 40. California Carbon Price Forecast ............................................................................................................................ 6-11 Figure 41. Social Cost of Carbon Forecast ............................................................................................................................... 6-12 Figure 42. Green Hydrogen Fuel Cost Forecast ..................................................................................................................... 6-13 Figure 43. Battery Energy Storage System Cost Forecast ................................................................................................. 6-14 Figure 44. Renewable Power Purchase Agreement Cost Forecast ................................................................................ 6-15 Figure 45. Resource Portfolio Candidate Cost Forecast ..................................................................................................... 6-16 Figure 46. Cost of Service Process Steps ................................................................................................................................... 7-2 Figure 47. Annual Energy Efficiency Savings ............................................................................................................................ 8-2 Figure 48. Energy Efficiency Net Savings as a Percent of Sales for California POUs ................................................ 8-9 Figure 49. Cumulative Energy Efficiency Savings with CEC Adjustments .................................................................... 8-10 Figure 50. Net Incremental Market Potential by Sector and Percent of Sales .......................................................... 8-11 Figure 51. Disadvantaged Communities Map ........................................................................................................................ 8-23 Figure 52. Electric Vehicle Charging Station Locations in Glendale ............................................................................... 8-25 Figure 53. Geographic Transmission Schematic ........................................................................................................................ 9-1 Figure 54. Southwest AC Intertie Transmission Line Average Usage .................................................................................... 9-5 Figure 55. Causes of Distribution System Outages .............................................................................................................. 9-11 Figure 56. RPS Compliance Period Requirements ................................................................................................................ 10-1 Figure 57. Current Portfolio RPS and Clean Energy .......................................................................................................... 10-10 Figure 58. Preferred Portfolio RPS and Clean Energy ...................................................................................................... 10-12 Figure 59. IRP PowerSIMM Modeling Process Flow ............................................................................................................ 11-1 Figure 60. Base Portfolio LOLH by Year ................................................................................................................................. 11-11 Figure 61. Reduced LOLH Risk with Resource Additions by Year ............................................................................... 11-12 Figure 62. Six Scenarios: Annual Total Cost ......................................................................................................................... 11-16 Figure 63. Six Scenarios: CO2 Emissions ................................................................................................................................ 11-17 Figure 64. Six Scenarios: RPS Generation ............................................................................................................................. 11-18 Figure 65. Six Scenarios: Clean Energy Generation ........................................................................................................... 11-18 Figure 66. Scenario 1: California Policy Capacity Build-Out .......................................................................................... 11-19 Figure 67. Scenario 1: California Policy Annual Energy Produced and Consumed .............................................. 11-20 Figure 68. Scenario 1: California Policy Annual Resource Additions and Retirements .......................................... 12-2 Figure 69. Annual Cost of New Resources .............................................................................................................................. 12-4 Figure 70. Townhall 1 Presentation Slides ................................................................................................................................. C-7 Figure 71. Townhall 2 Presentation Slides .............................................................................................................................. C-12 Figure 72. Townhall 3 Presentation Slides .............................................................................................................................. C-18 Figure 73. Townhall 4 Presentation Slides .............................................................................................................................. C-24 Figure 74. STAG At-Large Member Application ................................................................................................................... C-26 90 of 839

Table of Contents
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP x
Figure 75. STAG Member Agreement ...................................................................................................................................... C-29 Figure 76. The Chatham House Rule ........................................................................................................................................ C-30 Figure 77. STAG Meeting 1 Presentation Slides ................................................................................................................... C-41 Figure 78. STAG Meeting 2 Presentation Slides ................................................................................................................... C-49 Figure 79. STAG Poll Scenario Assumptions Response ..................................................................................................... C-53 Figure 80. STAG Poll Clean Energy Timeline Response ..................................................................................................... C-54 Figure 81. STAG Meeting 3 Presentation Slides ................................................................................................................... C-61 Figure 82. STAG Survey Q5 Results: DERs plus Storage .................................................................................................... C-74 Figure 83. STAG Survey Q6 Results: DER Target in STAG Scenario 1 .......................................................................... C-74 Figure 84. STAG Survey Q7 Results: Reach Code Target in STAG Scenario 1 .......................................................... C-75 Figure 85. STAG Survey Q8 Results: Resources to Exclude in STAG Scenario 1 ...................................................... C-75 Figure 86. STAG Survey Q9 Results: High Electrification Adoption in STAG Scenarios ........................................ C-76 Figure 87. STAG Survey Q12 Results: Clean Energy Timeline Ranking ....................................................................... C-78 Figure 88. STAG Survey Q12 Results: Clean Energy Adoption Priority ....................................................................... C-78 Figure 89. STAG Survey Q14 Results: Input Assumptions Considered in STAG Scenarios 1 and 2 ................. C-80 Figure 90. STAG Survey Q15 Results: STAG Scenario 2 Elements ................................................................................. C-81 Figure 91. STAG Survey Q16 Results: Excluded Resources from STAG Scenario 2 ................................................ C-82 Figure 92. STAG Meeting 4 Presentation Slides ................................................................................................................... C-89 Figure 93. STAG Meeting 5 Presentation Slides ................................................................................................................. C-103 Figure 94. STAG Meeting 6 Presentation Slides ................................................................................................................. C-119 Figure 95. STAG Top Three Scenario Selections (Survey 1) ........................................................................................... C-121 Figure 96. STAG Scenario Preference by Total Points Allocated per Scenario (Survey 1) ................................. C-122 Figure 97. STAG Top Three Scenario Selections (Survey 2) ........................................................................................... C-124 Figure 98. STAG Scenario Preference by Total Points Allocated per Scenario (Survey 2) ................................. C-125 Figure 99. California Policy Scenario Capacity Build Out (CRAT) .................................................................................... D-1 Figure 100. California Policy Scenario Annual Energy Produced and Consumed (EBT) ........................................... D-2 Figure 101. RPS and Clean Energy Totals by Year (RPT) ....................................................................................................... D-3 Figure 102. Annual CO2 Emissions (GEAT) .................................................................................................................................. D-4 Figure 103. Three-Day Dispatch Outputs Plotted against Load .......................................................................................... F-4 Figure 104. ARS Schematic of Candidate Resource Expansion ........................................................................................... F-5 Figure 105. PowerSIMM Simulation Engine ................................................................................................................................ F-6 Figure 106. Multiple Simulations of Daily Maximum Dry Bulb Temperatures ............................................................... F-8 Figure 107. Multiple Simulations of Load Over a Single Week ........................................................................................... F-9 Figure 108. Load versus Temperature Relationships ............................................................................................................... F-9 Figure 109. Multiple Simulations of Solar Generation Over a Single Week ................................................................. F-10 Figure 110. Multiple Simulations of Wind Generation Over a Single Week ................................................................. F-11 91 of 839

Table of Contents
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP xi
Figure 111. Multiple Simulations of Hydro Generation Over a Single Week ............................................................... F-12 Figure 112. Multiple Simulations of Forward Prices ............................................................................................................... F-13 Figure 113. Simulations for Spot Prices Over a Single Week ............................................................................................. F-14 TABLES Table 1. GWP Generation Resource Portfolio ...................................................................................................................... 3-6 Table 2. Functionalized Test Year Revenue Requirements ............................................................................................. 7-4 Table 3. Conservation Voltage Reduction Program Results .......................................................................................... 8-7 Table 4. Energy Efficiency Program Results Fiscal Year End 2022 ............................................................................... 8-8 Table 5. Energy Efficiency Targets with Codes and Standards ...................................................................................... 8-9 Table 6. Installed Electric Vehicle Charging Stations ...................................................................................................... 8-15 Table 7. Proposed Electric Vehicle Charging Stations .................................................................................................... 8-16 Table 8. Transportation Electrification LCFS Proposed Budget .................................................................................. 8-19 Table 9. Compliance Period Percent of Retail Sales Requirements ........................................................................... 10-2 Table 10. Compliance Period 1 Retired and Applied RECs ............................................................................................. 10-3 Table 11. Compliance Period 2 Available and Applied RECs .......................................................................................... 10-4 Table 12. Reported Procurement Target Calculations ...................................................................................................... 10-4 Table 13. Reported Retired RECs ............................................................................................................................................... 10-4 Table 14. Current Renewable and Clean Energy Resources ........................................................................................ 10-11 Table 15. First Year Cost of RPS-Compliant, Clean Energy, and Storage Resource Portfolio Options .......... 11-6 Table 16. Local Resource Assumptions for All Six Scenarios .......................................................................................... 11-9 Table 17. N-1-1 Resource Contribution for Contingencies ......................................................................................... 11-10 Table 18. Six Scenarios: Resource Capacity in 2035 and 2045 ................................................................................... 11-13 Table 19. Six Scenarios: Cost and Emission Summaries ................................................................................................ 11-14 Table 20. Six Scenarios: Market Purchases and Sales ..................................................................................................... 11-15 Table 21. Resource Portfolio Expansion by Year ................................................................................................................. 12-3 Table 22. CEC IRP Guidelines Cross-Reference ...................................................................................................................... A-4 Table 23. Results of Community Resource Preference Activity ....................................................................................... C-3 Table 24. Original and Updated New Resource Costs: All Scenarios ....................................................................... C-120 Table 25. STAG Scenario Weighting: Survey 1 .................................................................................................................. C-122 Table 26. Top Three Scenario Selection Comparison between Survey 1 and Survey 2 .................................... C-124 Table 27. Scenario Point Allocation Comparison between Survey 1 and Survey 2 ............................................ C-126 Table 28. Scenario Summary for Top Three Selection and Allocated Points ........................................................ C-126 Table 29. Average Point Allocation Comparison between Survey 1 and Survey 2 ............................................. C-126 92 of 839

Table of Contents
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP xii
Table 30. Renewable Costs through PPAs Forecasts ($/MWh) ....................................................................................... E-2 Table 31. Battery Energy Storage Systems Cost Forecasts ($/kW) ................................................................................. E-2 Table 32. Hydrogen CT, CCS, and SMR Cost Forecasts ($/kW) ....................................................................................... E-3 Table 33. Hydrogen Fuel, California Carbon, and Social Cost of Carbon Price Forecasts ..................................... E-3 Table 34. Power (Off-Peak & On-Peak) and Natural Gas Price Forecasts ................................................................... E-9 Table 35. Energy Efficiency Program Results ........................................................................................................................... I-1 Table 36. Energy Efficiency Program Costs .............................................................................................................................. I-1 Table 37. Energy Efficiency Program Results by End Use ................................................................................................... I-2 Table 38. Energy Efficiency Program Results by Sector ....................................................................................................... I-3 Table 39. Energy Efficiency Program Results by Building Type ........................................................................................ I-4 93 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-1

1. Executive Summary
Glendale Water & Power’s (GWP) 2024 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) presents a strategy for meeting forecasted peak and net energy demand, plus a planning reserve margin (PRM) to address contingency events and grid reliability over a five to twenty year planning period. This strategy focuses on ensuring that greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction as well as renewable and clean energy targets are met.

THE RESUL TS OF INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLANNING The IRP considered candidate resources for an incremental build-out that were included in all modeled portfolio scenarios and were limited only to non-fossil, renewable, and clean energy resources that GWP could realistically procure. These resources include solar, wind, geothermal, nuclear small modular reactors (SMR), battery energy storage systems (BESS), and green hydrogen. The preferred portfolio allows the existing natural gas units to be retained to ensure reliable service but provides a pathway to significantly reduce reliance on the output from the natural gas generation and spot purchases from energy markets. GWP and the Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG) developed six portfolio scenarios for consideration. Initially, only five scenarios were to be developed, but it became clear that a sixth scenario was necessary. GWP relied heavily on STAG input, together with information garnered from Community Townhall events. All scenarios were extensively and comprehensively modeled, analyzed, and reviewed to ensure completeness and accuracy. The resultant preferred resource portfolio meets forecasted load as well as state renewable energy and clean energy goals while maintaining a high level of system reliability and minimizing cost impact. As required by the California Energy Commission (CEC) in the Publicly-Owned Utility Integrated Resource Plan Submission and Review Guidelines, “The IRP Filing must address procurement for a diversified procurement portfolio of short- and long-term electricity, electricity-related, and demand-response products and strategies or programs.” The IRP employed an overall modeling and planning horizon extending from 2024 through 2045. To comply with statutory mandates, the IRP needed to satisfy and plan for 2030 and 2045 targets. In addition, the modeling studied the year 2035, aligning with the City of Glendale’s City Council objective to achieve 100 percent clean energy by that year. 94 of 839

1. Executive Summary The Results of Integrated Resource Planning Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-2
The Preferred Resource Portfolio Of the six scenarios considered, the IRP modeling process selected Scenario 1: California Policy as the preferred portfolio. This scenario meets the aggressive California clean energy mandates while keeping costs lower for the residents of Glendale. The preferred scenario also presents the most realistic path forward for meeting renewable and zero-carbon generation requirements as it relies solely on mature renewable and clean energy technologies—wind, solar PV, geothermal, and energy storage—and not on nascent emerging technologies. In addition, the California Policy scenario was based on the assumption that historic levels of distributed energy resource (DER) installations and demand response (DR) adoption continue in the future. GWP has limited control of DER and DR, so the scenario was specifically designed to not overly rely on these resources. The path forward in the preferred portfolio includes a mix of geothermal, wind, solar PV, and energy storage while keeping Grayson Unit 9, Magnolia, and the internal combustion engine (ICE) units—currently being installed—online. Figure 1 shows the energy mix from the resources in the preferred scenario.

Figure 1. California Policy Preferred Portfolio Annual Energy Produced and Consumed Natural gas generation remains constant year over year as a result of the Magnolia Power Plant’s must-run status. Generation from Grayson and the ICE units drops to a combined amount of less than 30,000 MWh (megawatt hours) per year while Magnolia remains around 46,000 MWh per year. As a result, Grayson Unit 9 will run at a capacity factor of 2 percent while the ICE units will run at a capacity factor of 4 percent. The 95 of 839

1. Executive Summary The Results of Integrated Resource Planning Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-3
decline in natural gas generation is a function of added resources to serve load, a decline in power prices, and increasing carbon costs. The capacity build out for the preferred portfolio is shown in Figure 2. In the build out, natural gas capacity remains online through 2045. Some hydrogen is in the mix from the pending conversion of the Intermountain Power Project (IPP) scheduled to be completed by the end of 2025.

Figure 2. California Policy Preferred Portfolio Capacity Build-Out 96 of 839

1. Executive Summary The Results of Integrated Resource Planning Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-4
Timeline for Acquiring Resources Figure 3 depicts the planned resource additions and retirements in the California Policy preferred portfolio. The already planned ICE unit additions occur in 2025 and 2026; IPP’s partial conversion from coal to hydrogen occurs in 2025. The California Policy capacity expansions begin in 2027.

Figure 3. California Policy Preferred Portfolio Resource Additions and Retirements In the short term, GWP will continue to focus on increasing the penetration of DERs from customer-sited solar PV and energy storage, as well as on its effective energy efficiency savings initiatives, including DR and other demand-side management (DSM) measures. 97 of 839

1. Executive Summary The Results of Integrated Resource Planning Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-5
Figure 4 shows the annual cost of the capacity expansion action plan. There is no cost for capacity expansion in the first three years. The expenditures for the ICE units that are being added to the resource mix during these years has already been allocated.

Figure 4. Preferred Portfolio Annual Cost of New Resources In the long term, GWP plans to investigate the potential of using green hydrogen in its current natural gas units, and to explore the potential for other emerging technologies such as long-duration storage and SMR. While hydrogen is the most promising of the options for clean and dispatchable energy, there is no certainty that hydrogen will be available in the Los Angeles basin by 2035 or that it will be affordable. GWP will monitor hydrogen generation development over the next few years and reconsider it as the situation warrants. 98 of 839

1. Executive Summary IRP Key Findings
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-6
IRP KEY FINDINGS Three key findings that would help further a transition to clean energy resulted from the integrated resource planning process. Technological Progress Is Required A transition to a clean energy system relies on technical progress for medium and long duration energy storage, green hydrogen fuel, and nuclear SMR. Multi-day long-duration storage can shift variable generation over several days, however this technology is not yet commercially available. Long duration storage provides dispatchable capacity by shifting generation over many hours. Long-duration storage, however, has a low efficiency rate—approximately 50 percent to 60 percent efficient. Installation requires large amounts of land–approximately 3MW per acre—plus the cells cannot presently be stacked to economize space. Some pilot projects are being planned with small capacities. A company called Form Energy is developing a 100-hour Iron-Air battery with plans for small pilots with multiple utilities. Another company, ESS, is developing a 12-hour Iron Flow battery, which is also in the pilot stage. Medium-duration storage (approximately eight to ten hours) shifts variable generation from low demand to high demand hours within a day. While commercially available, it is not yet widely installed. Other promising technologies include green hydrogen fuel, nuclear SMR, carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), and renewable natural gas. While none are commercially available, hydrogen and SMR show some promise. Green hydrogen presents as the most probable technology, considering the possibility to convert existing assets to using hydrogen exclusively for in-basin generation and that this generation would be dispatchable and carbon-free. Due to the need for continued technological advancements and new infrastructure, the cost projections for green hydrogen use are high. Infrastructure is needed to get hydrogen to the power plants, a situation that is difficult in urban areas such as the City of Glendale. In addition, large losses occur when transforming renewable energy to hydrogen and then back to clean power. As previously mentioned, IPP in Delta, Utah will be one of the first hydrogen facilities in the world when it comes online in 2025. As a participant in this project with the City of Burbank and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), Glendale will have an opportunity to gain significant insights in the use of green hydrogen which will support the transition of our in-basin generation. SMR are, by design, small when compared to traditional reactors. They would provide carbon-free, fully dispatchable generation. Costs, however, will likely be higher than hydrogen. NuScale was attempting to build the world’s first SMR in Idaho, but that project was recently cancelled because it lacked the necessary subscribers to purchase its energy. 99 of 839

1. Executive Summary Developing this IRP
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-7
Local Thermal Generation Retirements Impact Reliability A full transition to clean energy requires that Grayson Unit 9, Magnolia, and the ICE units currently being installed be replaced with firm, clean options. However, retiring these natural gas resources create reliability challenges for GWP. GWP is required to maintain operational reserves based on the N-1-1 contingency planning. In 2035, the peak load is projected to be 416 MW. To cover an N-1-1 contingency, GWP can only rely on 113 MW from the Southwest AC Intertie transmission line; the remaining capacity must be local. Together, this generation amounts to 376 MW, leaving GWP with a 40 MW shortfall which must be met with local generation. Mature Renewable Resources Form the Foundation Based on the projected resource costs and market outlook, the modeling process selected geothermal, wind, energy storage, and hydrogen generation as foundational renewable resources. Solar was not selected due to the heavy build out of solar in California which has pushed market prices lower during solar hours. Solar generation, however, replaced a portion of wind generation in the modeling process because solar resources were required by the scenarios. The modeling process added geothermal resources as soon as possible in all scenarios due to its high capacity and RPS contribution. Hydrogen was also selected for its capacity contribution. Energy storage, especially long-duration storage, was selected to boost capacity for reliability and to manage fluctuations in daily renewable generation profiles.

DEVELOPING THIS IRP Many voices participated in developing the IRP, including direct and meaningful input from community stakeholders. The integrated resource planning process was based on modeling and analyzing six resource portfolio scenarios. GWP developed three of these scenarios; the STAG also developed three scenarios. GWP, together with its consultants Ascend Analytics and Strategen Consulting, formed the STAG to assist in developing scenarios to model and analyze in the integrated resource planning process. The STAG met six times during a little over five months. GWP also held four Community Townhalls, starting at the end of June and running through mid-November. GWP garnered valuable input and commentary from these Townhalls. In addition, the STAG considered input from these Townhalls when developing its three scenarios. The STAG scenarios put a heavy emphasis on customer resources (such as rooftop solar PV, energy efficiency, and DR) with a preference for local renewables, and clean energy timelines that exceed California’s 2045 zero-carbon requirement. As a result of community interest, Ascend included the social cost of carbon in its modeling and analysis. 100 of 839

1. Executive Summary Developing this IRP
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-8
Six Portfolio Scenarios The six modeled scenarios contain varied resources and requirements. Scenario 1. California Policy for Clean by 2045: Assumes GWP procures resources to meet the California mandates for renewable energy and clean energy. The mandates state that GWP must serve 60 percent of load with renewable energy by 2030 and 100 percent of the retail sales with clean energy by 2045. In this path, GWP continues to develop geothermal, wind, and solar resources remotely while adding distributed solar PV and energy storage in Glendale. Natural gas units are expected to remain online after 2045 to ensure system reliability while operating infrequently. Scenario 2. Zero-Carbon Emissions by 2035: Meets the City Council target of fully clean by 2035. GWP aggressively procures renewable resources including geothermal, wind, and solar while also building storage early in the process. Natural gas generation will be replaced or converted to a clean fuel source (such as green hydrogen) by 2035. Energy storage will provide necessary capacity to maintain reliable operations. The costs of this transition are uncertain as they depend heavily on the cost of replacing natural gas with green hydrogen. Scenario 3. Clean by 2045 with REC Purchases for Offsets: Procures resources to come within 10 percent of the RPS requirement and fills the remaining gap with REC purchases. This scenario is meant to show the least-cost path to fulfill the renewable energy and zero-carbon energy requirements of SB 350, SB 100, and SB 1020. Scenario 4. Zero Carbon Emissions by 2035: Meets the City Council target of fully clean by 2035. Aggressively procures utility-scale geothermal, wind, and solar while pursuing customer-sited resources. Rooftop solar increases significantly along with distributed batteries at residences. GWP would also work to increase energy efficiency savings. All natural gas generation transitions to green hydrogen in 2035 supplemented with long-duration storage. Scenario 5. Zero-Carbon Emissions by 2042: Converts natural gas resources to run on green hydrogen by 2042. GWP pushes for increased renewable procurement in the near- and mid-term while working towards transitioning away from natural gas. Given the longer timeline for a carbon free transition, GWP stops normal operation of Magnolia power plant in 2038 keeping it for capacity and reliability purposes. In 2042, all natural gas resources transition to green hydrogen fuel. Scenario 6. Zero Carbon Emissions by 2040: Achieves a carbon-free portfolio by 2040 through increased procurements of renewables and storage along with a full transition of natural gas to green hydrogen by 2040. 101 of 839

1. Executive Summary Developing this IRP
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-9
Resource Capacity Mix in 2035 Figure 5 shows the varying resource capacity portfolio mix in 2035 for all six modeled scenarios. Renewable resources form the bottom of the chart’s columns, followed by clean energy resources, with thermal resources topping the columns.

Figure 5. Resource Capacity Mix in 2034: All Scenarios
102 of 839

1. Executive Summary Acting on the IRP Recommendations
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-10
ACTING ON THE IRP RECOMMENDATIONS The goal of the actions resulting from this IRP is to attain the state’s requirements for GHG emission reductions by transitioning to renewable and zero-carbon generation, to reduce costs, to strengthen reliability, and to improve the lives of GWP’s customers. Toward that end, GWP will continue to explore and engage in power purchase agreements (PPA) that align with the capacity build out from the preferred portfolio. In addition, GWP will focus on expanding the integration of DER and look for innovative models to engage customers and business in the energy efficiency and DR programs. GWP is working diligently with LADWP and the City of Burbank Water and Power to explore joint infrastructure projects to expand and upgrade transmission capabilities, leveraging shared resources. GWP is updating its Electric Services Master Plan. Implementing that plan will ensure that GWP’s distribution system continues its high level of reliability and can effectively carry the forecasted increase in load. GWP continues to monitor and assess changes in planning assumptions, policy, markets, technologies, and all other factors affecting energy generation. GWP will respond to changes in these factors to pursue a constant goal of delivering reliable, affordable, clean energy to its customers. While GWP recognizes that the California Policy scenario, identified as the most viable solution for meeting the City of Glendale’s resource needs and IRP obligations, does not explicitly address the City Council’s goal of 100 percent clean or non-carbon emitting energy by 2035, it also does not prevent GWP from adjusting to meet this goal should technologies or resources advance sufficiently to make it possible. This IRP addresses the obligation of GWP to meet the State of California renewable and zero-carbon mandates under the guidelines of existing and probable technologies and resources. GWP will continue to seek options and alternatives to meet the City’s goal of 100 percent clean or non-carbon emitting energy by 2035. To that end, GWP is currently working with a consultant on a study to determine the utility’s and community’s ability to adopt additional solar penetration such that it is representative of 10 percent of Glendale’s electric customers. This same study will additionally consider the potential for developing demand management measures equivalent to a minimum total peak dispatchable and peak-load-reducing capacity of 100 MW. The effort to meet such goals are widely recognized as complex and onerous. 103 of 839

1. Executive Summary Acting on the IRP Recommendations
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 1-11
GWP is committed to finding opportunities that will help the City shift toward a carbon-free future while considering the implications of reliability, sustainability, and affordability to the Glendale Community as a whole. As evidence, Figure 6 depicts how GWP’s clean energy progress through 2022 has significantly exceeded state requirements, demonstrating its commitment to sustainable energy practices.

Figure 6. GWP Clean Energy Progress
104 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-1

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process
GWP developed this IRP by employing an integrated approach that considered several specific planning objectives. These key objectives were identified by GWP, the Glendale City Council, the California legislature, and various state agencies including the California Energy Commission (CEC), the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). The driving factors influencing the IRP are shaped significantly by two pivotal directives: the California mandates and the City Council’s 100% Clean Energy by 2035 resolution. These directives serve as the guiding pillars for the strategic decision-making within the planning process. The California requirements are: § Reduce GHG emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2030 as mandated by SB 350, and then by 85 percent of 1990 levels by 2045 as codified by Assembly Bill (AB) 1279. § Achieve a 60 percent RPS by 2030 by procuring adequate renewable generation, as mandated by Senate Bill (SB) 350, and updated by Senate Bill 100. In addition, meet the interim RPS goals of 44 percent by the end of 2024 and 52 percent by the end of 2027. § Achieve a 100 percent zero-carbon generation portfolio by 2045, also mandated by SB 100, with interim goals of 90 percent zero-carbon generation by 2035 and 95 percent zero-carbon generation by 2040 as mandated by SB 1020. The Glendale City Council Resolution 22-125 intends to: § Achieve 100 percent of energy sales from clean, renewable, or non-carbon-emitting resources by 2035. § Adopt policies and practices designed to reach a goal of having at least 10 percent of GWP customers adopt solar and energy storage systems by 2027. § Develop additional demand management measures, with a minimum total peak dispatchable and peak-load-reducing capacity of 100 MW. The convergence of these driving factors compels the IRP process to prioritize integrating renewable energy, reducing emissions by either transitioning away from or significantly reducing natural gas generation, and adopting DERs. The planning process is not only shaped by legal mandates but also by the local vision and commitment to environmental sustainability. 105 of 839

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process The Inception of the Integrated Resource Plan Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-2
THE INCEPTION OF THE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN Customer-Oriented Priorities GWP’s internal and community-oriented goals have remained constant since its last IRP: serving its customers with reliable, clean energy at affordable rates. In addition, the planning process retains a consistent set of priorities: Keep the lights on. GWP’s immediate and ongoing priority is to ensure that its customers’ lights stay on. Its customers—residents, businesses, industries, and municipal services—expect reliable power. Reliability in energy delivery supports the people and institutions that depend on constant power for their quality of life, such as: § Healthy lifestyles for household tasks, public lighting, and medical equipment. § Income generation for home offices, business interactions, and industrial production. § Quality lifestyles for the heating, cooling, and lighting of public buildings and schools. This requires a resilient infrastructure to provide this power. While there are many–sometimes conflicting–goals in creating an integrated resource plan, an overriding and crucial priority is reliability. Renewable and clean energy generation. GWP prides itself on being a leader in progressing toward a clean power system. GWP continues to aggressively pursue all available, cost-effective options for using renewable and clean energy resources to generate and deliver reliable energy. This IRP seeks to accelerate state mandated renewable and clean energy requirements to reduce GHG emissions that cause climate change. The community as contributor. GWP is no longer the sole producer of energy. Consumers are joining the renewable energy transition by installing rooftop solar PV systems often combined with energy storage, and saving energy by participating in efficiency efforts and demand-side management programs. GWP embraces and supports this transformation. The community as collaborator. GWP actively and intentionally engaged customers—its stakeholders—to meaningfully participate in developing this 2024 IRP. GWP has taken a leadership role in involving the Glendale community to support clean energy opportunities through a stakeholder technical advisory group and several townhall meetings. Steady, incremental steps. The future remains uncertain. GWP’s integrated resource planning implements a prudent, measured approach to meet community needs and state energy requirements, and to retain enough agility to respond to changes. A look back confirms that energy-related technologies continue to evolve; GWP expects them to continue that evolution even more rapidly in the following decades. The GWP plan aims to meet immediate needs while being flexible enough to quickly respond and implement technological maturations that best serve the energy needs of its customers. 106 of 839

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process The IRP Planning Process Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-3
Retain affordable customer bills. Affordability is an important pillar of GWP’s resource planning. Just and reasonable rates are important to its customers, and GWP continues to prioritize that goal. Affordable rates begin with evaluating the cost of generating and delivering energy from various resource options and choosing wisely. GWP is also committed to ensuring the benefits it delivers are fair to all Glendale customers, especially for lower-income residents.

Planning Horizon The IRP employed an overall modeling and planning period that ranged from 2024 through 2045. Due to statutory goals for renewable generation and clean (zero-carbon) energy requirements, the IRP also considered two consecutive timeframes within this overall planning period: Short Term: 2024–2030. This term focuses on identifying common needs for meeting existing demand and evaluating conditions (such as transportation and building electrification) that affect planning. Short-term planning also focuses on retiring, repowering, and adding renewable resources to meet regulatory requirements and increased demand, and handling system adaptations necessary with increased renewable generation. Ultimately, short-term planning focuses on attaining the state-mandated 60 percent RPS by 2030 requirement and scaling customer rooftop solar plus storage installations to support City Council goals. Long Term: 2031–2045. As required by state statutory goals, this long-term planning period focuses on attaining a 100 percent renewable and zero-carbon portfolio by 2045, identifying potential impediments, and incorporating new technologies to attain that goal. Long-term planning also involves attaining the City Council’s resolution of speeding up the state clean energy goal by a decade and potentially meeting it in 2035. In addition, modeling and analysis considered the year 2035, the year the Glendale City Council seeks “to achieve 100 percent clean, renewable, and non-carbon-emitting energy” for generating electricity for city residents.

THE IRP PLANNING PROCESS GWP begins the planning process by identifying its overriding goals and specific objectives that the IRP must address, and by defining the overall planning and modeling periods.

Overriding IRP Goals To begin developing the IRP, GWP first identified these overriding goals that form the foundation of its planning. Reliability. Maintaining service without curtailing energy during environmental, generation, and transmission contingencies. 107 of 839

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process The IRP Planning Process Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-4
Just and Reasonable Rates. Focusing on reasonable costs for providing energy, which translates to reasonable rates for customers. Resource Portfolio. Planning for and developing a diverse portfolio of resources to meet renewable and zero-carbon generation goals to generate energy that can be dispatched to meet customer demand throughout the day, every day. Efficiency. Achieving the highest level of productivity possible with minimum wasted effort to ensure the smooth delivery of energy. Constraints. Identifying state statutes, regulatory mandates, transmission and distribution issues, geographic limitations, and other restrictions on its operation and handling them adeptly. GWP’s overarching constraint is its location in a load pocket that restricts receiving remote generation through only two transmission lines, the Pacific DC Intertie and the Southwest AC Intertie. Due to operating issues, GWP can only plan to receive 200 MW of remote generation through both lines. (See Chapter 9. Transmission and Distribution for details.) Risk. Assessing the risks from regulatory and statutory mandates, new and emerging resource technologies, the volatility of fuel prices and transmission costs, infrastructure investments, and other unavoidable factors to determine an acceptable level of risk while minimizing its impact. Environmental Responsibility. Accelerating progress toward 100 percent renewable and zero-carbon energy; empowering customers to participate in clean energy programs, such as energy efficiency; and focusing on the social benefit of a cleaner environment through renewable generation, both for today and for future generations. Social Responsibility. Fosters economic, health, and electric rate benefits for low-income customers and disadvantaged communities.

Additional Planning Objectives for the IRP In addition to the objectives discussed earlier, additional planning objectives include the following: § Safeguard the sustainability and resilience of its access to the area bulk transmission system, despite its current constraints. § Ensure its distribution system and circuits can effectively handle increases in customer-sited DERs. § Simplify the EV charging station permitting process as a means of promoting the continued transition to transportation electrification. § Ensure adequate energy generation to meet forecasted increases in customer demand, transportation electrification demand from an increasing number of EVs and their charging needs, and building electrification demand from the requirement that all new construction be all-electric buildings. These energy needs are partially offset by increases in energy efficiency savings and in customer-sited rooftop solar PV installations. 108 of 839

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process The IRP Planning Process Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-5
§ Ensure compliance with all statutory and regulatory requirements. § Design and write this IRP report so that it complies with California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 9621 and the CEC’s Publicly Owned Utility Integrated Resource Plan Submission and Review Guidelines, Revised Third Edition (issued in August 2022) that dictate the IRP’s contents.

Steps of the IRP Framework Key characteristics of the IRP’s planning approach include fairly treating a wide variety of supply and demand options, considering the environmental and social costs of providing energy services, engaging the public in developing the resource plan, and analyzing the uncertainties associated with both internal and external factors and resource options. Steps taken in creating the IRP include: § Forecasting future loads, energy efficiency savings, and market prices and resource costs, and evaluating current resources. § Identifying potential resource options to meet future loads. § Assessing internal and external factors that directly affect the IRP. § Receiving and responding to stakeholder input and feedback. § Developing a detailed model of the GWP system and its ties to the bulk transmission system. § Developing, modeling, and analyzing a series of candidate resource option portfolio scenarios. For the 2024 IRP, GWP modeled and analyzed six scenarios: three developed by GWP staff and three developed by the Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG). (See “Stakeholder Participation” on page 2-8 for details on the extent of their participation and their involvement in creating portfolio scenarios.) § Determining the optimal mix of resources based on minimizing future electric system costs. § Creating and implementing the resource plan. 109 of 839

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process The IRP Planning Process Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-6
Figure 7 shows the process GWP followed in developing the IRP.

Figure 7. Integrated Resource Planning Process To evaluate the resources and assets necessary to achieve these goals, the IRP considered numerous assumptions in forecasting future energy needs and made the best use of GWP’s current resources and assets—including repurposing them, replacing them, and adding to them—to prepare for the sustainable growth necessary to meet the state’s clean energy objectives. Identifying GWP goals and objectives sets the ultimate composition of the energy portfolio for the IRP pathway the utility intends to take. The next step involves forecasting, as accurately as possible, factors that materially affect its ability to generate sufficient power to meet the future needs of customers. This involves: § Developing customer, transportation, and building load forecasts; fuel, power, and carbon price forecasts; energy storage cost forecasts; purchased renewable generation cost forecasts; alternative resource cost forecasts; energy efficiency savings forecasts, and the costs and remaining lifetimes of existing resources. § Assessing reserves and reliability, customer-facing energy efficiency and demand-side management initiatives, demand response, DERs, energy storage, supply options, environmental costs and constraints, integrated analysis, the planning timeframe, and risk and uncertainty.

$$'()(
.
*()$"'
.'#(%$'))$#
.
*!#

'$'()(
#'
,

#,

(

*''#)
($*'(

*%%!, "# ( $!,&(
$')
$!$ $')
$!$$')
$!$ $')
$!$ $')
$!$

#$!
#!,-#
((((/+)
)
$!'#%*)
$')
$!$

'

+-"'-1

'%1,",
&)%
&
'-('"-(+/%.-

#.,-
110 of 839

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process The IRP Planning Process Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-7
Analyzing these factors identifies the need, quantity, and timing of additional resources. These resources refer to any method used to meet customer energy-service needs: renewable and zero-carbon power plants, contracts to buy electricity from other organizations, and programs that improve the efficiency or timing of customer electricity use. In its planning, GWP assessed a broad array of alternatives that could satisfy the need for more energy services, including supply, demand, transmission and distribution, pricing options, as well as statutory, regulatory, and city policies. Supply-side resources include adding generating capacity; constructing new power plants; modifying existing power plants to extend their lifetimes or increase their output; purchasing power from other utilities and from non-utility companies; adding, upgrading, and repowering its distribution system; and identifying transmission constraints. DSM resources include energy savings initiatives that, for instance, promote new lighting systems, motors, and other equipment to improve energy efficiency or demand response programs that directly control customer loads at critical times. They also include customer energy generation and storage projects, such as rooftop solar and customer-sited batteries, that reduce customers’ demand for electricity from the grid. These DSM programs constitute resources that can substitute for power plants, transmission lines, and distribution systems because they reduce the demand for energy. Common risks include sudden cost and price fluctuations, extraordinary load growth, electricity spot prices, variability of hydroelectric resources, market structure, environmental regulations, regulations on carbon dioxide (CO2) and other emissions, and weather-related events. During this process, GWP actively and meaningfully engaged stakeholders through two main avenues: townhall meetings for the public at large and a STAG for a subset of community representatives. All of these input assumptions and risks were then encapsulated into six candidate resource portfolio scenarios. GWP analyzed these different combinations of supply and demand resources to determine how well they meet future electricity needs and at what cost. These analyses are repeated to test the various portfolios for their resilience against different uncertainties and to assess their inherent risks. These analyses test different assumptions about external environment factors, different estimated costs and resource performance, and different combinations of resources. Such uncertainty analysis helps to identify a mix of resource options that meets the growing demand for electricity, is consistent with its goals, avoids exposure to undue risks, and satisfies environmental and social criteria. The selected preferred resource portfolio is the result of these analyses. This IRP is the formal report based on the entire process of inputs, processes, and outcomes. The 2024 IRP presents the preferred resource plan and reasons why it represents the best mix of resources to meet GWP goals of reliable, sustainable service at affordable rates. Once adopted, GWP will implement the plan and acquire the necessary resources. GWP will continue to monitor changes in its environment and the implementation of the plan. As events and opportunities 111 of 839

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process Stakeholder Participation Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-8
change, GWP will modify the plan as necessary to adapt to changing conditions and integrate new technologies, at least every five years.

STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION Following feedback both from the City Council and the public about a desire for greater community input in the 2024 IRP, GWP sought to enhance the opportunities for public engagement in this IRP. Toward this end, GWP pursued two avenues: public input gathering, and a direct, hands-on approach with a subset of community members. For the first, GWP held four well-promoted Townhalls for the community at large; for the latter, GWP created and worked closely with a 13-member STAG. (See Appendix C. Stakeholder Outreach for extensive details on both approaches to stakeholder engagement.) Townhall Attendee Participation GWP and its consultants held a series of four Townhalls. The goal of these public meetings was to increase attendees’ knowledge on GWP’s system and planning constraints; gain community input into the IRP’s development, including scenario creation; and gather feedback on decisions made by GWP and the STAG. GWP and its consultants used what was heard during townhalls to inform discussions at STAG meetings, and in turn updated the community on the happenings at STAG meetings at the subsequent Townhalls for their awareness and feedback. At the first Townhall, GWP introduced the Integrated Resource Planning process, the basics of GWP’s energy system, the process for IRP modeling, and the process for how the public can be engaged in the IRP process. GWP solicited the opinions of attendees to determine their preferences for the types of resources to be potentially procured through the finalized IRP. Their priority was for local resources such as rooftop solar, energy efficiency measures, and demand response programs. Utility-scale solar and storage were also priorities. Attendees expressed a strong desire for transparency and community involvement in the IRP process. The second Townhall saw attendees being informed about the creation of the STAG, its members, and its accomplishments from their first two meetings. GWP introduced three anticipated modeling scenarios and further discussed the modeling approach, getting into specifics about the modeling process in response to attendee questions. GWP asked for their input on a range of questions related to Glendale’s potential clean energy timeline, their preferred and unpreferred resources, and the community’s cost sensitivities—all of which was provided to the STAG. Townhall attendees exhibited a preference for achieving 100 percent clean energy by 2035. There was pushback to the idea that achieving a sooner clean energy timeline might raise rates, with attendees expressing concern about asking customers to choose between these two priorities, especially low-income residents. Some Townhall attendees also emphasized the need to consider the experience of renters and their limited ability to participate in utility customer programs such as solar incentives. They expressed a desire for new program models to better engage Glendale’s large group of renters and multi-family unit dwellers. 112 of 839

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process Stakeholder Participation Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-9
The third Townhall began with a presentation about the multiple key inputs and assumptions to be used in the IRP modeling, including those related to Glendale’s electricity demand; future resource costs; customer energy efficiency, demand response, and solar adoption; and the potential for local resource development inside Glendale. The presentation also included GWP’s three scenarios and the STAG’s first two proposed scenarios for community feedback before the modeling process began. Attendees expressed concern over including renewable energy credits (RECs) in the third scenario. This led to attendees requesting a third STAG scenario. As a direct result, GWP and its consultants agreed to retain GWP’s third scenario, while making a third scenario available to the STAG, to even out the number of scenarios developed by GWP and the community. During the fourth, and final, Townhall, GWP, Ascend, and Strategen presented the results of the scenario modeling, key findings from this IRP, and GWP’s preferred scenario, California Policy. Strategen and GWP discussed the ways that community input has been integrated into the IRP, areas of community interest that have arisen across the process for GWP to explore further, and lessons learned for the next IRP process. As in past Townhalls, attendees showed heavy interest in exploring new opportunities for customer engagement in GWP’s clean energy transition, including through outreach and educational programs to spur behavior change and in the consideration of innovative clean energy programs (for example, community solar and virtual power plants). Hydrogen was a large topic of conversation at this Townhall, with attendees interested to explore the likelihood of hydrogen development in and around Glendale, cost assumptions on hydrogen, and other topics. To conclude, Strategen thanked all attendees for their active engagement in the IRP process and encouraged their continued participation as the IRP is publicly released and presented to City Council. Summaries of each Townhall and the presentation slides from each meeting can be found in the “Community Townhalls” section of Appendix C. Stakeholder Outreach on page C-2.

Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group Participation The STAG was designed as a complement to Townhalls by providing a venue for consistent and detailed community input to the IRP. STAG members were intended to act as a bridge between the IRP modeling team and the larger Glendale community, both by soliciting community perspectives and feeding them into the IRP’s development, as well as by updating the community on IRP progress. A central purpose of the STAG was to develop portfolio scenarios to be modeled and analyzed for consideration as the preferred resource portfolio. This happened over the course of six in-person meetings, facilitated by Strategen Consulting, with GWP’s and Ascend Analytics’ collaboration. A significant portion of STAG meetings were spent increasing members’ knowledge of GWP’s system, GWP’s unique planning and operational constraints, how the IRP modeling process works, and the inputs feeding into the model. Once STAG members were equipped with this background information, conversations on scenario development began, informed by public input gained during the community Townhalls. Because the STAG was a group with diverse perspectives, members had a variety of opinions on potential scenarios to test overarching priorities for this IRP. Some desired modeling the fastest possible pathway 113 of 839

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process Stakeholder Participation Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-10
toward 100 percent clean energy, while others called for a later target. Some expressed concern about resources such as natural gas and hydrogen, while others saw these as necessary to providing system reliability. Despite these differences, there were areas of mutual interest across the group. From the start, STAG members expressed an interest in maximizing energy resources sited in Glendale, including DERs plus utility-owned solar and storage, to achieve the state’s clean energy goals and overcome challenges associated with GWP’s transmission constraints through the Pacific DC Intertie and the Southwest AC Intertie. Members expressed a desire to discuss options for overcoming this transmission constraint as well as maximizing energy savings from energy efficiency measures, demand response programs, and customer-sited solar and storage. Across the first several meetings, email communications, and surveys between meetings, the STAG formed two initial scenarios: one that modeled the ambitious pursuit of Glendale’s clean energy goals and one that took a more moderate path to 100 percent clean energy. In devising these scenarios, Strategen’s goal was for every STAG member to have one scenario they supported, recognizing the challenges of reaching complete consensus. These two scenarios are: § A 100 percent clean energy by 2035 scenario that integrates City Council’s various clean energy goals (10 percent of customers adopting solar by 2027 and achieving 100 MW of DERs), with a focus on maximizing local resources. The scenario modeled accelerated electrification compared to GWP’s scenarios. § A 90 percent by 2035, 100 percent by 2042 scenario that models a long-duration energy storage project built in Glendale during the IRP period. The scenario also emphasized local resources, but with moderate assumptions that, fell between STAG’s first scenario and GWP’s baseline scenarios. As previously discussed, GWP presented these two portfolio scenarios at the third Townhall, together with its consultants, to solicit attendees’ feedback. After hearing an interest from attendees in an additional STAG scenario, GWP and its consultants discussed and agreed to provide the STAG with three total scenarios, while maintaining GWP’s third scenario, which was of interest to some affordability-focused STAG members. The STAG then discussed options for its third scenario and ultimately decided on an approach that would be an intermediary to its two existing scenarios. This decision was informed by feedback received at the third Townhall, at which attendees expressed interest in a scenario that achieved 100 percent clean energy closer to 2035, while maintaining emphasis on local resources This third STAG scenario has the following characteristics: § Achieving 90 percent clean energy by 2035 and 100 percent by 2040. § Developing 75 MW of DERs by 2040, as a slightly relaxed version of STAG’s first scenario. At the final STAG meeting, after scenario development and modeling were complete, GWP presented the results of the modeling and analysis of all six portfolio scenarios. GWP highlighted how the resource buildout, cost, and greenhouse gas emissions differed or aligned across the scenarios and their implications 114 of 839

2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process Implementing the IRP Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 2-11
on the state’s RPS and clean energy requirements as well as the City Council’s resolution regarding a clean energy goal of 2035. STAG members, GWP staff, and its consultants discussed the implications of these results and gathered STAG feedback on a potential preferred scenario. STAG members discussed many key areas involving the scenarios and the preferred portfolio, including technology availability (particularly of hydrogen), the impact of each scenario’s cost on retail rates, and the near-term investments. STAG members took a survey expressing their preferences for the scenarios. After the meeting, Ascend continued to share updated results with STAG and answer questions via email and phone calls. While STAG did not arrive at a preferred scenario during this final meeting, Strategen sent a follow-up survey to the group to gather their preferences. Summaries of each STAG meeting, the presentation slides from each meeting, and the results from both STAG surveys of can be found in the “About the STAG Meetings” section of Appendix C. Stakeholder Outreach on page C-30.

IMPLEMENTING THE IRP The energy industry has experienced profound and rapid technological and wholesale market evolution over the past two decades that shows no sign of abating. The IRP recognizes this fact. GWP considers this IRP to identify a moment in time. Resource planning is an iterative process. As such, GWP continues to monitor and assess changes in planning assumptions, policy, markets, technologies, and all other factors affecting energy generation. GWP staff will respond to changes in these factors to pursue the constant goal of delivering reliable, affordable, clean energy to its customers. 115 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-1

3. About Glendale Water & Power
Glendale Water & Power’s vision is to deliver reliable, clean, cost-effective, and sustainable electric power services to residential and business customers in a caring and cost-competitive manner, while creating a stimulating and rewarding work experience for its employees. GWP has provided this essential service for decades relying on a diverse mix of local natural gas power plants and an array of renewable and zero-carbon resources.

THE CITY OF GLENDALE The City of Glendale was incorporated on February 16, 1906, and spans approximately 31 square miles with a current population of approximately 193,116 residents. Located minutes away from downtown Los Angeles, Pasadena, Burbank, Hollywood, and Universal City, Glendale is the fourth largest city in Los Angeles County and is surrounded by Southern California’s leading commercial districts. Glendale is a suburb in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. The Verdugo Mountains run through the west central heart of the city; to the east are the San Rafael Hills. The city is bordered to the northwest by the Sun Valley and Tujunga neighborhoods of Los Angeles; to the west by Burbank and Griffith Park; to the east by Eagle Rock and Pasadena; to the south by the Atwater Village neighborhood of Los Angeles; and to the southeast by Glassell Park neighborhood of Los Angeles. The Golden State, Ventura, Glendale, and Foothill freeways run through the city. Businesses and residents alike have taken advantage of Glendale's central location, reputation for safety, excellent business environment, outstanding schools, state of the art healthcare facilities, and growing restaurant and entertainment options. Glendale is also one of Southern California's leading office markets featuring a wide range of properties and amenities. The City has over six million square feet of office space and is home to such recognized firms as Walt Disney Imagineering, Legal Zoom, Service Titan, Dream Works, Avery Dennison, and Public Storage. 116 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power About Glendale Water & Power Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-2
As a Charter city, Glendale voters determine how the city government is organized and governed. A Council-Manager form of government manages Glendale. Five council members are elected at large to serve four-year terms. Each year, the City Council selects one member to serve as Mayor. The City Manager serves as the Chief Executive Officer. The City’s Mission Statement is “The City of Glendale delivers exceptional customer service through precision execution and innovative leadership.” As a premier City anchored in pride of civic ownership, Glendale’s success is realized through a community that is safe, prosperous, and rich in cultural offerings. The City accomplishes its mission and realizes its vision by emphasizing fiscal responsibility; exceptional customer service; economic Figure 8. Glendale Water & Power Service Territory vibrancy; an informed and engaged community; a safe and healthy community; balanced, quality housing; community services and facilities; infrastructure and mobility; arts and culture; and sustainability.

ABOUT GLENDALE WATER & POWER GWP is the City of Glendale’s water and electric utility serving over 34,500 water and 90,000 electric customers. GWP’s peak load of 346 MW occurred in September 2017. The peak is expected to grow with the electrification of buildings and electric vehicles. !!

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

!! ##

""&& ##

!! ##

## &&"" ##!!

$$%%

$$ !!

!!""
##

117 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power About Glendale Water & Power Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-3
GWP Customers GWP serves a diverse spectrum of customer types, each with unique energy needs and usage patterns. Residential customers rely on the utility to power their homes for comfort. Commercial customers, on the other hand, look to GWP for energy solutions that drive sales and productivity while maintaining cost-effectiveness. In additional, industrial customers depend on the utility to fuel their operations, making it an integral part of their production process. Figure 9 depicts the breakdown in customer accounts, compared to Figure 10 which shows the energy consumed by each customer segment.

Figure 9. GWP Customer Count Figure 10. GWP Energy Consumed Award Winning Grid Reliability and Service Glendale Water & Power is a Reliable Public Power Provider (RP3). For the second year in a row, GWP has earned the RP3 designation from the American Public Power Association (APPA). GWP is one of 176 public power utilities out of 2,000 nationwide to earn this designation. The APPA designates RP3 to utilities that demonstrate exceptional proficiency in four key areas: safety, reliability, workforce development, and system improvement. GWP continually strives for excellence in these areas.

Membership in SCPPA GWP is a member of the Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA). SCPPA is a Joint Powers Authority, created in 1980, to provide joint planning, financing, construction, and operation of transmission and generation projects. Comprised of eleven municipal utilities and one irrigation district, SCPPA’s members 118 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power About Glendale Water & Power Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-4
serve more than 5 million Californians across a service area of 7,000 square miles. SCPPA members supply 16 percent of California’s power. Through its SCPPA membership, GWP receives discounted natural gas fuel for its Grayson Power Plant and its power sales agreement (PSA) with the Magnolia Power Plant. GWP has also executed PSAs through SCPPA with Magnolia, Pebble Springs wind facility, Star Peak and Whitegrass No. 1 geothermal plants, Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, and the Eland 1 Solar and Storage Center. In addition, SCPPA has assisted GWP with agreements for EV charging stations and related infrastructure, access to transmission lines for delivering remote generation.

Energy Mix GWP’s energy mix for 2022 is depicted in Figure 11.

Figure 11. 2022 Energy Resource Mix In 2022, 35.2 percent of the electricity supplied by GWP to its retail customers came from eligible renewable energy sources. Including generation from nuclear and large hydroelectric, GWP achieved 60 percent clean energy. GWP anticipates higher renewable and clean energy in its power mix as new projects come online. 119 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power Clean energy Progress
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-5
CLEAN ENERGY PROGRESS GWP is committed to finding opportunities that will help the City shift toward a carbon-free future while considering the implications of reliability, sustainability, and affordability to the Glendale Community as a whole. For the past decade, GWP’s clean energy progress (Figure 12) has significantly exceeded state requirements, demonstrating its commitment to sustainable energy practices.

Figure 12. GWP Clean Energy Progress
120 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power Resource Generation Portfolio Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-6
RESOURCE GENERATION PORTFOLIO GWP’s resource generation portfolio continues to evolve to meet state mandates for renewable energy and zero-carbon generation. To meet retail load obligations, GWP relies on a combination of both local and remote generation resources: owned and power purchase agreements (PPAs) of thermal, renewable, and zero-carbon resources, as well as spot purchases. Table 1 lists GWP’s generation resource portfolio. Unit Type Location MW Grayson Unit 9 Natural Gas California (Glendale) 48.0 Magnolia Natural Gas California 48.0 Intermountain Power Project‡ Coal Utah 39.0 High Winds Wind California 9.0 Pebble Springs Wind Oregon 20.0 Pleasant Valley Wind Wyoming 10.0 Townsite* Solar Arizona 50.0 Star Peak Geothermal Nevada 12.5 Whitegrass No. 1 Geothermal Nevada 3.0 Tieton Hydro Eligible hydro Washington 6.8 Hoover Large hydro Arizona-Nevada 33.0 Palo Verde Nuclear Arizona 11.0 Eland 1§ Solar with BESS California 25.0 Scholl LFG§ Landfill Gas California (Glendale) 11.0 Grayson ICE§ Natural Gas California (Glendale) 53.0 Grayson BESS§ Storage California (Glendale) 75MW/ 400MWh Intermountain Power Project–Renewed‡ Natural Gas / Green Hydrogen Utah 35.0 * Also referred to as Skylar Project, consisting of 55% renewable, 20% zero-carbon, 25% unspecified power. § Development in progress ‡ IPP Coal Plant facility will be retired and replaced with a natural gas-fired combined cycle (CC) power plant in 2025 Table 1. GWP Generation Resource Portfolio 121 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power Resource Generation Portfolio Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-7
Grayson Power Plant Unit 9 Grayson Power Plant Unit 9 is a city-owned, city-sited 48 MW natural gas-fired simple cycle (SC) General Electric LM6000 gas turbine that was installed in 2003. This unit stands as the lone unit excluded from the Grayson Repowering Project, ensuring its preservation throughout and after the entire power plant upgrade. Unit 9 plays a vital role in supplying local power and ancillary services to support grid stability. Figure 13. Grayson Power Plant Magnolia Power Plant The Magnolia Power Plant is a 310 MW combined cycle (CC) natural gas-fired generating plant with a nominally rated net capacity of 242 MW. The plant is located on Burbank Water & Power’s generation station complex adjacent to Magnolia Boulevard in Burbank, California. Magnolia began commercial operation in September 2005; it provides continuous firm and dispatchable power to six SCPPA members: the cities of Glendale, Anaheim, Burbank, Cerritos, Colton, and Pasadena. Figure 14. Magnolia Power Plant GWP signed a 30-year contract with SCPPA for 16.53 percent of Magnolia’s generated energy, which amounts to 40 MW of baseload generation. By operating the unit in a duct-firing mode, GWP gains an additional 8 MW of capacity, increasing its total entitlement to 48 MW. GWP expects to continue operating Magnolia as the City transitions its power supply to renewable and zero-carbon resources. 122 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power Resource Generation Portfolio Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-8
Intermountain Power Project The Intermountain Power Project (IPP) is a two-unit, coal-fired plant located near Delta, Utah operated under the supervision of Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP). GWP, LADWP, and the electric utilities of the Cities of Anaheim, Burbank, Pasadena, and Riverside are participants to a “take or pay” power sales contract with IPP through June 15, 2027. GWP’s present entitlement is 39 MW of the facility’s nameplate rating of 1,800 MW. Approximately 6 MW of its entitlement is from excess capacity sold by other IPP owners. This excess Figure 15. Intermountain Power Project capacity may be recalled in the future but is included as a firm resource. GWP is a partner in the IPP Repowering Project which plans to first convert the plant to burn natural gas and eventually to convert to burning green hydrogen. Initially, GWP signed a renewal contract for converting IPP to a 1,200 MW natural gas facility and subscribing to up to a 50 MW share of the repowered IPP. This contract was for a 4.166 percent share of the project through June 15, 2077. On July 17, 2018, the City Council authorized GWP to vote in favor of an Alternative Repowering proposal, which reduced the size of the proposed repowering from 1,200 MW to 840 MW. This renewed proposal retained its 4.166 percent share of 35 MW of generation and increased its share of the Southern Transmission System (STS) to 5.278 percent for 127 MW of transmission starting in 2024. The IPP Repowering Project also includes a plan to fuel the plant entirely with green hydrogen by 2045, beginning with 30 percent in 2025. High Winds In August 2003, GWP signed a 20-year PPA with PPM Energy (now Avangrid Renewables) for wind powered energy for a 9 MW share of the 145.8 MW High Winds wind facility located in Solano County, California. The PPA allows GWP a flat 3 MW of firm generation based on a 33 percent capacity factor at Mead Substation. Thus, High Winds provides 26,208 megawatt hours (MWh) of renewable energy annually to GWP customers. The seller opted to terminate contract early in 2023. Figure 16. High Winds 123 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power Resource Generation Portfolio Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-9
Pebble Springs Wind In November 2007, GWP entered into an 18-year contract with SCPPA for the purchase of 20 MW of renewable energy from the Pebble Springs Wind Generation Facility. The 99 MW facility, located in Gilliam County, Oregon, began commercial operation in January 2009. Pebble Springs has an expected capacity factor of 33 percent, providing GWP with Figure 17. Pebble Springs Wind approximately 57,000 MWh of energy per year. In addition, the project off-takers—GWP, LADWP, and Burbank—execute an annual exchange arrangement with a third-party for the delivery of Pebble Springs energy at NOB on the Pacific DC Intertie, where GWP has rights to receive and deliver energy to its service area. Townsite Solar Plant The Townsite Solar Plant, located south of Las Vegas and owned by Arevon, came online in May 2021. The facility features an innovative solar PV system with 237 MW capacity paired with a 360 MWh BESS. Townsite generates more than 500,000 MWh per year of renewable energy. On October 1, 2021, the RPS eligible portion of GWP’s 21-year PPA with Skylar Energy was assigned to Townsite Solar for the remaining 19 years of the agreement. Townsite provides Glendale with 160,600 MWh of renewable energy per year.

Figure 18. Townsite Solar Plant
Star Peak Geothermal Energy Project Star Peak Geothermal, owned by Open Mountain Energy and located in Imlay, Nevada, began operating in September 2022. The facility utilizes a mix of steam and binary resources, consisting of a single steam unit and four Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) units with a total nameplate capacity of 14 MW. In 2021, GWP entered into a contract with SCPPA securing a 100 percent share of Star Peak for a term Figure 19. Star Peak Geothermal Energy Project 124 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power Resource Generation Portfolio Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-10
of 24 years. The facility was anticipated to generate 60,000 MWh annually, but its actual generation is 40 percent lower than expected since it became operational.

Whitegrass No. 1, Geothermal, Nevada The Whitegrass No. 1 Geothermal plant is located near Yerington, Nevada and is also owned by Open Mountain Energy. This 4 MW binary cycle power plant began commercial operation in February 2018. In 2021, GWP entered into a contract with SCPPA securing 100 percent share of Whitegrass No. 1 for a term of 25 years. The facility was estimated to generate 19,500 MWh annually, but it is currently yielding 15 percent less than the projected amount. Figure 20. Whitegrass No.1 Geothermal Plant Tieton Hydropower Project The Tieton Hydropower Project is located near the town of Tieton in Yakima County, Washington. Tieton has a nameplate capacity of 13.6 MW. The Project includes a 115 kilovolt (kV) transmission line, approximately 22 miles long, that connects the generating station with PacifiCorp’s Tieton Substation. The Project was built in 2005–06 at the base of Tieton Dam, which was initially constructed for irrigation. At times during the year, the water Figure 21. Tieton Hydropower Project upstream of the dam is frozen and the plant generates no energy. The plant operates only when water is released through the dam for irrigation, which is anticipated to occur annually between the months of May through October. In 2009, through an SCPPA PSA, Glendale and Burbank established an equitable 50/50 ownership arrangement for Tieton, providing each city with 6.8 MW of capacity. GWP receives approximately 24,000 MWh of energy annually. 125 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power Resource Generation Portfolio Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-11
Hoover Dam Power Plant The Boulder Canyon Project (Hoover Dam), a concrete arch gravity dam, is located in the Black Canyon area of the Colorado River, on the border between Arizona and Nevada. The dam, located 30 miles southeast of Las Vegas, Nevada, is named after Herbert Hoover, who played an instrumental role in its construction. Construction commenced in 1931, and was completed in 1936, a little more than two years ahead of schedule. Upon completion, it was both the world’s largest hydroelectric power generating station and the world’s largest concrete structure. There are 17 main turbines at Hoover, nine on the Figure 22. Hoover Dam Power Plant
Arizona side of the Colorado River, and eight on the Nevada side. The original turbines were replaced through an up rating program between 1986 and 1993. Presently, Hoover can produce 2,080 MW of capacity and a yearly average generation of 4.5 million MWh. In 2017, GWP signed a new Electric Services Contract with the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) and an Amended and Restated Implementation Services Agreement the Bureau of Reclamation and the Boulder Canyon Project contractors of Hoover Dam for an additional 50 years. These contracts entitle GWP 33 MW of capacity from Hoover Dam. GWP receives approximately 54,000 MWh from Hoover annually. Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station The Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS), located in Wintersburg, Arizona approximately 55 miles west of Phoenix, is currently the largest nuclear generating plant in the United States. The facility is on 4,000 acres of land and consists of three reactors, each with an original rating of 1,270 MW. Units 1 and 2 went into commercial operation in 1986 and Unit 3 in 1988. With the completion of steam generator replacements in early 2009, coupled with other changes and upgrades, the plant’s total capacity has increased to 4,238 MW. PVNGS is Figure 23. Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station managed and operated by the Arizona Public Service Company. Due to its location in the Arizona desert, PVNGS is the only nuclear generating facility in the world that is not adjacent to a large body of above ground water. Instead, it uses treated sewage effluent from several nearby 126 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power Upcoming Generation Projects Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-12
municipalities to meet its cooling water needs. In addition, PVNGS does not use fossil fuels to generate electricity, making it a zero-carbon emissions facility. SCPPA’s share of the unit is 230 MW and Glendale is entitled to 4.4 percent, amounting to approximately 11 MW of capacity. GWP receives approximately 82,000 MWh from Palo Verde annually.

UPCOMING GENERATION PROJECTS Grayson Repowering Project: ICEs and BESS The aging units Grayson Units 1–8 are required to be repowered to continue to meet the energy needs of the City. Over the past seven years, GWP has explored and developed options for alternatives to the originally proposed 262 MW repowering of the Grayson Power Plant. The 2019 IRP recommended portfolio included 93 MW of natural gas-fired Wartsila ICE engines and 75 MW Lithium-Ion BESS capable of storing 300 MWh of energy. After numerous setbacks, the project was finally approved in 2022 with a significant reduction in capacity. The authorized Grayson Repowering Project has been adjusted down from five to three ICEs with a total capacity of 53 MW. Notably, the proposed 75 MW (300 MWh) BESS component of the project has been approved without any modifications in capacity. The ICEs and BESS are scheduled to come online in July 2026. Scholl Canyon Biogas Project The proposed Biogas Renewable Generation Project comprises four self-enclosed Jenbacher JGS 620 reciprocating internal combustion engine (RICE) generators with a total of 12 MW nameplate capacity. It is to be constructed at Glendale’s existing Scholl Canyon Landfill site. The plant will produce approximately 91,000 MWh of energy per year for GWP customers. The project, which uses the landfill gas from the Scholl Canyon Landfill in an environmentally sound Figure 24. Scholl Canyon Biogas Project (rendering) manner, will provide the City with an RPS-eligible resource. The project is currently underway and expected to come online in summer 2025. Eland 1 Solar and Storage Project GWP is a partner in the Eland 1 Solar and Storage project. The facility is located in Kern County, California, with point of delivery at Barren Ridge. The anticipated commercial operation date is in 2024. In December 2019, the City Council authorized a 25-year contact with SCPPA for 12.5 percent renewable solar energy, 127 of 839

3. About Glendale Water & Power Natural Gas Transportation Pipelines Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 3-13
BESS, and environmental attributes from the Eland 1 Solar and Storage Center. Under the PPA, GWP’s share was 25 MW of solar energy and 12.5 MW (50 MWh) of BESS. In January 2020, GWP exercised an option to increase the project’s BESS to 150 MW (600 MWh), increasing its share of the BESS to 18.75 MW (75 MWh). In August 2021, the Glendale City Council approved the execution of a Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service Agreement with the City of Los Angeles under LADWP’s Open Access Transmission Tariff to provide 25 MW of capacity to transmit Eland 1 Solar and Storage energy to the City of Glendale.

NATURAL GAS TRANSPORTATION PIPELINES GWP has the ability to purchase and ship up to 4,034 MMBtu per day of natural gas from Alberta, British Colombia to the Southern California Basin and distribute it to local power plants. This is possible through contracted firm pipeline capacity for natural gas transportation. Due to the various locations of natural gas refineries, storage, and limited pipelines, the price of natural gas can vary drastically at different shipping and delivery hubs. GWP’s strategy has been to retain options to purchase natural gas by maintaining four long-term pipeline contracts. Foothills Pipelines (South BC). Executed in 1991, the agreement with Alberta Natural Gas Company provides firm transport capacity from facilities’ point of interconnection of NOVA Corporation of Alberta at the Alberta-British Columbia border near Coleman, Alberta, through southeast British Columbia to a point of interconnection with the pipeline facilities of Pacific Gas Transmission (PGT) at the international border near Kingsgate, British Columbia. In 1998, Alberta Natural Gas Company was amalgamated with TransCanada Pipeline. In 2006, TransCanada Pipeline sold their facilities to Foothills Pipelines (South BC). Gas Transmission Northwest. Executed in 1993, the agreement with PGT provides firm transport capacity from facilities’ point of interconnection of Alberta Natural Gas Company at the international boundary near Kingsgate, British Colombia and Stanfield, Oregon, through the states of Idaho, Washington, and Oregon to a point of interconnection with Pacific Gas Electric at the Oregon-California border near Malin, Oregon. In 1997, Pacific Gas Transmission changed its name to PG&E Gas Transmission-Northwest. Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). Executed in 1992, the agreement with PG&E provides firm transport capacity from facilities’ point of interconnection of the PGT pipeline and PG&E’s Line 401 near Malin, Oregon to a point of interconnection at the southern terminus of the PG&E Expansion Project located at Kern River Station. Southern California Gas Company Backbone Transportation Service (BTS). In 2023, GWP was successful in bidding for firm natural gas transport capacity rights through the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) BTS open season for a three-year term. Using the BTS allows for natural gas received at PG&E Kern River Station to be shipped into the SoCalGas’s and San Diego Gas & Electric’s integrated natural gas transmission system with final delivery to GWP’s local power plants Grayson and Magnolia. 128 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 4-1

4. 2019 IRP Outcomes
After the 2019 IRP was adopted by the Glendale City Council on July 23, 2019, global events were underway that presaged an uncertain road ahead. The COVID-19 pandemic fundamentally altered virtually every aspect of life, both in the United States and across the globe, and created a tumultuous path that required careful assessment, flexibility, and resilience. These uncontrollable events affected how GWP implemented the action plans from its 2019 IRP. The utility made necessary adjustments to ensure that the goals set forth from that IRP were achieved to the greatest extent possible. Procurement strategies were modified in response to the negative effects of the pandemic including supply chain obstructions while also addressing changes in market conditions, regulations, and governing directions. 2019 IRP RECOMMENDED PORTFOLIO The 2019 IRP was developed in conjunction with the Clean Energy RFP project. The goal was to seek clean energy alternatives to the proposed 262 MW repowering project at Grayson Power Plant. Through this initiative, GWP identified new local clean energy sources, leading to a reduction in the initially proposed size of Grayson Repowering Project. The preferred portfolio in the 2019 IRP includes the following incremental local resources: § 28 MW of energy efficiency and demand response, including behind-the-meter (BTM) batteries § 23 MW of distributed solar and storage § 75 MW / 300 MWh of local, utility-scale batteries § 93 MW of ICEs to provide flexible and local back-up generation1 This chapter discusses GWP’s efforts on these actions over the past five years. 1 2019 Integrated Resource Plan, City of Glendale Water & Power, July 23, 2019; p. 9. 129 of 839

4. 2019 IRP Outcomes 2019 IRP Recommended Portfolio
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 4-2
Energy Efficiency, Demand Response, and Behind-the-Meter Batteries 28 MW of energy from these 2019 initiatives was broken down into 8 MW of energy efficiency measures, 10 MW of demand response (DR), and 10 MW of a city solar project. Energy Efficiency Measures. Energy Efficiency Measures. GWP launched a Business Energy Upgrade program in 2021 in partnership with Willdan Group. The program was designed for commercial customers to deliver 8.3 MW of permanent demand reduction by 2027 and more than 36,500 MWh energy saved from high efficiency LED light retrofits and targeted energy conservation measures identified through site audits. The program is on track and is anticipated to achieve the specified contractual objectives. See Chapter 8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives for details, and “Energy Efficiency Programs” (page 9-3) for specifics. DR Program. In April 2021, GWP launched a Peak Savings DR program with Franklin Energy to deliver up to 10 MW of controllable demand by 2024 from residential and commercial customers. Through this program, residential customers would receive incentives for reducing demand during peak hours by adjusting their thermostats by three degrees. Participating customers receive $50 for enrolling, $50 each year on their enrollment anniversary, and a $100 instant rebate for purchasing a smart thermostat, essentially amounting to a free thermostat for certain models. Participating commercial customers receive a complimentary site assessment to determine ways to reduce energy during peak events, resulting in a customized energy reduction plan to be implemented during peak events. Participating commercial customers receive up to $250 per event. Both residential and commercial customers can choose which peak events to participate in. GWP can call up to 15 DR events per year from June through October. To date, the program has only resulted in a reduction of 2.7 MW. Nonetheless, Franklin continues to promote the program to attain goal for residential and commercial participants by 2024. City Solar Project. GWP contracted with Black & Veatch, to perform a study that identified potential sites for the installation of solar projects on city-owned properties. The study selected 65 sites with a total capacity of 10 MW. Installation is planned to be accomplished in phases. For this 2024 IRP, this project was modeled for 4 MW to first be installed, then for the entire 10 MW to be installed by 2030.

Distributed Solar and Storage Through the Clean Energy RFP process, GWP considered a virtual power plant (VPP) resource in its 2019 IRP portfolio, with a total capacity of 13 MW of grid-scale solar and 15 MW (20.5 MWh) two-hour battery energy storage system (BESS) installed single and multi- family homes. The capacity subsequently increased to approximately 25 MW solar with 50 MWh BESS. GWP spent over two years pursuing this project with the vendor. Implementing the VPP technology turned out to be quite complex. This situation was only exacerbated by the industry-wide supply chain disruptions, inflation, and rising interest rates caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Nonetheless, GWP continued 130 of 839

4. 2019 IRP Outcomes 2019 IRP Recommended Portfolio
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 4-3
negotiating with the vendor. The vendor, however, decided that the VPP project was not viable. In June 2022, the vendor, on their own, terminated negotiations. Without delay, GWP issued a second RFP soliciting proposals to develop and deliver clean DER and energy efficiencies for 50 MW of reliable, dispatchable power located within the City of Glendale. The RFP identified commercial and residential solar PV with dispatchable energy storage, renewable distributed generation, energy efficiency and DR, and any other DER solution to meet GWP’s energy needs. Four responses were received but none of the proposed solutions have materialized. Furthermore, GWP has commissioned a study to investigate the feasibility of increasing rooftop solar penetration and DER pursuant to the City’s Clean Energy by 2035 resolution. This project is currently underway and will be completed by 2024.

Internal Combustion Engines and Battery Energy Storage Systems The 2019 IRP action plan called for fully retiring Units 1–8 of the Grayson Power Plant and installing five Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) units with a total capacity of 93 MW to provide flexible, local generation. The plan also called for a 75 MW (300 MWh) local, utility-scale BESS. Both were planned to be in commercial operation in 2021. On December 13, 2022, the Glendale City Council, through Resolution 22-189, approved the 75 MW BESS, only three ICE units with a total capacity of 54 MW. The delay in approval has resulted in a significant increase in cost. Both projects are now underway and projected to achieve commercial operation by summer of 2026, five years later than initially planned.

Additional Capacity Since the filing of the 2019 IRP, GWP has added 12.5 MW of capacity from a PPA with Star Peak geothermal and 3 MW from Whitegrass No. 1 geothermal, 25 MW of solar energy and an 18.75 MW (75 MWh) BESS from the Eland 1 Solar and Storage project (including 25 MW of transmit capacity through an Open Access Transmission Tariff with LADWP), and several agreements for transporting natural gas from the Pacific Northwest and Canada. The energy market in California is very tight, with many utilities competing for limited resources. Interconnection queue backlogs and supply chain shortages exacerbate the situation. This situation looks to remain tight, and perhaps tighten, as the 2030 deadline for meeting the state’s RPS requirements approaches. Given these market conditions, contract negotiations for at least three renewable projects have been unfruitful. Nonetheless, GWP continues discussion with developers to complete and acquire long-term renewable and clean resources. 131 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-1

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors
STATUTORY DRIVERS California has established itself as a global leader in sustainably addressing the impacts of climate change. For almost two decades, the California legislature has introduced and passed numerous bills that have substantially altered the operation of electric utilities across the state. The underlying principle in all of this legislation is to dramatically reduce GHG emissions across that state. Regulatory rules derived from the legislative bills serves as planning drivers for developing the GWP IRP. Two foundational bills set the standard. SB 350, passed in 2015 and established in 2020, established strict GHG emission reduction targets, RPS-compliance requirements for replacing carbon-emitting resources with renewable generation on the power grid, energy efficiency savings, and accelerated the transition to transportation electrification. SB 100 increased the RPS requirements established in SB 350 and established a series of goals for attaining a 100 percent zero-carbon power grid by 2045. The following statutes complemented these requirements: § Widened the GHG emission requirements set in SB 350. § Strengthened the RPS requirements set in SB 350 and SB 100. § Established subsidies for customer-owned generation (mostly from rooftop solar photovoltaic systems). § Set standards for a cap-and-trade program designed to lower GHG emissions. § Increased the effects of energy efficiency measures and demand-side management programs. § Codified transportation electrification initiatives and established measures to promote EV charging stations and streamline its permitting process. § Established measures that benefit underserved and DACs. § Set goals for adding BESS to a utility’s resource mix. 132 of 839

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors Statutory Drivers Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-2
These statues and other external factors influence GWP’s daily operation and profoundly affect its long-term resource planning. Taken together, these factors introduce a fair amount of risk and uncertainty in its resource acquisitions strategies and its commitment to deliver reliable energy at affordable rates.

Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Statutes Several legislative statutes mandated aggressive reductions in GHG emissions with requirements set for 2020, 2030, 2045, and 2050. Assembly Bill 32: California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 required that aggregated GHG emissions be reduced to the levels measured in 1990 by 2020. CARB is required to continue and coordinate the overall climate change policies. CARB is also required to monitor and enforce compliance through a process for utilities to report and Assembly Bill 32 2006 § Statewide goal for carbon neutrality by 2045 Senate Bill 350 2015 § GHG emissions 40% of 1990 levels by 2030 § GHG emissions 80% of 1990 levels by 2050 § Took effect in 2020 Senate Bill 32 2016 § Codified GHG emissions reduced to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 § GHG emissions 80% of 1990 levels by 2050 § Contingent upon passing AB 197 Assembly Bill 197 2016 § CARB prioritized GHG emission reductions from large sources Assembly Bill 1279 2022 § GHG emissions 85% of 1990 levels by 2045 Senate Bill 12 2023 § GHG emissions 55% of 1990 levels by 2030 § Still being considered Figure 25. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Legislation self-verify its emission reductions. CARB adopted a regulation for the Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and a Cost of Implementation Fee Regulation. AB 32 also contained a provision for a cap-and-trade program (see “Cap-and-Trade Program and Market” on page 5-6). Senate Bill 350: Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015. Following passage of SB 350 in 2015, this wide sweeping, environmentally-oriented bill included a provision to set precise levels of GHG emission reductions: 40 percent of 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent of 1990 levels by 2050. Due to the substantial impact of the bill’s provisions, SB 350 took effect in 2020, almost five years after it was signed into law. SB 350 also contained provisions for establishing RPS targets (see “Renewable Portfolio Standard and Zero-Carbon Resources” on page 5-4), increasing energy efficiency (see “Energy Efficiency and Demand-Side Management” on page 5-7), and promoting transportation electrification (see “Transportation Electrification” on page 5-7). 133 of 839

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors Statutory Drivers Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-3
Senate Bill 32: California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 – 2030 Emissions Limit. In 2016, SB 32 expanded the GHG emission reduction provisions implemented in AB 32 by codifying the levels set in SB 350: reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and by 80 percent by 2050. CARB is responsible for ensuring that California meets this goal. Since SB 32’s passage, GWP has been reducing its reliance on the gas-fired generation that produces GHG emissions in several ways: by transitioning to more renewable resources, increasing energy efficiency, promoting local rooftop solar installations, and transitioning to transportation and building electrification. Assembly Bill 197: California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 – Direct Emissions. AB 197 required CARB to adopt regulations to achieve the maximum amount of GHG emission reductions in a cost-effective manner and to prioritize direct emission reductions from large, stationary, and mobile sources. To comply with AB 197, GWP has reduced overall GHG emissions through several transportation electrification (see “Transportation Electrification Analysis” on page 6-8) and energy efficiency initiatives. Assembly Bill 1279: The California Climate Crisis Act of 2022. AB 1279 established a statewide goal for achieving carbon neutrality within the next two decades. The bill furthered GHG emission reduction goals by requiring an 85 percent reduction of 1990 levels no later than 2045 and to continue that reduction into the future. AB 1279 also contained a provision for an update to the RPS requirement (see “Renewable Portfolio Standard and Zero-Carbon Resources” on page 5-4). Senate Bill 12 of 2023. Introduced in late 2022 and still being debated, the bill seeks to decrease GHG emissions by changing the current goal of “40 percent reduction from 1990 by 2030” and replacing it with an aggressive target rate reduction of 55 percent. 134 of 839

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors Statutory Drivers Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-4
Renewable Portfolio Standard and Zero-Carbon Resources California RPS Statutes Five legislative statutes set various targets for replacing carbon-fueled generation with renewable and zero-carbon resources by establishing RPS targets starting in 2013 and culminating in 2045, with a crucial target in 2030. Senate Bill X1–2: California Renewable Energy Resources Act of 2011. This bill fundamentally modified California’s RPS by setting three new goals that apply to all retail electric providers in the state, including POUs, IOUs, electric service providers (ESPs), and community choice aggregators (CCAs). The bill defines compliant resources, establishes goals and Senate Bill X1–2 2011 Set three RPS targets: § 20% of retail sales by year-end 2013 § 25% of retail sales by year-end 2016 § 33% of retail sales by year-end 2020 and onward Senate Bill 350 2015 Set three more RPS targets taking effect in 2020: § 40% of retail sales by year-end 2024 § 45% of retail sales by year-end 2027 § 50% by 2030 with 65% from PPAs ≥ 10 years Senate Bill 100 2018 § 60% RPS by year-end 2030 and onward § 100% renewable and zero-carbon by 2045 Assembly Bill 1279 2022 § Statewide goal for carbon neutrality by 2045 Senate Bill 1020 2022 § Interim goals of 90% renewable and zero-carbon by 2025 and 95% by 2040 § State agencies powered by 100% renewable and carbon-free by 2035 Figure 26. RPS and Zero-Carbon Requirements Legislation minimum increases over time for a specific percentage of retail sales, and specifies the location and delivery point for renewable resources. The RPS targets are: § 20 percent of retail sales by year-end 2013. § 25 percent of retail sales by year-end 2016. § 33 percent of retail sales by year-end 2020 and thereafter. Glendale’s City Council must implement these requirements with the CEC, with CARB having the specific enforcement authority. Senate Bill 350: Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015. SB 350 called for a new set of objectives to improve air quality and public health, reduce GHG emissions to address the impacts of climate change, and expand other clean energy policies. The bill was signed into law in 2015 and took effect in 2020. The bill established the California's renewable energy procurement goal of 33 percent by 2020 and 50 percent by 2030; with the 50 percent target that must be maintained into the future. The bill includes an interim goal of 40 percent RPS by 2024 and 45 percent RPS by 2027. Starting in 2021, at least 65 percent of RPS procurement must be derived from long-term contracts of 10 years or more. The bill defined the renewable energy and zero-carbon sources that support the RPS goals. Renewable energy includes generation from solar, wind, geothermal, small hydroelectric, municipal solid waste, biofuels 135 of 839

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors Statutory Drivers Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-5
(biodiesel, biomass, and biomethane), fuel cells using renewable fuel, and hydrokinetic energy (ocean thermal energy conversion [OTEC], ocean wave, and tidal stream). Zero-carbon generation that does not emit climate-altering greenhouse gases include large hydroelectric and nuclear technologies. Senate Bill 100: The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018. Passed in 2018, SB 100 accelerated the state’s RPS set in SB 350 to ensure that, by 2030, at least 60 percent of California’s electricity is renewable. This percentage of renewable generation must be maintained at or above 60 percent from 2030 onward. In addition, SB 100 requires that renewable energy generation and zero-carbon resources power 100 percent of retail electricity sold in California by the year 2045. While not specified in SB 100, combustion resources fueled by biofuels or hydrogen derived from renewable energy resources are defined as zero-carbon resources. In addition, while all retail electricity sales in California must come from renewable and zero-carbon resources by 2045, the transmission and distribution line power losses can still be served by fossil fuel-powered generation. Finally, SB 100 required the CEC, the CPUC, and CARB to employ programs under existing laws to achieve 100 percent clean electricity and issue a joint policy report on SB 100 by 2021 and every four years thereafter. Assembly Bill 1279: The California Climate Crisis Act of 2022. AB 1279 established a statewide goal for achieving carbon neutrality no later than 2045 and thereafter. Senate Bill 1020: The Clean Energy, Jobs, and Affordability Act of 2022. In September 2022, SB 1020 added interim goals and the clean energy mandates established in SB 100. SB 1020 requires that eligible renewable energy and zero-carbon resources supply 90 percent of all retail electricity sales to California end-use customers by December 31, 2035, and supply 95 percent of all retail electricity sales by December 31, 2040. 136 of 839

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors Statutory Drivers Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-6
Subsidies for Customer Rooftop Solar Statutes Senate Bill 1: Subsidies for Customer Solar. SB 1 was enacted in 2006 to increase the number of rooftop solar PV systems, thus offsetting carbon resources and reducing GHG emissions. Potential Senate Bill 1 2006 § Required utilities to adopt and implement a customer rooftop solar installation process § Subsidized customer rooftop solar installations Figure 27. Customer Rooftop Solar Installation Legislation systems include microturbines, fuel cells, solar, and solar plus BESS installations. The bill raises the net energy metering (NEM) cap from 0.5 percent to 2.5 percent of GWP’s aggregate customer peak demand. Among related provisions, the legislation requires utilities to offer financial incentives for a limited time to encourage customer rooftop solar PV installations. A portion of those incentives must encourage optimal solar production during peak demand periods and energy efficiency improvements.

Cap-and-Trade Program and Market Statutes Assembly Bill 32: California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 established a cap-and-trade market for carbon emissions requiring CARB to create two types of newly tradable Assembly Bill 32 2006 § Created a cap-and-trade market program for carbon emissions Assembly Bill 398 2017 § Improved the cap-and-trade market program Figure 28. Cap-and-Trade Program Legislation commodities known as a California Compliance Instrument (CCI) Allowance and CCI Offset. Allowances are essentially permits created and issued by CARB that allows the holder to legally emit one metric ton (MT) of GHG measured in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2-e). A CCI Offset is created when an approved project results in a GHG reduction or removal. These projects must be accurate, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, and enforceable reductions or removals of GHG in the environment. An independent third-party verifier must periodically inspect these projects to ensure compliance with protocols created or adopted by CARB. To comply with AB 32, a CCI Allowance and a CCI Offset must equally offset each other to allow for the legal emission of one MT of GHG, measured in CO2-e. Assembly Bill 398: Cap-and-Trade Extension. AB 398 extended and improved the cap-and-trade program established in AB 32. The extension enables California to meet the 2030 GHG emission reduction goals in a cost-effective manner, and also generates billions of dollars in auction proceeds to invest in statewide communities. 137 of 839

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors Statutory Drivers Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-7
Energy Efficiency and Demand-Side Management Assembly Bill 2021: 10-Year Energy Efficiency Targets. AB 2021 required POUs to establish specific annual energy efficiency goals as a percent of total annual retail electric consumption and establish 10-year targets every three years, starting 2007. Before investing in new carbon-based resources, utilities must exhaust savings from all available energy efficiency and demand reduction Assembly Bill 2021 2006 § Utilities must institute all possible EE and DSM § Established 10-year targets every three years § CEC quantified all achievable EE savings § Funded through a 2.85% surcharge Assembly Bill 2227 2012 § Changed AB 2021 target requirement to every four years § Consolidated POU reporting requirements Senate Bill 350 2015 § Double statewide energy savings through EE measures and conservation Figure 29. Energy Efficiency and Demand-Side Management Legislation resources that are cost-effective, reliable, and feasible. The cost of implementing this program was funded through a 2.85 percent surcharge on customer bills. The statute also required the CEC to quantify all achievable energy efficiency savings to establish realistic attainment levels. Assembly Bill 2227: 10-Year Energy Efficiency Targets (Amendment). AB 2227, passed in 2012, replaced the three-year requirement to establish 10-year energy efficiency goals to every four years. In addition, AB 2227 also consolidated all of the POU reporting requirements into a minimum number of sections in the PUC. Senate Bill 350: The Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015. Among the various provisions set forth by SB 350, a key requirement directed state agencies to double the energy savings in electricity and natural gas end uses through energy efficiency and conservation by 2030.

Transportation Electrification Senate Bill 350: Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015. SB 350 required utilities to propose multiyear programs and investments to accelerate widespread transportation electrification that reduce dependence on petroleum, meet air quality standards, achieve EV charging station goals, and reduce GHG emissions. The CPUC, in Senate Bill 350 2015 § Accelerated transportation electrification Assembly Bill 1236 2015 § Streamlined EV charging station permitting Senate Bill 1000 2016 § CEC assessed EV charging station infrastructure for proportionate distribution Assembly Bill 2127 2018 § CEC assessed EV charging station infrastructure Assembly Bill 970 2021 § Set time limits for the EV charging station permitting process Figure 30. Transportation Electrification Legislation consultation with CARB and the CEC, approves these programs and their investments. Assembly Bill 1236: Local Ordinances Electric Vehicle Charging Stations. AB 1236 required cities and counties to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for EV charging stations based on criteria listed in the Permitting Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Scorecard. 138 of 839

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors Regulatory Factors Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-8
Senate Bill 1000: Land Use Safety and Environmental Justice. SB 1000 required the CEC to assess whether EV charging infrastructure, especially direct current fast charger (DCFC) stations, is disproportionately deployed by population density, geographical area, or by low-, middle-, and high-income levels and whether access to these charging stations is disproportionately available. Assembly Bill 2127: Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Assessment. AB 2127 required the CEC to assess all EV charging infrastructures to determine how well they meet the state’s goal of adding at least five million ZEVs by 2030 and reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Assembly Bill 970: Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Permit Application. AB 970 built on AB 1236 by clarifying the EV charging station permitting process and setting deadlines for application acceptance. The City of Glendale is subject to the regulations outlined in AB 1236 and AB 970, as they require all California cities and counties with populations more than 200,000 residents to expedite and streamline permitting process for EV charging stations.

REGULATORY FACTORS Several external factors drive the planning of the IRP. Some of these factors had a direct impact on the planning of this IRP; other factors complement the actions that GWP plans to implement as a result of the IRP.

Transportation Electrification Analysis Electrification of the transportation sector is vital to reducing California’s GHG emissions. A significant element of the transformation to a clean energy future is the electrification of transportation—replacing gas-powered internal combustion engine vehicles with zero-emission cars, buses, and trucks. In 2012, Governor Brown issued Executive Order B-16-2012 to electrify the transportation sector, calling on the CEC and other state agencies to achieve 1.5 million ZEVs by 2025. In 2018, Governor Brown issued Executive Order B-48-18 that increased that goal to 5 million ZEVs by 2030. In August 2022, CARB established an annualized roadmap to phase out the sale of internal combustion passenger vehicles by issuing The Advanced Clean Cars II (ACC II) rule which codified Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N-79-20. The rule requires that all new cars and light trucks, including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), increase the sales of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) from 35 percent in 2026 to 100 percent in 2035. The related Advanced Clean Fleet program helps electrify heavy-duty vehicles. 139 of 839

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors Regulatory Factors Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-9
Figure 31 shows the annual requirements for complying with ACC II.

Figure 31. Annual Zero-Emission Vehicles Sales Targets for the Advanced Clean Cars II Rule2 Transportation currently accounts for more than 50 percent of California’s GHG emissions. By 2037, the rule will reduce smog-causing pollution from light-duty vehicles by 25 percent to meet federal air quality standards. In 2040, GHG emissions from cars, pickups, and sport utility vehicles (SUVs) will decrease by 50 percent from today’s levels. By 2040, the regulation will cut climate warming pollution from those vehicles a cumulative total of 395 MMT. The rule delivers multiple benefits that continue to grow year after year. By 2030, 2.9 million fewer new gas-powered vehicles will be sold in California, rising to 9.5 million fewer conventional vehicles by 2035. This potentially results in over 12 million additional EVs within the next 13 years.

Building Electrification Impacts The CEC Building Energy Efficiency Standards, also known as Title 24 or the Energy Code, is an integral part of the state’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions and address the ongoing issues related to climate change. The latest updates to the 2022 Energy Code reinforces the concept of building electrification, which not only encourages the adoption of efficient all-electric technologies by reducing emissions from newly constructed buildings but also increases electric load flexibility to support grid reliability and enable increased opportunities for on-site renewable energy generation through solar. Along the same lines, the 2022 Strategy for the State Implementation Plan (SIP) adopted by CARB aims to reduce building emissions in the form of nitrous oxide (NOx) due to natural gas combustion. 2 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/california-moves-accelerate-100-new-zero-emission-vehicle-sales-2035 140 of 839

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors Regulatory Factors Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-10
Both the Energy Code and the SIP complement initiatives in CARB’s Scoping Plan, which calls for increasing renewable hydrogen for hard-to-electrify end uses. Upon its full implementation, the Scoping Plan would reduce the demand for petroleum by 94 percent below 2022 levels by 2045. The Energy Code means newly constructed buildings must utilize electricity as the primary fuel for its core functions. This approach deviates from traditional fuel sources that includes on-site combustion of natural gas, oil, propane, or other fossil fuels. While each entity has its own unique operation, a few overarching concepts for building electrification can include adopting heat pumps to decarbonize space and water heating for buildings, coupled with all-electric boilers and furnaces for operations that require high heat demand. Opportunities for BESS to respond to an increasingly variable renewable grid and electric vehicle charging infrastructure to support the shift to an all-electric fleet also play vital roles. Solar PV and heat pump technologies have evolved significantly in various instances and can provide cost-competitive solutions to making the switch, especially in a new construction setting. For commercial and industrial operations, adopting all-electric equipment can reduce maintenance costs, together with improved efficiency and less challenges with meeting air quality standards. Ultimately, the impacts of building electrification still heavily depend on the difference between the ongoing costs of energy to run all-electric equipment compared to a conventional fuel type. GWP recognizes the need for customers and site owners to assess their potential to electrify, allowing for better decision-making when it comes to investing in all-electric equipment. For its IRP, GWP has considered the impact that building electrification has on its energy forecasts.

Adopting Energy Reach Code Standards GWP supports the CEC’s efforts that result in reducing GHG emissions. On November 15, 2022, GWP adopted the All-Electric CALGreen Amendment to the California Title 24 Building Standards Code. This amended Glendale’s building and safety codes to adopt reach codes as they pertain to building electrification, customer solar PV installations, and EV charging installations. A reach code is a local building energy code that goes beyond or “reaches” past the state minimum requirements for energy use by addressing GHG emissions targets, energy efficiency, air quality, and public health and safety concerns. Reach codes involve building electrification, transportation electrification, and customer solar PV installations. 141 of 839

5. Statutory Drivers and Regulatory Factors Regulatory Factors Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 5-11
Reach codes provide an array of environmental, economic, and health benefits that include: § Lowering GHG emissions advancing climate action plan goals § Improving public health through cleaner air § Better preparing local customers to meet new state standards § Engendering more affordable buildings § Creating safer and more comfortable buildings § Increasing structural resiliency § Lowering utility bills The City of Glendale and GWP adopted three reach codes. Building Electrification Reach Code. Requires that all newly constructed single-family and multifamily residential buildings and nonresidential buildings be all-electric buildings. (Commercial kitchens can request an infeasibility waiver.) Solar PV Infrastructure. Requires non-residential and multifamily PV systems to be installed on all new buildings to offset 100 percent of projected electricity use or cover at least 50 percent of rooftop space. This reach code includes an infeasibility waiver for projects unable to meet the requirement due to shading or other technical constraints. EV Charging Installations. Requires EV charging infrastructure for new single and multi-family dwellings, townhouses with attached private garages, new construction multifamily dwellings with residential parking facilities, and new non-residential construction, with limited exceptions and subject to an infeasibility waiver. Adopting these reach codes continues GWP’s pathway to decarbonize Glendale’s building and transportation sectors.

City Clean Energy Goals In 2022, the Glendale City Council adopted a resolution for GWP to accelerate attaining California’s renewable and zero-carbon goals by 2035. (See Appendix J. City Council Clean Energy Resolution.) To comply with this resolution, GWP has modeled and analyzed two portfolio scenarios incorporating this 2035 target date. In addition, GWP is currently conducting a study to determine the feasibility of getting 10 percent of GWP customers to install rooftop solar PV plus storage systems by 2027. This study also seeks to determine the path necessary to attain a 100 MW reduction in peak load capacity through DERs and DSM measures. 142 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-1

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements
Fundamental to developing the IRP are effective forecasts for essential key variables such as energy demand (MWh), peak demand (MW), power prices, natural gas prices, candidate resource costs, and cost of carbon. These variables drive decisions on which resources to acquire, the quantity of these resources, and when to integrate them into GWP’s resource mix.

FORECAST METHODOLOGY The GWP IRP used the CEC Final 2022 IEPR Update, published on February 28, 2023, that included the California Energy Demand Update (CEDU) 2022 report for the mid-demand AAEE energy and peak load forecasts as a baseline in the modeling process. This forecast includes assumptions for the expected expansion of existing and future energy efficiency and photovoltaic programs as calculated by CEC analysts and considers Glendale-specific modifiers. Load contribution from EVs was calculated using the CEC electric vehicle forecast calculator. The CEDU report forecasts statewide electric energy growth until 2035. The IRP derived its forecasts by subtracting projected customer PV generation, energy efficiency, DR, and other DSM programs from the energy consumption forecasts. Ascend Analytics modified the CEDU projection for GWP to include anticipated large load additions in 2027 and 2028 that were not included in the CEDU forecast. The CEDU projects an annual 6 percent growth of PV generation, reaching 55,740 GWh in 2035, and an overall growth of approximately 28 percent in energy consumption, reaching 358,738 GWh in 2035. This forecasted amount considers the effect of transportation electrification and building electrification. 143 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Forecast Methodology Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-2
Power price and natural gas forecasts, as well as all candidate resource costs, are derived from Ascend’s Market Intelligence. Through rigorous screening of market fundamentals and geospatial dynamics, Market Intelligence forecasts capture changes in price volatility, curtailment, real-time market dynamics, and ancillary services markets. Carbon costs are derived from CARB data. Th Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) forecasts are based on data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Energy efficiency savings and DER forecasts are based on historical and predicted GWP data. Forecasts were input to PowerSIMM’s modeling and analysis software. PowerSIMM employs a stochastic construct. Through multiple simulations, PowerSIMM probabilistically envelops all possible future possibilities through coherent and correlated set of data inputs and forecasts. PowerSIMM simulates weather conditions, which drives GWP’s hourly load values, to model different realistic weather futures that drive different load futures. PowerSIMM then calculates the mean, median, and percentile demand possibilities that can be translated into capacity expansion requirements. 144 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Load Forecasts
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-3
LOAD FORECASTS Energy Demand Forecast Customer energy consumption, measured in MWh, is the primary driver of load in Glendale. However, behind-the-meter solar and storage, energy efficient lighting and other energy efficiency initiatives, electric vehicle adoptions, smart thermostats and devices, and building electrification shifts are beginning to have a key secondary impact to load. Figure 32 depicts GWP’s energy forecast over the planning period with and without the projected energy savings from GWP’s energy efficiency programs. The steep rise in 2028 is due to expected load increases from new customers in Glendale’s territory.

Figure 32. Energy Forecast
Peak Demand Forecast Peak demand, measured in MW, is determined by the largest amount of power that customers are using at one time. High demand tends to occur in the summer evenings when many people return home from work and make use of home appliances. Peak demand is primarily driven by heat waves and the power usage associated with air conditioning. 145 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Load Forecasts
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-4
The net load peak is the largest amount of power that is supplied by the grid after contributions from solar and wind are considered. Since solar and wind resources tend to provide energy during the afternoon and early morning hours, respectively, they are generally not well-suited for meeting the power demands during these crucial peak evening hours. This leads to the so-called “duck curve” effect where net load dips during the afternoon as solar production rises, but the evening peak remains largely unaffected. During the summer months, solar generation shifts the net load peak from late afternoon to early evening while providing a mild decrease in the total peak. As solar penetration increases, the net load peak will correspond to the loss of solar generation and be largely unchanged by further solar penetration. Thus, while increases in energy efficiency and rooftop solar may reduce energy consumption, these resources do not have a large effect on peak load. Avoiding blackouts requires meeting customer power demand at all times, thus it is imperative to have enough resources available to meet customer demand during peak hours. Peak load depends mainly on weather conditions; as such, it is far more variable than energy requirements. Figure 33 depicts GWP’s peak demand forecast over the planning period. The planning reserve margin (PRM) covers uncertainty in the peak demand forecast as well as contingency reserves.

Figure 33. Peak Demand plus Reserve Margin Forecast
146 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Load Forecasts
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-5
Rooftop Solar PV Installations Figure 34 depicts the forecasted growth in customer-sited solar PV installations. This forecast was used in Scenario 1, Scenario 2, and Scenario 3. The other three scenarios assumed increased DER forecasts.

Figure 34. Solar PV Distributed Energy Resources Forecast Energy Efficiency Savings Forecast GWP has implemented various customer programs to promote the efficient use of energy with a specific focus on key areas smart thermostats, lighting, refrigeration, and air conditioning. In total, these programs have generated approximately 15,343 MWh in annual energy savings for fiscal year 2022. GWP forecasts cumulative net energy savings of over 400 GWh over the course of the long-term planning period until 2045. 147 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Load Forecasts
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-6
Figure 35 depicts the annual savings throughout the planning period.

Figure 35. Energy Efficiency Savings Forecast A series of energy efficiency regulations apply to GWP, including SB 1037, AB 2227, and SB 350 (discussed in Chapter 5. Statutory Drivers). The City’s existing and future building codes also include the state’s green building requirements outlined in Title 24 and CalGreen, which contains specific regulations for energy efficiency. In 2021, the California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA) hired GDS Associates, Inc to analyze and quantify the potential impact of energy efficiency in CMUA member electric service territories.3 The CMUA study serves as the foundation for energy efficiency targets for fiscal years 2022 through 2031, which is to achieve 17,978 MWh per year in energy savings and 2,860 kilowatts (kW) per year in demand response savings. The energy and DR savings figures were derived from the 10-year average of the forecasted figures developed by GDS. 3 https://www.cmua.org/files/CMUA%202020%20EE%20Potential%20Forecast.pdf 148 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Load Forecasts
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-7
Transportation Electrification Impacts The transition to transportation electrification has been spurred by SB 350 and three CARB measures: the ACC II, Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT), and Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) rules. The CEC’s IEPR, through an AATE framework, forecasts the adoption rate and energy impacts from three ZEV sectors (light-duty, medium-duty, and heavy-duty) by modeling three scenarios: Baseline Scenario: Economic and demographic inputs; vehicle attributes such as price, range, refueling time, acceleration, and model availability; federal tax credits, state rebates and rewards, and high-occupancy vehicle access incentives; incentives resulting from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act; consumer model preference; and CARB’s Innovative Clean Transmit regulation. Scenario 2: Direct, post-process alignment of light-duty ZEV sales that capture delayed compliance or some exemptions with CARB’s policies, in particular the ACC II rule; lower prices for medium-duty battery-electric trucks to capture increased electrification. Scenario 3: Full compliance with all regulations (including the Advanced Clean Fleets rule) with a postprocess alignment of new vehicle sales with state light-duty and proposed medium- and heavy-duty regulations. The 2024 IRP used the Baseline Scenario forecast in the modeling for EV penetration. The CEC forecasts ZEV growth for the entire state, then proportionally allocates that forecast to individual utilities based on the relative size of each utility. Figure 36 shows the forecast for medium-duty and heavy-duty ZEVs a few years beyond the short-term planning period. Scenario 3, which accounts for complying with the Advanced Clean Fleet rule, shows a population of approximately 200,000 ZEVs by 2031.

Figure 36. Medium- and Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicle Population Forecast 149 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Power and Natural Gas Price Forecasts Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-8
Increases in electricity energy consumption complement the increasing ZEV adoption forecast. The AATE framework used a managed forecast, which is an energy demand scenario that adjusts a baseline forecast to reflect either or all the following: § The impacts of policies and programs that cannot be included within the basic architecture of the forecasting model. § Significant uncertainties about existing programs, funding, or implementation features. § Uncertainties regarding new policies and programs motivated by state or federal goals. Figure 37 depicts the corresponding increase in energy growth over the same adoption rate period. An increase of approximately 35,000 GWh is forecast for 2031.

Figure 37. Transportation Electrification Demand Forecast Technological advances have increased the efficiency of ZEVs. Improved fuel economy, vehicle travel model improvements, and consumption improvements for PHEVs have slightly lowered the energy consumption of ZEVs.

POWER AND NATURAL GAS PRICE FORECASTS As the demand for renewable and clean energy increases, the market will likely see higher volatility in power supply availability and price uncertainty. This volatility is due mainly to the variable nature of wind and solar, which combine for over 25 percent of renewable generation in California. 150 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Power and Natural Gas Price Forecasts Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-9
Power Price Forecast The shift toward low to zero variable cost resources is forecasted to result in power prices remaining flat over the long term, even as natural gas prices and carbon costs increase. The heavy solar generation during the day in California is forecasted to push on-peak power prices in the Southern California SP-15 market below off-peak power prices in the near-term. Figure 38 depicts the Southern California SP-15 Market power price forecast over the planning period.

Figure 38. Southern California SP-15 Power Price Forecast 151 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Power and Natural Gas Price Forecasts Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-10
Natural Gas Price Forecast As more resources with little to zero variable cost come online, implied heat rates will drop, resulting in natural gas plants having a difficulty clearing in the market. Natural gas prices are expected to rise over time while power prices are expected to fall in the near-term and remain flat in the long-term. Figure 39 depicts the monthly Southern California CityGate Market natural gas price forecast over the planning period.

Figure 39. SoCal City Gate Natural Gas Price Forecast
152 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Resource and Carbon Cost Forecasts Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-11
RESOURCE AND CARBON COST FORECASTS California Carbon Price Forecast The cost of carbon emissions is expected to continue to rise and accelerate over time. Over the course of the entire planning period, the carbon emission costs are forecast to increase by a factor of five. Figure 40 depicts the California carbon price forecast used in the modeling of all scenarios. Ascend’s Market Intelligence developed this forecast.

Figure 40. California Carbon Price Forecast
153 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Resource and Carbon Cost Forecasts Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-12
Social Cost of Carbon Forecast The EPA uses an estimate of the social cost of carbon to value the climate impacts of rulemakings. The social cost of carbon is a measure, in dollars, of the long-term damage done by a ton of CO2 emissions in a given year. The EPA last updated the social cost of carbon forecast on February 7, 2023. The SC-CO2 is meant to be a comprehensive estimate of climate change damages and includes changes in net agricultural productivity, human health, property damages from increased flood risk, and changes in energy system costs, such as reduced costs for heating and increased costs for air conditioning. Current modeling, however, does have its limitations; as such, the impacts from the social cost of carbon would likely increase. Modeling does not currently include important physical, ecological, and economic impacts of climate change because of a lack of precise information. Nonetheless, the current estimates of the social cost of carbon are a useful measure to assess the climate impacts of CO2 emission changes. Figure 41 depicts the constant increase in the social cost of carbon derived by the EPA over the planning period.

Figure 41. Social Cost of Carbon Forecast
154 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Resource and Carbon Cost Forecasts Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-13
Green Hydrogen Fuel Cost Forecast Figure 42 depicts this decrease in cost followed by a slight increase in green hydrogen fuel costs over the planning period.

Figure 42. Green Hydrogen Fuel Cost Forecast
155 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Resource and Carbon Cost Forecasts Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-14
Candidate Resource Cost Forecasts Figure 43 depicts the cost forecast for the three modeled BESS resources over the planning period. The graph captures only the capital cost of the storage resources and does not account for charging or maintenance costs.

Figure 43. Battery Energy Storage System Cost Forecast
156 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Resource and Carbon Cost Forecasts Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-15
Figure 44 depicts the PPA forecast costs for three modeled candidate resources over the planning period. Solar and wind costs are expected to remain low while geothermal costs will increase as more utilities seek firm clean energy that geothermal provides.

Figure 44. Renewable Power Purchase Agreement Cost Forecast 157 of 839

6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements Resource and Carbon Cost Forecasts Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 6-16
Figure 45 depicts the PPA forecast costs for three candidate resources that were modeled for potential addition over the long-term planning period. Hydrogen is shown as lowest cost resource among the clean and dispatchable options. Some additional costs are not depicted in the chart, such as the infrastructure costs for hydrogen and CCS. All three resources are still in the emerging technology phase and costs are highly uncertain.

Figure 45. Resource Portfolio Candidate Cost Forecast
158 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 7-1

7. Cost of Service and Rate Impacts
Maintaining affordable electric rates stands as a foundational pillar in developing the 2024 IRP. A comprehensive production cost modeling was employed to evaluate the total cost of each portfolio tested. Two factors drive the production cost model: expected cost and market exposure. The expected cost is the total cost for generating necessary energy; the market exposure is the amount of energy purchased from the wholesale market and its ability to effectively handle price volatility. By strategically addressing economic, regulatory, and environmental considerations, the IRP endeavored to balance increasing renewable and zero-carbon generation with reliable service while prioritizing affordability of rates for all stakeholders.

RATES In July 2023, GWP performed an Electric Cost of Service and Rate Design Study. As part of this study, a five-year financial forecast including revenue requirements, recommended debt issuances, and rate changes was developed from fiscal year 2024 through 2028. The goal was to evaluate and identify the optimal combination of debt and rate (that is, cash) funded portions of the capital program while maintaining financial stability over the five-year planning period. GWP is projected to serve an average of 90,000 retail electric customers with average annual retail sales of 997,000 MWh of electricity over the study period. Power is provided to customers through a combination of GWP-owned generation, PPAs, and market purchases. GWP currently operates the Grayson Power Plant and has various PPAs for renewable energy. Plans are in process to repower the plant by upgrading from steam boilers in combination with clean energy alternatives. 159 of 839

7. Cost of Service and Rate Impacts Cost of Service and Rate Design Process Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 7-2
COST OF SERVICE AND RATE DESIGN PROCESS The cost of service (COS) and rate design process includes five steps: four steps in the cost of service process and one final step to design rates. Figure 46 depicts the four steps in the cost of service process.

Figure 46. Cost of Service Process Steps Step 1 adds individual costs to derive the total revenue requirement. Step 2 separates costs into four functional areas. Step 3 classifies costs in each of the four functional areas. Step 4 allocates the classified costs over the various customer categories and municipal needs. Step 1: Develop the Revenue Requirement Developing the revenue requirement is the first step in the cost of service and rate design process. This step examines the utility’s financial needs and determines the amount of revenue that must be generated from rates. For municipal utilities, the revenue requirement is determined on a “cash basis.” A “cash basis” analysis examines the cash obligations of the utility such as operations and maintenance (O&M) expenses, debt service, cash funded capital projects, and City transfers. Rates are set such that the utility can pay its annual bills. To be more specific, the revenue requirement is based on an analysis of average expenses with adjustments for unusual or one-time expenses, the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), existing debt amortization schedules, projected debt issuances, and forecasted escalation assumptions and factors. The average revenue requirement for the five-year period was used and represented all costs that must be recovered through the electric utility’s rates. The analysis serves as a basis for determining the overall level of revenue recovery and provides a foundation for the cost of service analysis. There are two primary revenue requirement methodologies employed in the utility industry: the cash basis and the utility basis. The primary differences between the cash basis and the utility basis involve the treatment of depreciation, return on invested capital, and debt service. The cash basis, which is the most Step 1:Develop Revenue RequirementStep 2:Functionalize CostsStep 3:Classify CostsStep 4:Allocate Costs§O & M§Debt Service§Transfers & Taxes§CapitalExpenditures§ReservesTotal Revenue Requirement Power SupplyTransmissionDistributionCustomers
Demand (CP)Energy (kWh)Demand (CP)Demand (NCP)CustomerStreetlightsCustomer ServiceMeter ReadingCustomer Accounting ResidentialSmall CommercialMedium CommercialLarge Commercial & IndustrialLighting 160 of 839

7. Cost of Service and Rate Impacts Cost of Service and Rate Design Process Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 7-3
common method used by municipalities, includes debt service, but excludes depreciation and return on invested capital when determining the revenue requirement. The cash basis focuses on meeting the cash demands of the utility. The utility basis most commonly used by private or for-profit utilities includes depreciation and return on invested capital, but excludes debt service when determining the revenue requirement. GWP uses the cash basis for this cost of service analysis as it follows the traditional cash-oriented budgeting practices frequently used by government entities. In addition, the cash basis is generally easier to explain to customers since the cash basis attempts to match revenue and expenditures. Fiscal year 2024 adopted budget detail helped develop the base year for the financial forecast model and subsequent projections. The fiscal year 2024 adopted budget was used for the base year and then projected for fiscal year 2025 and 2028. The fiscal year 2024 adopted budgets data was adjusted to account for any unusual or one-time expenses. Projected non-recurring expenses or revenues were identified and incorporated in the financial forecast, as appropriate. Based on the financial forecast model, the revenue requirement reflects GWP’s total cost of providing electric utility services to various rate classes that must be recovered through rate revenues. The revenue requirement was calculated by developing an average of the GWP costs or revenue requirements for the period. The difference between the projected revenues and revenue requirement was calculated. The revenue requirement of $305,039,911 is the five-year average of the annual revenue requirements. If GWP desires, cash from reserves can be used to reduce the revenue requirement or address the under recovery of costs. Over the period, GWP’s average debt service coverage ratio is adequate and stays above 1.1 times of coverage. Unrestricted cash reserves by GWP are used to provide working capital, fund capital projects, mitigate market or price volatility risks to customers, and manage the cash flow of the utility. The reserves also provide GWP the flexibility to address changes in construction, schedule, and financing related costs (for example, the debt interest rates) for the approved Grayson repowering, as it is currently estimated in the forecast. In addition, these cash reserves are utilized for multiple purposes at the utility, such as working capital, rate stabilization (for example, reducing rate volatility and impacts), and capital improvements. Step 2: Functionalize Costs After determining the system revenue requirement, it is then assigned to the particular function or sub-function of the utility. Electric utilities like GWP typically have power supply, transmission, distribution, and customer services functions. Power Supply sub-functions include utility-owned generation, PPAs, or purchased power from market. Distribution sub-functions may include distribution infrastructure by voltage, metering, billing, collection, etc. Customer sub-functions include billing and collections, customer service, and meter reading. 161 of 839

7. Cost of Service and Rate Impacts Cost of Service and Rate Design Process Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 7-4
A cost of service for each customer class is developed to determine the specific costs to serve each class. Customer class revenues are compared to class revenue requirements to evaluate the current rate’s abilities to fully recover costs. GWP analyzed the cost to serve each customer class based on the developed revenue requirement. The cost of service results indicate the degree to which existing rates recover the costs to serve customers and are then used to design new electric rates. The cost of service analyses relied on the following key supporting data and analysis: § Reported revenue requirements and revenues based on current rates. § Total system and customer class demand and energy requirements. § Actual and assumed customer service characteristics. § Information obtained from customer accounts and records. The revenue requirement was then functionalized. Rates were unbundled into four functions: power supply, transmission, distribution, and customer service. The assignment of costs by function falls into two general categories: direct assignments and derived allocations. Direct assignments are costs that are readily associated with a specific utility function and are directly assigned to that function. For example, the purchase power contracts are an expense solely related to power supply, so it is directly assigned to that function. Derived allocators are allocation factors that are based on the sum, average, or weighted effect of different underlying factors. Derived allocators can be complex and should reflect the logical answer to the following question—what underlying activities drive the cost of this item? For example, administrative and general expenses are associated with the O&M of all utility functions. Thus, administrative and general expenses are allocated to each utility function using various derived allocators. The four utility functions are power supply, transmission, distribution, and customer service. Table 2 summarizes the functionalized revenue requirements for the test year. Function Revenue Requirements Dollars per kWh Percent Power Supply $235,946,706 $0.166 77% Transmission $7,122,397 $0.004 2% Distribution $43,355,464 $0.030 14% Customer Service $20,378,404 $0.015 7% Totals $306,802,971 $0.215 100% Table 2. Functionalized Test Year Revenue Requirements Step 3: Classify Costs Once costs are functionalized, costs are then classified based on the underlying nature of the costs. Of particular importance is determining fixed versus variable costs. Fixed costs remain a financial obligation of the utility regardless of the amount of energy produced whereas variable costs fluctuate based on system 162 of 839

7. Cost of Service and Rate Impacts Cost of Service and Rate Design Process Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 7-5
energy requirements. Further, fixed and variable costs are associated with utility requirements to meet customer demand, energy, and customer service needs. System costs can be classified into four generally accepted rate-making cost classifications: (1) demand or fixed costs; (2) energy or variable costs; (3) customer-related costs; and (4) directly assignable costs. This provides a reasonable basis for assigning total revenue requirements to each customer class. Step 4: Allocate Costs Once costs are functionalized and classified, costs are then allocated to the various customer classes. Allocation factors align with cost classification. Demand-related costs are allocated on measures of class demand such as class contribution to the system coincident peak. Energy allocation factors are based on energy consumed by customers. Customer allocation factors are based on the number of customers. Customer classes represent aggregations of customers that have similar customer usage characteristics and use the system in a similar manner. These groups of customers have similar cost of service results, which justify similar rates. Based upon actual and assumed customer service and consumption characteristics, GWP developed various factors to use in allocating the revenue requirement to individual customer classes. These allocation factors reflect accepted ratemaking principles and are based upon embedded cost allocation procedures. Embedded costs are the total system costs assuming utility resources are spread across all customers. Embedded costs are generally based on historical or known costs such as audited financial statements and budgets. GWP developed demand related, energy-related, customer-related, and direct assignment allocation factors. Step 5: Design Rates Rate design is the culmination of a cost of service study where the rates and charges for each customer class are established in such a manner that the total revenue requirement of the utility will be recovered in the most equitable and consistent manner, to the extent reasonable and practical. During rate design, consideration was given to the recovery of fixed costs in the customer and demand charges, implications of Proposition 26, as well as phasing in the proposed rates over time. In general, proposed and recommended rate structures meets the following objectives and best practices: § Rates are equitable among customer classes and individuals within classes, taking into consideration the costs incurred to serve each customer class. § Rates are designed to encourage the most efficient use of the utility’s system. § Rates consider other important factors, such as competitive concerns, conservation, GWP or City Council policies, and other overriding concerns. § Rates are simple and understandable. 163 of 839

7. Cost of Service and Rate Impacts Cost of Service and Rate Design Process Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 7-6
Rate design typically combines cost of service results and policy considerations important to the community. Specific rate design goals for GWP ensure that they are: § Based on cost of service results, improve fixed cost recovery. § Align with the cost of service results between and within classes. § Minimize customer and class adverse impacts while moving toward the cost of service, to the extent possible. The electric rates include a customer charge, energy charge, demand charge (if applicable), Energy Cost Adjustment Charge (ECAC), Regulatory Adjustment Charge (RAC), and the Revenue Decoupling Charge (RDC). The customer, energy, and demand charges are commonly referred to as “base rates,” while the ECAC, RAC, and RDC are referred to as pass-through adjustment rates. Rate design also includes rates to collect for additional revenue goals. The GWP revenue adjustments are not applied equally to each customer class, as the cost of service support varying rates for each customer class to gradually align rates that are grandfathered under Proposition 26. Gradual increases better align rates closer to the cost of service while minimizing rate shock. Ultimately, GWP must ensure sufficient financial resources are available to cover the cost of providing service and funds needed for capital improvements (such as the Grayson Repower Project, the Scholl Canyon Biogas project, and City solar projects). Such improvements help align GWP with State and Federal regulations as California moves towards reducing GHG emissions and minimizing the impacts of climate change. GWP continues to evaluate and minimize the impact to rates from future projects. Its primary goal is to provide affordable and reliable electric service for its customers. 164 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-1

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives
GWP continues to provide ways to help residents and businesses become stewards of the planet’s natural resources and to wisely manage energy costs at home and at work through various residential, business, and community programs promoting energy efficiency and demand reduction. Glendale advocates clean energy future for its residents. On August 16, 2022, the Glendale City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-125. This resolution intends for the City of Glendale to achieve 100 percent clean, renewable, and zero-carbon energy excluding renewable biofuels not already permitted or approved, by no later than 2035. The resolution also intends for the City of Glendale to adopt policies and practices designed to reach a goal of having at least 10 percent of GWP customers adopt solar and energy storage systems by 2027, and develop additional demand management measures, with a minimum total peak dispatchable and peak-load-reducing capacity of 100 MW. Subsequently, GWP hired a consultant to review its current low-income, energy efficiency, renewable energy, and RD&D program portfolio with the purpose of analyzing the potential for increased energy efficiency, load management, and distributed energy resources to augment the GWP power system. GWP is working towards implementing some of the recommendations and best practices and utilizing the findings of this report as a roadmap to assist in the improvement of its program portfolio in the upcoming years.

Conservation and Utility Modernization A key part of GWP’s diversified power supply is an ongoing commitment to energy efficiency. GWP continues to invest significant resources in conservation and energy efficiency programs for commercial, industrial, and residential customers. Energy efficiency remains the most cost-effective way to accommodate future energy needs, and projects in partnership with industrial customers are slated to surpass any previous savings in the utility’s history. Through its various Public Benefit Programs, GWP accomplished the following: § Provided 477 shade trees through its Tree Power Program. § Provided 624 incentives through its Smart Home Rebate Program. § Created incentives for 52 solar residential installations in Glendale. 165 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Contributions to Peak Demand Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-2
§ Provided over 74 smart thermostats and In-Home Digital Displays. § Provided incentives to five of its key account customers who participated in its Business Energy Solutions program for implementing various energy efficiency projects. § Provided six print Home Energy Reports to approximately 57,000 residential customers on their energy use and provided 81,000 customers with web-access to their electric usage. A total of 28,000 customers received electronic Weekly Energy Updates. § Provided a survey and free installation of energy and water saving devices to over 300 residential customers who participated in the Smart Home Energy Upgrade program.

CONTRIBUTIONS TO PEAK DEMAND Energy efficiency programs, DSM, DR, and DERs aid GWP in reducing peak demand. Glendale has several such programs already in place and plans to implement additional programs as selected through a Clean Energy RFP. These programs are described throughout this chapter. GWP continues to exceed its annual energy efficiency savings goals. GWP’s current savings targets are based on the Energy Efficiency Potential Forecasting for California’s Publicly Owned Utilities by GDS Associates, Inc. Figure 47 shows Glendale’s customers energy savings for the past four fiscal years.

Figure 47. Annual Energy Efficiency Savings
166 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Energy Efficiency Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-3
GWP estimates that its current energy efficiency programs have approximately 2 MW of peak demand impact, which is embedded in the peak demand forecast projections. In addition to the energy efficiency embedded in the demand forecast projections, clean energy and load reduction programs included in the recommend power plan provide average additional savings on peak.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS Since January 1, 1998, GWP customers have paid a state-mandated fee on their electric bill known as the Public Benefits Charge (PBC). Pursuant to Glendale Municipal Code section 13.44.425, the fee in Glendale is set at 3.6 percent of retail revenues. PBC revenues are maintained in a separate fund to be used for programs serving one or more of the following purposes: § Cost-effective demand-side management services to promote energy-efficiency and energy conservation § New investment in renewable energy resources and technologies § Research, development, and demonstration programs § Services provided for low-income electricity customers, including, but not limited to, targeted energy efficiency service, education, weatherization. and rate discounts Section 9615 of the California Public Utilities Code requires each publicly owned utility to acquire all cost effective, reliable, and feasible energy efficiency and demand-reduction resources prior to other resources and Section 9505(a) of the California Public Utilities Code requires each publicly owned utility to report its investment on energy efficiency and demand reduction programs annually to its customers and to the CEC. Since 1999, GWP has been a leader in the development and implementation of energy efficiency programs for its customers, and GWP programs have consistently ranked among the best in the State in terms of annual energy savings produced. Since 2000, GWP has invested over $57.7 million on energy efficiency programs for the benefit of Glendale customers and have saved over 286,000 MWhs. At today’s average electric rate, GWP energy efficiency programs will have produced over $378 million in customer bill reductions over the life of installed measures. Presently, GWP offers over 16 energy and water efficiency programs to help Glendale customers reduce their utility bills and operation costs. Over the past four years, Glendale reported saving 63.4 GWh from fiscal year end (FYE) 2019 through FYE 2022.

Commercial and Industrial Energy Efficiency Programs Becoming energy efficiency partners with commercial and industrial customers has always been one of Glendale’s priorities. Business Energy Upgrade Program. Launched in 2021, this clean energy program provides a comprehensive audit and direct installation of energy efficient lighting and other measures at commercial 167 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Energy Efficiency Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-4
sites. It is a seven-year program that will deliver up to 8.3 MW and 36,500 MWh of energy efficiency improvements in commercial buildings by the end of the program term, with an expected average 12.5-year life for the installed energy efficiency measures. The program totaled 7,890 MWh in savings in FYE 2023. Business Energy Solutions. First approved by City Council in 1999, this CMUA award winning program provides incentives for medium and large businesses to complete pre-approved energy saving retrofit projects. Qualified customers can receive up to $100,000 (increased from $50,000 in FY 2022) in incentives per fiscal year. Projects must be cost-effective from the customer’s perspective based on the value of total estimated energy savings over the life of the installed measures. Incentives for approved retrofit projects are limited to 40 percent (increased from 20 percent in FY 2022) of eligible project cost or 100 percent of the incremental costs necessary to bring a remodeling and/or new construction project above the minimum Title 24 energy standard. In no case will an incentive exceed the value saved energy over the life of the measures assuming $0.06 per kilowatt hour (kWh) saved. This program had a total of 1,327,027 kWh savings in FYE 2022. Commercial Energy Efficiency Program. This energy efficiency program launched in 2021 and is geared to serve approximately 4,000 commercial customers in the City of Glendale to offer high efficiency LED light retrofits and targeted energy conservation measures identified through site audits. The program’s goal is to save more than 36,500 MWh of energy and provide 8.3 MW of permanent demand reduction through energy efficiency. The program is on target and is expected to deliver the contract goals by the end of 2027. Peak Savings Program. Launched in April of 2021 and implemented by Franklin Energy, this program provides residential and commercial DR. By 2024, the program is expected to offer up to 4 MW of DR capacity from commercial customers for up to 15 peak load events per year. At the end of FYE 2022, a total of 0.545 MW was under control, representing 13 percent of the four-year commercial program goal. The capacity of the program is expected to ramp up over the next two-and-a-half-year term as additional customers enroll.

Residential Energy Efficiency Programs Smart Home Rebates. This program provides an easy-to-use and cost-effective solution for providing customers with energy and water saving rebates using new modernization technologies and web-based services. The program had a total of 52,959 kWh savings in FYE 2022. Smart Home Energy and Water Savings Rebates. Provides incentives to promote the purchase of approved energy and water saving appliances and devices. GWP began to offer rebates for various all-electric home appliances for customers to electrify their home. To facilitate and expedite the application process, GWP offers an easy-to-use web portal for residents to submit their rebate applications online. Tree Power. First approved by City Council in 2006, this program provides up to three free shade trees and arborist services to residential customers, ensuring the trees are planted correctly. When properly sited and cared for, a healthy, mature shade tree helps provide shade that cools the home and helps reduce air conditioning use. This program had a total of 96,354 kWh savings in FYE 2022. 168 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Energy Efficiency Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-5
Home Energy Reports. First approved by City Council in 2009, this program offers Glendale residents with a quarterly print and email energy usage reports to help them reduce their energy consumption. Reports also include action steps for each household to help them reduce their electricity consumption. Currently, the program is integrating the existing two-month billing data and a wealth of external data sources to educate customers on how they can save energy. The home energy report includes their Smart Grid data and access to the website where they can review their energy usage. The addition of interval electric usage data has given customers the ability to view their usage in monthly, weekly, daily, or hourly intervals. This program had a total of 7,026,701 kWh savings in FYE 2022. Smart Home Energy and Water Saving Upgrade Program. The Smart Home Energy and Water Saving Upgrades program evaluates the efficiency of customer homes, installs low-cost energy and water saving devices, and makes recommendations regarding additional energy and water measures customers can implement. The program inspects a number of energy and water saving measures, including lighting, HVAC systems, attic insulation, temperature setting for home environment and appliances, and water flow rates at all sinks, showers, and toilets. Additionally, the program installs several measures at no cost to the customer, including LED lights, low flow shower heads, faucet aerators, toilet displacement devices and toilet flappers. Online Marketplace. An online marketplace that allows Glendale residents to obtain program eligible energy and water saving products easily and quickly without having to visit a retail store nor the need to fill out incentive or rebate applications. Smart Home Energy and Water Saving Upgrades. The program evaluates the efficiency of customer homes, installs energy and water saving devices, and makes recommendations on additional energy and water measures customers can implement. The program inspects a number of energy and water saving measures, including lighting, HVAC systems, attic insulation, temperature setting for home environment and appliances, and water flow rates at all sinks, showers, and toilets. In addition, the program installs several measures at no cost to the customer, including LED lights, low flow shower heads, faucet aerators, toilet displacement devices and toilet flappers. In School Energy & Water Conservation Education. First approved by City Council in 2001. The program was on hold during the pandemic and relaunched in FY 2022-23. This program provides energy and water conservation education in local public and private schools. High Bill Alerts. These alerts are designed to analyze Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI) data to help customers save energy and money when they are likely to consume more energy than usual for a billing period. Before the end of a billing period, High Bill Alerts inform customers that they are likely to have high energy use, and they provide insights to help customers reduce their consumption before the billing period ends. Weekly Energy Updates. A weekly email report sent to customers to inform them of their energy usage patterns, trends, and projected energy usage or costs. In-Home Display and Thermostat Program. GWP partnered with CEIVA Energy, LLC to provide a unique In-Home Display (IHD) solution for residential customers. The CEIVA IHD is a digital picture frame that 169 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Energy Efficiency Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-6
integrates customer’s personal photographs with meaningful and useful historical water usage information and near real time electric consumption information. The CEIVA IHD works as a home gateway that simultaneously communicates with GWP’s electric digital meters as well as the customer’s existing home networks via Wi-Fi or Ethernet. In addition to providing interval energy and water consumption usage information, GWP has the ability to enhance outreach by pushing the energy efficiency program, conservation, and event messages directly to the IHD. This program was modified, and it now integrates the installation of smart thermostats.

Conservation Voltage Reduction Programs Historically, GWP has concentrated its PBC expenditures in low income, energy efficiency, and solar programs. One of GWP’s strategic goals is to begin offering new programs and services that allow customers to take advantage of GWP’s modernization investments. GWP researched, developed, and demonstrated modernization programs as the need arose. GWP’s Conservation Voltage Reduction (CVR) program stands as an example for other POUs in achieving the energy efficiency goals of SB 350. As stated in the CEC report Senate Bill 350: Doubling Energy Efficiency Savings by 2030: “Conservation Voltage Reduction (CVR) is a proven technology for reducing energy use and peak demand. CVR improves the efficiency of the distribution system by optimizing voltage.” CVR has been around the utility industry for over 40 years. It is only recently that modern advances in data acquisition capabilities, computer processing, and general sophistication about dynamic, real-time control have fundamentally changed the CVR picture of its earliest years. GWP continues to work with Dominion Voltage Inc to expand its CVR program system wide. CVR conserves electricity by operating electric customer voltage in the lower half of 10 percent voltage band required by equipment standards using the voltage data collected from the Advanced Meter Reading Infrastructure (AMI) to distribution feeders. GWP conducts a study of GWP conservation saving at the end of each year. For FYE 2022, GWP increased its infrastructure to 23 transformers and 38 feeders that are in CVR mode with a combined savings of 4,229 MWh. The percentage of savings by transformer ranged from 0.56 percent to 2.22 percent; the average savings by feeder was 1.38 percent. This program is a cost-effective DSM program. Using Dominion Voltage’s Edge system, CVR builds on GWP’s investment in AMI by using the data generated by the new digital meters and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) to reduce customer energy consumption by maintaining optimal voltage levels on GWP’s distribution transformers and feeders. Roughly 95 percent of the savings generated by Dominion Voltage’s Edge CVR are in the customer’s home. When GWP started the program in 2014, the program was expected to produce energy savings of two to four percent in participating transformers and feeders, resulting in a total estimated savings of 14,430–28,378 MWh annually. Results for the first two years of the program verified these estimates. 170 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Energy Efficiency Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-7
Table 3 shows measured and projected results from GWP’s CVR program.

Program Year CVR Transformers CVR Feeders Annual EE Savings (MWh) Lifecycle GHG Reductions (Tons) Incremental Cost* TRC Benefit Cost Test FYE 2019 20 35 4,287 3,038 $119,165 6.72 FYE 2020 22 37 4,254 3,015 $124,470 2.43 FYE 2021 24 40 4,229 2,997 $134,924 2.48 FYE 2022 24 40 4,062 2,879 $122,944 2.72 Full Program 90 152 16,832 11,929 $501,503 — * Annual cost includes onetime perpetual license fee and pilot costs prorated over 54 feeders, plus program overhead, labor, and materials to upgrade and maintain transformers and feeders during the program year. Program life is assumed to be one. Table 3. Conservation Voltage Reduction Program Results Senate Bill 350 requires the CEC to establish annual targets that will achieve a cumulative doubling of statewide energy efficiency savings and demand reductions in electricity and natural gas use.4 The CEC Report suggests that CVR can play a key role meeting these goals. In addition to the above, existing modernization energy efficiency programs, GWP launched these new energy efficiency programs: Peak Time of Use Energy Monitor and App. CEIVA Energy’s time of use (TOU) offering includes the Peak Energy Price Monitor and App. These tools aid customers in optimizing their electricity usage. The monitor and app update in real-time and are designed to be easily visible and usable in high traffic areas like kitchens to help customers understand GWP’s TOU rates and how they can change their energy use habits to save on their energy bills. GWP plans to launch this program in the near future. Online Store for Energy Efficiency & Water Measures. An online market store for customers to purchase discounted energy and water efficiency measures and smart home energy devices. This program has already been launched.

Energy Efficiency Portfolio Results In FYE 2022, GWP participation increased in many energy efficiency programs, which resulted in higher MWh savings. During this reporting year, GWP was able to reopen customer programs that were closed during the pandemic. The reopening of the Smart Home Energy and Water Saving Upgrade program along with the launch of the new Business Energy Upgrade program yielded a higher kW and kWh savings for its overall portfolio. GWP’s new Business Energy Upgrade program, Home Energy Reports, Business Energy Solutions Program, and the Smart Home Energy and Water Saving Upgrade Program continued to produce the most energy savings. The Home Energy Reports had the greatest impact on residential customers reaching the majority of 4 California Public Res. Code § 25310(c)(1). 171 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Energy Efficiency Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-8
customers and providing constant communication and engagement. GWP also launched the Weekly Energy Updates to engage and educate customers with personalized insights and programs marketing via email. The Business Energy Solutions Program is a CMUA award winning program that is designed to allow GWP large business customers the flexibility to define their own needs and develop their own energy efficiency projects. The Business Energy Solutions Program guidelines were changed by increasing the total incentive cap to $100,000 per fiscal year and also increasing the incentive per project to 40 percent of eligible project cost. Table 4 illustrates the effectiveness of GWP’s energy efficiency programs in FYE 2022 as reported to the CEC on March 15, 2023. Energy Efficiency Programs MWh % Home Energy Reports 7,027 46% Conservation Voltage Reduction Program 4,062 26% Business Energy Upgrade Program 1,423 9% Business Energy Solutions 1,327 9% Smart Business Energy Savings Upgrades 1,177 8% Other Programs: In-Home Display and Thermostat Program, LED Streetlight Upgrade Program, Online Marketplace, Peak Savings DR Program, Shade Tree Program, Smart Home Energy Water Saving Upgrade Program, and Smart Home Rebates 327 2% Net Annual Energy Savings 15,343 100% Table 4. Energy Efficiency Program Results Fiscal Year End 2022 Some other relevant facts include: § Glendale spent $3.3 million on energy efficiency programs. § Glendale programs reduced peak demand by 1.5 MW. § Net lifecycle savings from GWP’s efficiency portfolio totaled 71,870 MWh. § Glendale’s energy efficiency portfolio scored a 1.4 in the Total Resource Cost (TRC) metric, a calculation used to measure and determine program cost-effectiveness. 172 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Energy Efficiency Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-9
Setting Energy Efficiency Potential Targets AB 2021 requires each publicly owned utility to identify potential energy efficiency savings, establish energy efficiency targets, and report on these findings to the CEC and customers. AB 2227 updated the reporting frequency of the 10-year potential study to every four years. Since FYE 2007, GWP has consistently exceeded its annual energy efficiency target, consistently ranking among the top ten California POUs in achieved efficiency savings. Figure 48 shows that Glendale currently ranks third in energy efficiency savings among all POUs.

Figure 48. Energy Efficiency Net Savings as a Percent of Sales for California POUs GWP, along with CMUA members, contracted GDS Associates, Inc. to develop a study that provides 10-year DSM potential target goals for 39 CMUA utilities. The study identified achievable and cost-effective efficiency savings and established annual targets from 2022–2031 for reaching these goals. Table 5 shows GWP’s energy efficiency targets. Glendale 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 Energy Efficiency (MWh) 16,957 17,504 17,686 18,263 18,592 18,648 18,548 18,332 17,866 17,385 Total Incremental Potential % of Total Sales 1.76% 1.81% 1.82% 1.88% 1.91% 1.92% 19.2% 19.0% 1.86% 1.82% Demand Reduction (kW) 2,847 2,887 2,866 2,919 2,935 2,915 2,881 2,840 2,777 2,736 Table 5. Energy Efficiency Targets with Codes and Standards 173 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Energy Efficiency Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-10
The CEC adjusted the energy efficiency targets that were submitted by POUs in April 2021. The updated targets exclude code and standard savings and shift from “gross” to “net” for calculating historical and future savings. The final CEC targets for GWP’s energy efficiency5 are displayed in Figure 49.

Figure 49. Cumulative Energy Efficiency Savings with CEC Adjustments CEC targets for GWP’s energy efficiency savings targets exclude code and standard savings. On February 26, 2021, GDS provided GWP with the results its 2020 CMUA Energy Efficiency Potential Forecasting Study. The results are specific to the Glendale service territory and account for unique characteristics of the service area, customer base, climate zone, economic conditions, and other relevant factors. This study provides a roadmap for Glendale to develop strategies and programs for energy efficiency. The development of market potential estimates for a range of feasible measures is useful for program planning and modification purposes. The City of Glendale's energy efficiency program target for the next 10 years (2022 to 2031) is set at 179,779 MWh. This results in an average annual target of 1.86 percent of total projected energy sales. 5 Table A-10 of CEC Final Commission Report: “Senate Bill 350: Doubling Energy Efficiency Savings by 2030”, 10/26/2017 174 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Demand Response Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-11
Figure 50 provides the market potential for the residential and non-residential sectors and CVR, as well as the total incremental potential as a percentage of total sales for the 10-year period of 2022 to 2031.

Figure 50. Net Incremental Market Potential by Sector and Percent of Sales DEMAND RESPONSE PROGRAMS Demand Response is an increasingly valuable resource that will support Glendale in meeting electricity demand and help maintain reliability. Through the Clean Energy RFP Glendale evaluated several demand response options that will be added to GWP’s portfolio to leverage the latest technology to increase DR capacity and assist in achieving energy efficiency goals. GWP sends email notifications to its top 300 customers asking them to conserve energy. Notifications are also placed on the GWP website as well as Twitter and Facebook. A press release is issued with energy conservation tips to all local news outlets. Glendale’s local GTV6 channel is also notified and displays information related to an upcoming peak day alert. These communications encourage customers to adjust their energy consumption during periods of peak energy demand. Here are GWP’s current DR programs. Residential and Commercial DR Program. This program launched in 2021 provides commercial and residential DR. The residential portion of the program focuses on installing smart thermostats in single and multifamily homes, with the goal of delivering a total of 6 MW of capacity to GWP by the end of 2024 and annual incentives to customers to ensure ongoing participation. Customers are also able to enroll their previously installed smart thermostats. The commercial demand response portion of this program engages large and medium commercial and industrial customers in manual and automated load reduction during peak events, with the goal of delivering a total of 4 MW capacity go GWP by the end of 2024. Customers receive a per-kilowatt incentive along with energy advisor education and clear communications. Based on up 175 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Demand Response Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-12
to date performance, the program is not expected to be able to deliver the total goal of 10 MW by the end of 2024 and will most likely deliver around 4.5 MW. The possible continuation of the program will be considered at the end of the program term. Behavioral Demand Response Program. GWP plans to relaunch a residential behavioral DR program in the summer of 2024. GWP partnered with Oracle/Opower Inc. to deploy a residential Behavioral Demand Response program which leverages AMI data analytics, behavioral science, and multi-channel communications to give customers personalized, low cost recommendations for saving energy on peak days. This program targets approximately 40,000 residential Glendale customers to receive electronic, Interactive Voice Response, and paper communications. Communication is intended to encourage customers to adjust their energy consumption during periods of peak energy demand. GWP plans to relaunch this program in FYE 2024. Behavioral Demand Response is an innovative approach to residential demand response because it gives customers personalized feedback on their performance shortly after a peak event has occurred. Customers no longer must wait until their monthly bill to see how much they saved, which is paramount to locking in positive peak shaving behaviors for future events. The goal is to ensure that GWP customers have correct information and tools to empower them to take action to reduce energy usage during the summer. Glendale’s Behavioral Demand Response program uses a randomized, controlled trial to measure the savings impact among customer groups that currently receive peak savings messaging and customer groups that do not. This approach is the old-standard for measurement available and allows Glendale to understand the peak savings impact of its Behavioral Demand Response program. The Behavioral Demand Response program sends e-mails and phone communications to approximately 40,000 customers the day before a peak event (a period of time when energy usage is predicted to be higher than normal due to heat or other circumstances), notifying them of the upcoming event and providing guidance for reducing energy usage during the identified peak hours. These communications include simple tips for saving energy during peak hours, such as adjusting air conditioning a few degrees or delaying the use of large appliances. Each customer also receives feedback from GWP in the days following an event with information about how much energy they used on the peak day and additional ways to save during the next event to keep customers engaged for the next event. All customers enrolled in the Behavioral Demand Response program have the opportunity to opt out if they no longer wish to participate. Glendale’s Behavioral Demand Response program turns AMI data into timely, actionable insights. Unlike other demand response programs, Behavioral Demand Response runs on AMI data alone and does not require installed devices or special pricing incentives.

Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification Studies Evaluation, measurement, and verification (EM&V) are practices used to assess the performance of energy efficiency programs. GWP plans to initiate EM&V analysis of its energy efficiency programs to support AB 2021. For FYE 2024, GWP has budgeted $50,000 to conduct EM&V studies through a third-party 176 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Current Low Income Programs Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-13
contractor on selected energy efficiency programs based on the kWh savings. The purpose of the EM&V study is to ensure that measures are installed as claimed by GWP and to lend credibility to its savings reports as compared to industry standards employed when the program were first implemented. GWP plans to review all energy efficiency programs for their cost effectiveness, customer participation, and administration. GWP currently performs the following ongoing activities to support EM&V activities: § Pre- and post-inspection of 100 percent of all large commercial retrofit projects under the Business Energy Solutions program, including a review of their energy-saving calculations. § Field inspections of all residential and commercial solar PV installations, which are verified by City personnel for compliance. § Energy assessments and installations for Glendale’s Business Energy Upgrade Program are performed by its consultant.

CURRENT LOW INCOME PROGRAMS These are GWP’s current low-income programs. In FYE 2022, 49 percent of the annual PBC expenditure went towards funding the low-income programs described here. Senior Care. Beginning in 1999, GWP’s Senior Care Program has provided bill discounts of $17.50 per month to eligible low-income seniors aged 62 or older and customers 55 or older with permanent disabilities. While this program still exists for customers enrolled before 2009, the program is currently closed to new applicants as it has been replaced in 2009 by the Glendale Care Program. A total of 1,200 participants are currently in the program. Glendale Care. Introduced in 2009, offers eligible low-income customers a monthly $17.50 discount off their utility bill. This program offers the discount to all eligible low-income customers as opposed to the Senior Care program which solely offered the discount to eligible senior applicants. This program currently has 9,824 participants. Guardian. Approved by Glendale City Council in December 1999, Guardian provides monthly bill discounts to customers with household members using life-saving medical equipment or suffering from afflictions requiring special space conditioning. Discounts are based on the estimated electric consumption of the medical equipment. For administrative purposes, this program is categorized as low income. Non-low-income participants are funded through the Electric Services fund. If customers are claiming low-income status, they are required to provide proof of income. The program has a total of 624 participants. Helping Hand. Approved by Glendale City Council in October 2002, this program provides up to $150 in bill deposit or bill payment assistance for low-income customers once every two years. Approximately 98 customers participate in this program annually. 177 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Community Solar Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-14
COMMUNITY SOLAR The California Energy Commission’s 2016 report Low-Income Barriers Study, Part A identified several recommendations, one being that POUs should explore the option to deploy community solar installations in low-income and disadvantaged communities. This recommendation is being explored by Glendale and as a result, GWP has budgeted $1 million to support a Community Solar project for FYE 2020 Community Solar is a local solar power plant whose electricity is shared by more than one customer. Community solar allows members of a community the opportunity to share the benefits of solar power even if they cannot or prefer not to install solar panels on their property. Typical participation formats include: § Ownership: where participants purchase some panels or a share in a project and receive a credit for the solar power produced by their share. § Subscription: where participants subscribe to a set amount of power produced by a community solar installation at a set price. § Donation: which allows participants to donate toward the installation of the system as a non-profit, with the only benefit to the participant being philanthropic. The City of Glendale currently has ownership of the following locations within the City limits that can potentially accommodate a solar development. These potential sites could support 3.064 MW of solar: § Public works building and parking area (0.077 MW) § Civic auditorium parking structure (0.040 MW) § Civic auditorium overflow lot (0.175 MW) § Diederich Reservoir (2.270 MW) § Rossmoyne Reservoir (0.502 MW) TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIFICATION INITIATIVES Electric vehicle infrastructure is an important part of the Los Angeles region’s future. GWP is planning to direct resources to planning Glendale’s future EV infrastructure needs. Future planning studies explore this topic in more depth, including understanding how to manage EV charging to avoid new peaking capacity and distribution grid upgrades. At this current early stage of EV development, most efforts revolve around expanding the EV charging station network and conversion of public vehicles to electric.6 These measures include: § Charging stations and preferential parking at public parking lots. 6 For more guidance for cities on vehicle electrification strategy, see: https://cleantechnica.com/files/2018/04/EV-Charging- Infrastructure-Guidelines-for-Cities.pdf 178 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Transportation Electrification Initiatives Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-15
§ Incentives for local businesses to install EV chargers at workplace parking lots. § Requirements of apartment building owners to make EV charging accessible to residents. § Converting bus fleets and city fleets to electric.7 Transportation Electrification Program History On February 27, 2018, the Glendale City Council authorized GWP to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Zeco Systems, Inc (dba Greenlots) to purchase and install $560,500-worth of electric vehicle charging stations (approximately 10 stations). This agreement was facilitated through SCPPA. GWP’s current strategy for the installation of EV charging stations has been to pinpoint areas in the City where there are currently no EV charging stations in the immediate area. GWP is currently looking at the Montrose Shopping area, Kenneth Village Shopping area and Adams Square as there are no public accessible EV charging stations in the immediate vicinity of these locations. GWP is also currently reviewing other sites such as the Glendale Transportation Center, location near multi-unit dwellings, additional City parking structures and parking lots, Glendale libraries, and areas near highway corridors. During the past two years, GWP installed a total of seven publicly accessible EV charging stations. GWP has installed one DCFC at City Hall, two Level 2 (L2) chargers in the Civic Center Parking Garage, two L2 chargers at Orange Street Parking Garage, and two utility-pole-mounted EV charging stations. Table 6 lists these installations and additional installations and their locations for a total of 77 EV charging stations. Location Address Level 2 Level 3 Total City Hall Parking Lot 120 N Isabel Street 4 1 5 Civic Center Parking Structure 650 E Wilson Avenue 6 0 6 Orange St. Parking Structure 222 N Orange Street 12 2 14 Utility Pole Mounted 1357¾ E Colorado Street 1 0 1 Utility Pole Mounted 1905¾ Broadway Drive 1 0 1 GWP Utility Operations Center 800 Air Way 2 0 2 Marketplace Parking Structure 120 S Artsakh Avenue 24 1 25 Transportation Center 400 W Cerritos Avenue 8 0 8 Integrated Waste Management Yard 548 W Chevy Chase Drive 4 0 4 Pacific Park & Community Center 515 S Kenilworth Avenue #¼ 10 0 10 EV Arc (Portable Solar EVSE) Lot #3 1 0 1 Table 6. Installed Electric Vehicle Charging Stations 7 Incentives are available from the State of California. See: https://www.californiahvip.org/ 179 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Transportation Electrification Initiatives Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-16
In addition, GWP has identified 4 sites for 18 electric vehicle charging stations as potential installation sites for upcoming development. Table 7 lists these 18 EV charging stations and their locations. Location Address Level 2 Level 3 Total Sports Complex 2200 Fern Lane 5 1 6 Montrose Lot #3 2266-2286 Florencita Drive W 2 2 4 Maple Park (curbside) 802 E Maple Street 4 0 4 Palmer Park (curbside) 620 E Palmer Avenue 4 0 4 Table 7. Proposed Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Electric Vehicle Infrastructure The number of EVs in the City of Glendale has grown substantially. Given this situation, GWP is expanding its EV charging station infrastructure throughout the City of Glendale. The goal is to create a web of conveniently located charging stations to make traveling for EV owners more accessible, dependable, and hassle free. GWP’s efforts directly support Governor Brown’s 2018 Executive Order B-48-18 setting targets of 250,000 EV chargers and 10,000 DCFCs by 2025, and Governor Newsom’s 2021 Executive Order N-79-20 to have 100 percent of new light-duty vehicles sales be zero emission vehicles by 2035. With growth in EV sales, newer generations of EV users have different types of charging needs. Multi-unit dwellings and workplace charging are emerging in importance. New types of public charging can play a key role in supporting these uses. Opportunity for highly visible and convenient chargers, such as curbside chargers in the public right-of-way, help ensure equitable access to EV infrastructure for all user groups in Glendale. Many factors affect where charging stations are installed. These factors include power source distance to the electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE), ADA compliance, EVSE availability in the area, installation cost, public visibility, feasibility to install DCFCs, proximity to multi-family buildings, and proximity to disadvantaged and low-income areas. As of May 2023, GWP has installed a total of 66 EV charging stations. GWP also installed an additional 12 public charging stations in June 2023 and bringing the total to 78 charging stations. Funding for the purchase and installation of electric vehicle charging stations is included in the GWP’s capital budget and funded through the sales of Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) credits that Glendale accumulates annually. GWP has planned a two-year budget of $2,000,000 through FYE 2025 to support the purchase and installation of approximately 50 publicly accessible EV charging stations. These projects will be primarily performed by Shell Oil Products US, who acquired Zeco Systems, Inc. Zeco Systems, Inc was one of the contractors selected by SCPPA through a competitive RFP process to purchase, install, license, communicate, and maintain EV charging stations for SCPPA members. GWP proposes to 180 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Transportation Electrification Initiatives Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-17
contract with Shell through a participation agreement with SCPPA. A separate Task Order to the SCPPA-vendor contract will be prepared documenting the services to be provided for Glendale and Glendale’s cost, including a not-to-exceed amount. GWP will also consider using other vendors that were selected by SCPPA through a competitive bidding process for EV charging station purchase, installation, licensing, communication, and maintenance.

Grants The CEC Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program (PON-13-606) grant was awarded to SCPPA in 2014 and all of its members which includes the City of Glendale. Through this grant, GWP was awarded funding of $50,000 for one L3 DCFC that was installed at Glendale City Hall parking lot. The grant’s goal was to create a web of conveniently located charging stations within a mile of any freeway in California, to make travelling for EV owners in the state more accessible, dependable, and hassle free and to encourage the use of additional electric vehicles in the state. Charging and Fuel Infrastructure Grant. GWP sent a letter to the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration in support of SCPPA’s application for this grant. This was submitted in collaboration with all SCPPA members. Glendale identified two projects for installing EV charging stations: § Install four DCFCs at the Fairmont Park & Ride lot located at 880 Fairmont Avenue. § Install one DCFC and four L2 charges at Montrose Community Park located at 3529 Clifton Place. Approval is pending. Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant. FreeWire’s battery integrated DCFC enables scalable ultrafast EV charging in a fraction of the time and cost it takes for a conventional DCFC. Benefits of a battery integrated DCFCs include: § Lower installation costs compared to conventional DCFCs. § Installation at locations where a conventional DCFC would not be feasible or cost effective to install. § Lower electrical demand. This battery integrated DCFC provides power output of 150 kW with an electrical demand of 27 kW or less. This is less than 20 percent of the demand required for a conventional DCFC with equivalent power output. GWP has planned a two-year budget of $400,000 through FYE 2025 to purchase a battery integrated DCFC for two locations in Glendale. These purchases can be offset through the United States Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant program which would provide Glendale with up to $227,620 for projects or programs that cut carbon emissions, improve energy efficiency, or reduce energy use. 181 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Transportation Electrification Initiatives Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-18
GWP proposes to work with FreeWire Technologies, Inc. through a participation agreement with SCPPA. GWP plans to prepare a separate task order to the SCPPA vendor contract documenting the services to be provided for Glendale and Glendale’s cost, including a not-to-exceed amount.

The Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee The Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) has received funding for Glendale to partner with them in reducing motor vehicle air pollution. The MSRC’s Local Government Partnership Program is designed to forge partnerships between the MSRC and cities or counties within the South Coast region to jumpstart implementation of the South Coast AQMD’s 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. The 2016 Air Quality Management Plan relies heavily on use of incentives to achieve air pollution reductions above and beyond those obtained solely by regulation. The Local Government Partnership Program is a unique funding opportunity that will provide GWP with additional funding to implement high priority clean air programs. The amount of funding allocated to Glendale will scale with the amount of air quality improvement funding the City receives under the AB 2766 Motor Vehicle Subvention Fund Program. The City of Glendale has an approved Reserved Funding Amount of $260,500. GWP will be pursuing the Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Installation category of the Local Government Partnership Program, which includes the costs to purchase and install EVSE to support increasing numbers of electric and plug-in-hybrid vehicles. The MSRC will contribute up to 75 percent of the cost of publicly accessible EVSE installations and up to 50 percent of the total EVSE cost for private access EVSE.

Low Carbon Fuel Standard Program Credits GWP opted into the LCFS Program offered by the CARB in March 2017. CARB adopted the LCFS regulation in 2009 to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels used in California. Through this program, GWP receives LCFS credits from public EV charging stations and residential EV Charging credits based on the number of EVs that “reside” in Glendale. LCFS credits can be sold and traded in the California LCFS market through competitive solicitation to generate revenue and fun the installation of more publicly accessible charging stations in Glendale. 182 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Electric Vehicle Charging Initiatives Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-19
Table 8 summarizes the proposed annual LCFS program budget for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025. The proposed LCFS budget is $3.55 million in FYE 2024 and $3.67 million in FYE 2025 to support 12 LCFS programs.

Program Budget ($1,000s) FYE 2024 FYE 2025 EV Infrastructure $,1000 $,1000 Residential EVCS Rebate Program $75 $75 Commercial & Multi-Family EVCS Rebate Program $400 $400 Upcoming EV Customer Engagement Programs $500 $500 Off-Peak EV Charging Rebate Program $300 $355 Clean Fuel Rewards Program $700 $7900 Web-Based EV Customer Awareness Platform $44 $24 Electric Car and Bike Guest Drive Events§ $140 $140 EV Dealership Showroom Beacon Pilot Program§ $50 $50 Battery-Integrated DCFC Pilot§ $200 $200 Electric Bicycle Rebates§ $40 $30 Vehicle-to-Grid Study§ $100 — Total Budget Expenditures $3,549 $3,674 § New program in FYE 2023 Table 8. Transportation Electrification LCFS Proposed Budget ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING INITIATIVES GWP continues to respond to the growing EV demand by investing in EV infrastructure and customer programs.

Southern California Public Power Authority EV Working Group Glendale is part of the SCPPA EV Working Group. The working group aims to develop a consistent presentation of information to customers related to “all things EV” throughout the southern California region. The mission statement of the group is focused on facilitating the electrification of the transportation sector in the region for the betterment of the communities that GWP serves by: § Reducing its dependence on fossil fuels. § Improving air quality by reducing GHG emissions. § Creating job opportunities and economic growth in the region. § Assisting customers in reducing transportation costs. § Improving utility system operating efficiencies and containing costs. 183 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Electric Vehicle Charging Initiatives Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-20
Electric Vehicle Level 2 Charger Rebates This program offers rebates of up to $599 for residential customers who install a new L2 EV charging station. Customers who upgrade their electrical panel to install the charging station can receive an additional $800. Rebates are for out-of-pocket expenses for the purchase, installation, and permitting of EV chargers. Commercial or multi-family building customers can also receive an additional $3,000 rebate per charger for publicly accessible DCFC chargers installed at an educational institution, in a DAC, or in an income qualified housing structure. Customer who are enrolled in GWP’s Glendale Care low-income program are eligible for higher incentives. These customers can receive $300 for non-networked EV charging stations, $700 for networked EV charging stations, and an additional $1,000 if they upgrade their electrical panel to install the charging station. GWP budgeted $75,000 for each of FYE 2024 and FYE 2025. GWP plans to explore the possibility of using LCFS revenue to supplement this program.

Electric Vehicle Guest Drive Events To promote the adoption of electric vehicles, Glendale will host multiple Electric Vehicle Ride & Drive Events every year. These events provide a peer-to-peer, experiential learning environment for prospective EV buyers. The events will provide the EV experience and education required to help customers facilitate the purchase or lease of an electric car. These events will be staffed by EV owners who are knowledgeable about their cars and are able and willing to answers questions from participants as they test drive their vehicle without the added sales pressure from dealerships. GWP’s goal is to expand awareness about EVs and the benefits of fueling from the electric grid. Electric bike displays and potential test rides will be held alongside Electric Car Guest Drive events when possible. GWP budgeted $140,000 for each of FYE 2024 and FYE 2025 for this program.

Electric Vehicle Infrastructure and Customer Programs GWP continues to upgrade its EV infrastructure and develop customer programs. EV Infrastructure. GWP plans to significantly increase its public charging network to make EV charging more accessible and accommodate a greater number of electric vehicles on the road. GWP plans to install at least 30 new publicly accessible EV chargers per year. Bring Your Own Charger Program. This program provides a monthly incentive of $8 to EV drivers who set their vehicles to charge during off-peak hours, helping to reduce peak load. This program uses AMI data to verify charging times, making the program available to any electric vehicle and any EV charger. Similar programs require vehicle and charger telematics, which limits the types of EVs and EV chargers that can participate in the program. Over 450 customers are currently enrolled in this program. 184 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Electric Vehicle Charging Initiatives Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-21
EV Customer Awareness Website. GWP launched its EV customer awareness website which provides customers with information on new and used EVs, incentives, home charging options, EV dealers, and a public charging station map. Electric Bookmobile. GWP sponsored the purchase of an electric bookmobile for the City’s Library Arts and Culture department by providing $100,000 towards the purchase. EV Autonomous Renewable Charge Station. GWP purchased a standalone, transportable, solar-powered EV charger that can charge electric vehicles completely off-grid. The EV autonomous renewable charge (ARC) station can also be used as a power source during emergencies where other electricity sources are unavailable. The EV ARC station is currently located at a public parking lot and available to the community. A Continued Commitment to Electric Vehicle Adoption GWP has continued its commitment to promote EV adoption in Glendale to better meet state goals for electrifying the transportation sector. In FYE 2022, GWP: § Launched an EV buyer’s guide website to provide information to prospective EV drivers on available EVs, charging options, and incentives. § Placed a solar-powered transportable EV charging station at the City’s Lot 34 by Verdugo Park and Glendale Community College. This station provides free charging to drivers and is completely solar powered and off grid. § Provided over $66,000 in incentives for customers to install EV charging stations at their home or business. § Reimbursed over 1,800 customers with monetary incentives of up to $1,500 as part of the state’s Clean Fuel Reward program for purchasing a new EV. Funding was through a partnership with CARB and local EV dealerships. GWP is significantly expanding its public charging network to make EV charging more accessible to Glendale residents and visitors. Over 60 new charging stations are expected at multiple locations around the city by mid-2023. GWP also plans to unveil new programs in the coming years to further incentivize customers to adopt EVs. 185 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives New Programs for Disadvantaged and Low-Income Customers Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-22
NEW PROGRAMS FOR DISADVANTAGED AND LOW-INCOME CUSTOMERS Glendale is currently designing a new program that evaluates the efficiency of low-income customer’s home, install energy and water saving devices, and give recommendations regarding additional energy and water measures that the customer can implement. The residential audit inspects and installs a number of energy and water saving measures at no cost to the customer, including the potential replacement or installation of an Energy Star room AC and an Energy Star refrigerator for qualified low-income customers. An estimated 60 percent of Glendale’s residential electric customers live in multi-family rental units, and a substantial number of these units are in low-income neighborhoods. This program targets inefficient room AC units and refrigerators in low-income neighborhoods. GWP is designing this new program with the intention of helping low-income customers with their electric bills while reducing overall system demands to benefit all utility customers. This program provides free upgrades to Glendale apartment owners who have low-income tenants. Given the fact that tenants generally pay for their electric bill, apartment owners have little incentive, if any, to replace aging, inefficient room air conditioning systems and refrigerators despite having minor benefits of reduced maintenance cost. This program changes this situation by providing the program free to qualified low-income customers and encouraging apartment owners with low-income tenants to participate in the program.

Localized Air Pollution and Disadvantaged Communities California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) has identified California’s most pollution-burdened and vulnerable communities. Based on the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen 3.0), the vast majority of GWP’s service territory is designated as disadvantaged areas. Approximately 35 percent8 of the population in GWP’s service territory lives in disadvantaged communities per the latest CalEPA data. Glendale is currently in the process of designing and implementing more programs that will target Glendale’s Low-Income customers and Disadvantaged Communities with energy efficiency, DR, and electrification programs. As a result of the implementation of these new programs, Glendale customers will benefit from increased energy efficiency, reduced GHG emissions, and lower electricity bills. GWP is currently working towards designing new programs for Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities and taking into consideration the recommendations that were included in the CEC’s 2016 report Low-Income Barriers Study, Part A: Overcoming Barriers to Energy Efficiency and Renewables for Low-Income Customers and Small Business Contracting Opportunities in Disadvantaged Communities. 8 This percentage was calculated as the sum of the populations in census tracts labeled as disadvantaged communities (Glendale Disadvantaged Communities SB-535-List-of-DACs_CES30) divided by 2017 Glendale census total population (https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk) with adjustment to unincorporated population. 186 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives New Programs for Disadvantaged and Low-Income Customers Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-23
Disadvantaged communities are mostly located near local air pollutants and have large overlap with low income communities (see Figure 37).

Figure 51. Disadvantaged Communities Map Glendale is proud of its long history of providing programs that specifically target its low-income customers for bill relief and energy efficiency. GWP’s first low-income program started in 1998 and GWP has spent approximately $42 million, or 33 percent of PBC revenues, on low-income bill discount and energy efficiency programs since 1998. Currently, there are approximately 11,500 low income customers taking advantage of GWP’s low-income programs. In FYE 2022, its low-income program expenditures totaled 49 percent of overall PBC expenditures.

Transportation Electrification in Disadvantaged Communities Transportation electrification is a key component in the State’s decarbonization strategy. According to CARB, 41 percent of California’s 430 million metric tons of CO2 emissions stem from the transportation sector. For comparison, only 16 percent of CO2 emissions are traceable to electricity generation. For California to achieve its current GHG reduction goals, the vast majority of transportation-related energy consumption will 187 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives New Programs for Disadvantaged and Low-Income Customers Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-24
have to be sourced from electricity. This means that California will need to have over seven million electric vehicles on the road by 2030 to meet emissions goals. When EV penetration in GWP’s service territory reaches 50 percent or more, GWP could have access to a large, distributed battery resource that it could leverage to integrate renewable energy. Ninety-five percent of the time,9 vehicle batteries are sitting idle. Theoretically, vehicle-to-grid control technology through a charger network could allow GWP to use plugged in vehicles for grid services such as regulation and frequency response. So far, vehicle-to-grid remains an interesting concept as compensation mechanisms remain immature and vehicle manufacturers have failed to embrace the concept, often voiding warranties due to concerns for excess wear on the battery. Another alternative is known as “smart charging” which simply optimizes the time to charge the battery relative to grid conditions. This is analogous to smart thermostat programs which automatically turn down a home thermostat when prices are highest. Of course, there are risks with growing the EV load without a management strategy. According to the Rocky Mountain Institute, “if 7 percent of households in California had EVs (a total of 870,322 vehicles, which is below California’s target for 2020) charging at the same time, the EV charging load would range from 3.8 percent of the system’s baseline peak load with Level 1 (L1) charging, to 75.1 percent with Level 3 (L3) 40 kW charging if all EVs were connected to the grid when the system demand reached its annual peak”.10 According to a CEC analysis, “demand from residential and nonresidential EV chargers could amount to more than one GW by 2025”.11 Another, more pressing concern is the impact of EV load on local distribution circuits. Currently, EVs tend to cluster in affluent neighborhoods, and the growth of EV clustering in neighborhoods may someday require distribution grid and substation upgrades. Using the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool, GWP has identified Disadvantaged Communities census tracts that are designated as being in the highest pollution burden percentiles. Census tracts with the highest air emissions from vehicles are located along the San Fernando Road corridor, adjacent to the Interstate 5 Freeway. As the transportation industry begins to transition to electric vehicles, GWP will continue its hard work to expand its public EV charging station infrastructure and EV residential and commercial utility programs. GWP is exploring the options of installing EV charging stations along those areas identified at the highest pollution burden. These efforts will directly benefit these disadvantaged communities by reducing local air pollution in these areas. The electricity sector has significantly more options to create clean energy than does the transportation fuel industry. A combination of hydro, nuclear, and renewable generation incorporated with energy storage technologies and larger integrated markets could accommodate a dramatically increased load from the transportation sector. Glendale is one of the first cities in California providing special programs to promote electrification in the transportation sector. Improvements in electric vehicle technology offer a significant opportunity for the city 9 https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/why-is-vehicle-to-grid-taking-so-long-to-happen#gs.FgH4mCk 10 https://rmi.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/RMI_Electric_Vehicles_as_DERs_Final_V2.pdf 11 https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/URLRedirectPage.aspx?TN=TN222986_20180316T143039_Staff_Report_California_PlugIn_Electric_Vehicle_Infrastructure.pdf 188 of 839

8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives New Programs for Disadvantaged and Low-Income Customers Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 8-25
to demonstrate government leadership toward advancing EV infrastructure and increased EV integration in Glendale. The electrification of transportation is a crucial strategy towards achieving air quality and climate goals both locally and statewide. California Clean Vehicle Rebate program data through February 2019 shows that the City of Glendale has added more than 2,388 PHEVs, Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs), and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEVs) since January 2011. According to the Alternative Fuels Data Center of the United States DOE, there are 86 public access and privately-owned charging stations within the city of Glendale as of June 2019. Figure 36 shows the locations of the charging stations in GWP service territory.

Figure 52. Electric Vehicle Charging Station Locations in Glendale12 According to the Alternative Fuels Data Center of the United States Department of Energy, there are 86 public access and privately-owned charging stations within the city of Glendale as of November 2018. Shown in the figure are the locations of the public access charging stations in GWP service territory. 12 https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_locations.html#/find/nearest?fuel=ELEC&location=glendale,ca&ev_levels=2&ev_levels=dc_ fast&ev_levels=1 189 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-1

9. Transmission and Distribution
BULK TRANSMISSION SYSTEM GWP has access to energy markets in the Western Electric Coordination Council (WECC) region via a number of high voltage transmission lines to efficiently deliver power to Glendale. Figure 53 shows the bulk transmission system that moves generation to Glendale.

Figure 53. Geographic Transmission Schematic
190 of 839

9. Transmission and Distribution Bulk Transmission System Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-2
GWP’s interconnection with other utilities is through the Air Way Receiving Station and the Western Receiving Station. The Air Way interconnection receives power from the Pacific Northwest and the Desert Southwest regions, and LADWP system, while the Western Receiving Station receives power from the Magnolia Power Plant. There are several transmission resources that feed into Air Way and the Western Receiving Station. Pacific Northwest Transmission System (Pacific DC Intertie): A direct current transmission line that extends 846 miles from The Dalles, Oregon to Sylmar, California. The 500 kilovolt (kV) HVDC line can transmit up to 3,100 MW of power from the Pacific Northwest to participants in California, and 2,730 MW from California to the Pacific Northwest. GWP owns 3.846 percent of the line—approximately 119 MW of capacity in the north-to-south direction and 38 MW of capacity (due to an operational limitation) in the south-to-north direction. The Southern Transmission System (STS): A direct current transmission line between IPP near Delta, Utah and Adelanto, California. This 500 kV HVDC line is 490 miles long and transmits power from IPP to GWP and other California utilities with PPAs with the plant. Up to 2,400 MW of power can be transmitted over the Southern Transmission System (STS, also called Path 27) to participating members in southern California. GWP’s current share of the line is 2.274 percent, or approximately 55 MW. Starting in 2027, GWP’s share of the STS will be increased by 72 MW for a total of 127 MW. The Northern Transmission System: An alternating current system between IPP and Mona in Utah, and IPP and the Gonder Switching Station in Nevada. GWP’s entitlements, which varies depending on the time of the year, are up to 21 MW from IPP to Mona and up to 3 MW from IPP to Gonder. Mead-Phoenix & Mead-Adelanto Transmission Line Projects: These two SCPPA projects began commercial operation on April 15, 1996. The Mead-Phoenix line consists of a 256-mile long 500 kV AC transmission line from the Westwing Substation in the vicinity of Phoenix, Arizona to the Marketplace Substation with an interconnection to the Mead Substation in southern Nevada. The project consists of three separate components: the Westwing-Mead Component, the Mead Substation Component, and the Mead-Marketplace Component. The Mead-Phoenix line transfers approximately 1,900 MW of power and extends from the Westwing Switching Station near Phoenix, Arizona to Mead near Boulder City, Nevada. GWP’s entitlement on the Mead-Phoenix transmission line is 41 MW, approximately 11.76 percent to 22.73 percent of the project. The initial transfer capability of the Mead-Adelanto Project was 1,200 MW, but now the line can transfer approximately 1,800 MW of power. This 500 kV AC transmission line is 202 miles long and extends from Mead through the Marketplace Substation to the Adelanto Switching Station near Adelanto, California. SCPPA members in the project are entitled to 815 MW. GWP is obligated for 90 MW or 11.04 percent of the SCPPA entitlement. GWP’s entitlements on the Mead-Adelanto transmission line are 112 MW on the Mead-Marketplace segment and 97 MW on the Marketplace-Adelanto segment. The Marketplace Substation was constructed to facilitate the interconnection between these two projects. It is sited at the southern Nevada terminus, approximately 17 miles southwest of Boulder City, Nevada. 191 of 839

9. Transmission and Distribution Bulk Transmission System Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-3
The Mead-Phoenix Project, in conjunction with the Mead-Adelanto Project, provides an alternative path for GWP’s purchases from the PVNGS and Hoover DAM. These transmission lines also provide access to the southwest United States where economical energy is readily available. As of June 30, 2022, GWP’s share of both projects is 14.80 percent. Hoover/Mead–Air Way. This contract with LADWP is for 33 MW of bi-directional firm transmission rights between Hoover/Mead and Air Way. This contract is used to transmit GWP’s Hoover Dam entitlements into Glendale. The contract ended on September 30, 2017, however GWP renewed this contract for a term concurrent with the extension of GWP’s contract for electric service from Hoover Dam. Adelanto–Air Way. This contract with LADWP is for 55 MW of bi-directional firm transmission rights between Adelanto and Air Way. This contract is used to transmit GWP’s IPP entitlements into Glendale. This contract ends on June 15, 2027. GWP has the right to renew this contract for a term concurrent with any extension of GWP’s contract for power from IPP. McCullough–Victorville Line 2. This contract with LADWP is for 26 MW of bi-directional firm transmission rights between the McCullough Switching Station and the Victorville Switching Station. This contract ends on May 31, 2030. Victorville–Air Way. This contract with LADWP is for 26 MW of bi-directional firm transmission rights between Victorville-Adelanto-Lugo and Air Way. This contract is used to transmit GWP’s McCullough–Victorville Line 2 entitlements into Glendale. This contract ends on May 31, 2030. Sylmar–Air Way. This contract with LADWP is for 50 MW of bi-directional firm transmission rights between the Sylmar Switching Station and Air Way. This contract can be terminated upon ninety days’ advanced written notice by either LADWP or GWP. 1968 Interchange Agreement. This agreement with LADWP provides for bi-directional firm transmission service between Sylmar and Air Way of up to a maximum of 100 MW. This contract is primarily used to transmit power delivered over the Pacific DC Intertie into Glendale. This contract remains in effect until the termination of Glendale’s Hoover contract or the Pacific DC Intertie project, or any extension of either of these, whichever is later. Burbank–Glendale Interconnection. The closure of BWP’s Olive-Capon-Western #1 and #2 69 kV lines allows Glendale to transfer up to 160 MW of energy. If one line is down, the rating is reduced to 80 MW. The one-hour emergency rating for each line is 125 MW. After one hour, the line is rated at 80 MW maximum. This interconnection is primarily used to deliver Magnolia energy to GWP. Eland Transmission Service Agreement. This 25-year agreement with LADWP is for 25 MW of bidirectional firm transmission service between the LA system and the Air Way for the delivery of the Eland 1 solar and BESS project from Barren Ridge. 192 of 839

9. Transmission and Distribution Bulk Transmission System Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-4
Transmission Load Pocket Bottleneck GWP resides in a “load pocket”, meaning access to remote generation resources is constrained by limited transmission capacity. All transmission is bottlenecked down to the Pacific DC Intertie and the Southwest AC paths (see Figure 53). Importing remote and market resources is forced into the limited capacity transmission of these two paths—the only two transmission lines going into the LA basin and subsequently to Glendale. While the total capacity of these lines during normal conditions is 262 MW, that full capacity is often not available to GWP due to various physical and contractual constraints. While the downstream of the Pacific DC Intertie is rated at 150 MW from the Sylmar-Airway and 1968 IA contracts with LADWP, 50 MW of that capacity is contractually dedicated to and strictly used for transmission transactions at the Sylmar hub (CAISO). This hub is frequently oversubscribed during abnormal peak demand hours. As a result, CAISO prevents GWP from purchasing any power from Sylmar since none is available. This leaves the 50 MW of reserved transmission capacity inoperative during times when it is most needed. This reduces GWP’s actual usable capacity on the Pacific DC Intertie to 100 MW. The Southwest AC path has a total capacity of 112 MW from multiple tie lines that are sensitive to temperature. The southwest capacity is generally derated to 100 MW during the hottest days of the year, which almost always coincides with the exact times when GWP experiences abnormal peak load. Thus, when Glendale’s demand is at its peak, the total available firm transmission capacity for imports is limited to approximately 200 MW. GWP’s peak demand in 2022 was 331 MW, with an all-time high record of 346 MW in 2017. Based on the current forecast, GWP’s load is likely to reach 416 MW by 2035. The bottleneck not only imposes a capacity limit on the amount of energy that GWP is able to receive but also carries a reliability risk: an outage on either intertie comprises a full 50 percent of all available transmission capacity. The STS transmission line is currently GWP’s only way of accessing the plentiful, cheap, and reliable wind power resources available in Wyoming as well as any other renewable projects that are being developed and interconnected at the IPP bus. GWP’s access to the STS line is contractually contingent upon maintaining a share of the IPP and remaining a participant in the IPP Alternative Repowering Project. Continued participation allows GWP to increase its share of the STS by 72 MW starting in 2027, which subsequently increases the Southwest AC from 112 MW to 184 MW. GWP is continuously looking for opportunities to expand its transmission import capability, however given the difficulty in financing, permitting, and constructing new transmission through an urban environment and high fire risk mountains, this remains a significant challenge. 193 of 839

9. Transmission and Distribution Transmission Utilization Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-5
TRANSMISSION UTILIZATION GWP’s transmission utilization peaks in the summer months, which corresponds to peaks in energy demand. Transmission utilization increases throughout the planning period with the Southwest AC Intertie accounting for most of the flow due to the position of most GWP resources. The Pacific DC Intertie line is used primarily during peak conditions when GWP purchases power from the NOB trading hub. When the Pacific DC Intertie line is down, the Southwest AC Intertie line becomes heavily loaded. In the beginning of the planning period, yearly transmission utilization is approximately 70 percent on average and is forecast to rise past 80 percent by 2039, while peak monthly utilization is forecast to rise to well over 90 percent in July. Future utilization of both transmission lines will depend on the location of resources that GWP will procure. As depicted in Figure 54, the current model assumes more new resources will serve GWP load via the Southwest AC Intertie line under future forecasted conditions.

Figure 54. Southwest AC Intertie Transmission Line Average Usage Energy exports typically happen along the Southwest AC Intertie during evening hours, driven by favorable market prices, and also occur less during morning hours. On occasion, GWP also exports energy along the Pacific DC Intertie. Future storage procurement will likely reduce utilization of the transmission lines. Batteries placed at different points in the transmission network provide the ability to shift power flows to relive stress on the lines. 194 of 839

9. Transmission and Distribution The Need for More Transmission Capacity Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-6
THE NEED FOR MORE TRANSMISSION CAPACITY Importing remote generation into Glendale is constrained by the limited capacity of the Pacific DC Intertie and the Southeast AC Intertie. Future peak loads, however, could potentially reach 400 MW. The only solutions are to increase transmission capacity or to site local generation. Glendale, however, is constrained by the amount of local renewable and zero-carbon capacity that can be implemented. As a highly urban area with little open space, there is limited amounts of local renewable capacity that can be built. While additional batteries can be added to the local system, these batteries need to be charged either by local resources or energy imported through transmission lines. The prospect of additional batteries being able to charge with the current transmission capacity is unlikely. This would necessitate any additional batteries to be charged with local thermal assets, which is unfavorable and counters the purpose of adding additional batteries to the local system. GWP will soon maximize its remote transmission capacity; the lines already are at maximum use to serve its load during peak conditions. This situation is exacerbated with the N-1 contingency event when the Pacific DC Intertie is out and the Southwest AC Intertie is the only transmission line available, a circumstance that happens often. Given this situation, there is little doubt that additional transmission capacity is necessary to procure additional clean energy resources to replace existing fossil fuel resources as required to meet zero-carbon requirements in 2045.

SYSTEM RELIABILITY REQUIREMENTS Maintaining reliability becomes increasingly challenging as the penetration of renewable generation increases. This situation is exacerbated by GWP’s constrained load pocket within the LADWP balancing area. Glendale is subject to operating reserve requirements based on the single largest contingency standard. The N-1 contingency refers to the event in which GWP’s single largest resource experiences a failure. GWP’s planning is also based on maintaining reliability in situations up to N-1-1 contingencies during peak load conditions. An N-1-1 contingency situation occurs when the second largest resource fails while the first resource is still unavailable (in other words, the largest remaining resource fails during an N-1 contingency event). Planning reserves ensure that, if an N-1 condition is not restored within 60 minutes, GWP has the reserves needed to cover an N-1-1 contingency. GWP is obligated to have sufficient contingency reserves—essentially replacement power to handle the failure of the single largest contingency on the local grid—to restore power within one hour following an event. This reliability standard requires at least half of the available operating reserves be in the form of spinning reserves with the remaining obligation satisfied by supplemental reserves. Prudent utility practice 195 of 839

9. Transmission and Distribution System Reliability Requirements Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-7
requires that system operators are able to handle more than just the loss of load and reserve obligations using solely outside resources. Planning reserves and contingency reserves are separate and distinct, and each set of reserves must be met separately. The contingency could be a transmission line, a resource, or any factors that critically impact the reliability of the grid. GWP currently has a Balancing Authority Area Services Agreement (BAASA) with LADWP for reserves to handle an N-1 contingency. The BAASA contract, however, only covers an N-1 contingency for one unit; it does not cover planning reserves for an N-1-1 contingency. If the contract ended, GWP would automatically become its own balancing authority (BA). Regardless of the status of the contract, GWP must maintain sufficient reserves to cover an N-1-1 contingency event. Under the current BAASA, LADWP agrees to sell Glendale 80 MW of spinning and supplemental contingency reserves for up to 60 minutes. BAASA negotiations established that LADWP could supply Glendale and Burbank a maximum of 40 MW of spinning reserve and 40 MW of non-spinning reserves each. The BAASA provides that if more than 80 MW of southbound capacity on Pacific DC Intertie, GWP would need to supply the additional reserves. In the BAASA, the parties stipulated that 80 MW of reserves will be sufficient for GWP to meet its N-1 obligation. If the contingency lasts for more than one hour, LADWP will only continue to supply Glendale if LADWP has the excess generation to do so. Not being able to purchase sufficient contingency reserves is exacerbated by the fact that LADWP has a large ownership share of the Pacific DC Intertie line. If the N-1 contingency occurs, the capacity shortage also affects LADWP. Thus, LADWP also needs its own supply to contingency reserves to maintain reliability for its customers and might not have excess energy available to sell or the excess transmission capacity available to deliver to Glendale. GWP cannot rely on LADWP being able to provide reserve resources during a transmission contingency; GWP must be able to maintain its own contingency reserves. Currently, the single largest contingency in GWP’s portfolio is the 100 MW Pacific DC Intertie. The second largest contingency is the 48 MW of capacity from either Grayson Unit #9 unit or Magnolia. Thus, GWP must maintain 148 MW of contingency reserve capacity in addition to the capacity required to maintain resource adequacy during peak load hours. In 2027, the second largest contingency will be half of the STS at 64 MW, for a total of 164 MW reserve requirement. Most utilities are able to maintain reserve capacity using a mix of local, remote, and market resources. GWP, however, with its load pocket bottleneck for remote transmission capacity, is forced to rely primarily on local resources to provide reserves. The increasing threat of wildfires in California makes the possibility of transmission outage more and more likely, increasing the importance of planning for these risks. As a result, this IRP emphasizes utilizing local resources, including behind-the-meter solar PV, BESS, DSM, renewables, and thermal resources. To help ensure that adequate contingency reserves are available, Ascend has simulated an N-1 event in the modeling where the Pacific DC Intertie is lost. This allows GWP to more fully understand how the remaining resources will behave during this outage and whether resource adequacy will be maintained even when the 196 of 839

9. Transmission and Distribution Distribution System
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-8
second largest resources undergo typical forced outages. This forced outage helps stress test the preferred portfolio to confirm reliability in the event of a contingency. In addition, since both interties are often derated due to repairs or high summer temperatures, these deratings reduce the amount of transmission capacity that GWP has available. These deratings often last for more than 60 minutes and, oftentimes, for several hours, days, weeks, or even months.

DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM GWP continues to ensure that its distribution system effectively and reliably handles load and the increasing influx of local customer-sited and grid-scale DERs. GWP’s local electric system consists of 520 miles of 4 kV and 12 kV distribution lines, 58 miles of 34.5 kV and 69 kV subtransmission lines, approximately 15,000 telephone poles, and nearly 90,000 end-user electric meters fed from 14 substations scattered across 32 square miles.

Distribution System Capital Improvements GWP continues to maintain its distribution system and infrastructure to provide reliable service to customers. GWP employs an on-going maintenance and capital improvement program to continually reinforce, enhance, and replace substations, transmission, and distribution infrastructure. Over the last five years, GWP engineering staff prepared plans and acted on a number of improvement projects. GWP staff: § Inspected 443 power poles and 110 streetlights in the northern area of Glendale. § Replaced 4.1 miles of aged underground high voltage cable. § Completed the engineering plan for a distribution project at 515 Pioneer Drive to install 600 feet of substructures and one distribution vault on Kenilworth Avenue to expand its electrical system and improve system reliability by converting overhead lines to underground. § Completed over 1,140 electrical service upgrades and reconnects, 87 distributed generation services, and 504 field checks for the ADU constructions. § Replaced 85 deteriorated power poles. § Replaced and installed 82 distribution transformers. § Expanded vegetation management to exceed minimum clearance requirements by trimming trees down to the telecommunications level. In FYE 2022, GWP’s contractor trimmed 15,229 trees to mitigate the risk of outages caused by trees. For a 4 kV to 12 kV reconstruction project, GWP staff: § Constructed and rebuilt 16 power poles and 1,568 feet of overhead conductors within #7 Tropico feeder area for 12 kV operation. 197 of 839

9. Transmission and Distribution Distribution System
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-9
§ Constructed and rebuilt three power poles and 800 feet of overhead conductors within 6 Howard feeder area for 12 kV operation. § Completed the engineering plans for the 12 kV reconstruction of 4, 6, and 8 Tropico feeders and 4 and 5 Acacia feeders. § Replaced 10 distribution transformers. This project will continue until it is completed. To upgrade street lighting, GWP staff: § Converted over 260 streetlights to LEDs to improve the energy efficacy of the lighting system. § Replaced 200 feet of street light conduits on Hillside drive to improve street lighting system reliability. § Replaced 700 feet of street light conduits on Chevy Chase drive as part of street light system improvements. § Installed three new streetlights for customers via the street lighting petition process. § Replaced six streetlights and foundations as part of the street light maintenance project. For its substations, communication system, and system protection areas, GWP staff: § Installed four Real Time Automation Controllers (Communication Processors) at four substations. § Installed event notification software to collect and organize relay events during outages or system disturbances. § Upgraded Columbus feeders #5, #6, #7, and #8 protective overcurrent relays from electromechanical to microprocessor based type. § Installed new batteries at the Scholl Substation. § Completed the inspection of 22 transformers at various substations. § Repaired the Tropico Substation bank transformer. § Repaired the Scholl Substation Transformer #4 Tap changer.

Updated Electric Services Master Plan GWP Staff are updating the Electric Services Master Plan. This plan outlines the schedule for a series of projects that are designed to improve reliability and ensure increased capacity for the increase in peak load from transportation and building electrification. One project is to adequately maintain several old power transformers that might be prone to failure. GWP is planning to release a Request for Quote for a mobile substation that will function on all GWP’s operating distribution and subtransmission line voltages. If any power transformer fails, this mobile substation can act as a substitute transformer until the failed transformer is fixed. 198 of 839

9. Transmission and Distribution Distribution System
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-10
Located in south Glendale, the old Acacia substation currently operates at 34.5/4 kV with an estimated capacity of 22.5 MW. The City’s upcoming bus and fleet electrification projects, which are also located in south Glendale, will increase the loading on the substation. As a result, GWP plans to upgrade the substation to a higher 69/12 kV operating voltage with a much higher 50 MW capacity. The Grayson Modernization project aims to replace aging, inefficient generating units with a new, modern portfolio of energy resources. To support these upgrades, GWP plans to replace and enhance its transmission and distribution infrastructure to increase the plant’s resiliency and reliability of energy delivery. Additional infrastructure projects include: § Upgrading substations, including new power circuit breakers, power transformers, bus work and conductors, and system protection. § Replacing existing communication systems, including the JungleMUX-based communications system that provides the pathways for GWP’s automated protection and control schemes. § Upgrading transmission and distribution systems, including new poles, crossarms, transformers, and substructure and underground infrastructure; replacing cables, conductor, and insulators; and automating distribution. § Converting the transmission and distribution systems, including upgrading the remaining 34.5 kV subtransmission system to 69 kV and the remaining 4 kV distribution feeders to 12 kV. § Adding new subtransmission lines to connect to existing substations and/or to provide redundancy to existing paths that will enhance reliability; expanding the distribution feeders and infrastructure into neighborhoods where GWP’s presence is sparse, as well as other transmission and distribution upgrades. § Converting inefficient streetlights to longer-lasting, more efficient LED lighting. § Enhancing the requirements for installing DERs, including rooftop solar and on-premise BESS, to ensure the continued reliability of the distribution system. These enhancements will improve safety by protecting customers and employees against potential hazards from backflow into offline circuits and complicated system protection schemes by power flowing in the opposite direction. § Continuing incentives to customers to install DER systems beyond the state-mandated incentives. § Implementing a DR program that will reduce GWP’s peak loads and heat stress on the transmission and distribution infrastructure during periods of high loads. § Enhance the transmission and distribution infrastructure to minimize the likelihood of wildfire ignition. These enhancements include upgrading tree wires, automating distribution, using “fuse savers” or similar spark-free devices, undergrounding of overhead circuits, and implementing other advanced technologies. § Installing additional solar PV and BESS systems on City properties, including fire stations and parking lots. This next iteration of GWP’s Master Plan is scheduled to be completed in early 2024. The plan will provide guidance for these on-going and proposed projects. Additional engineering studies will be required to determine the scope and requirements for specific project. 199 of 839

9. Transmission and Distribution Distribution System
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 9-11
Cause of Outages Distribution level outages stem from various causes, highlighting the complex nature of maintaining a reliable power supply at community level. Understanding these causes is crucial for GWP to implement effective preventative measures and enhance overall grid resilience. Figure 55 depicts the various causes of the outages GWP experienced in FYE 2023.

Figure 55. Causes of Distribution System Outages
200 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-1

10. RPS Compliance and Resources
Over the years, GWP has met or exceeded all of California’s statutory requirements. The CEC’s RPS is one such requirement. It requires load-serving entities (LSEs) in California to procure an increasing percentage of its retail sales from eligible renewable energy resources such as wind, solar, small hydroelectric, geothermal, biogas, and biomass. The RPS compliance includes three key components for each compliance period: 1) the Procurement Quantity Requirement, 2) the Portfolio Balance Requirement, and 3) the Long-Term Contract Procurement Requirement Any shortfall for each compliance period may lead to enforcement action by the CEC.

RPS COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS Established and enacted by California legislation,13 the RPS sets increasingly progressive renewable energy targets for the state’s ESPs, requiring local POUs to increase their procurement of eligible renewable energy resources. POUs, that fall under the requirement, were mandated to comply with the statewide RPS program starting in 2011. Figure 56. RPS Compliance Period Requirements14 As part of its administrative responsibility, the CEC verifies the eligibility of renewable energy procured by load-serving entities (LSEs), which include retail sellers, POUs, and all other entities serving retail sales of electricity in California that are obligated to participate and report to the RPS. 13 In 2006, by SB X1–2, then modified by SB 350 in 2015 and again by SB 100 in 2018. See Renewable Portfolio Standard and Zero-Carbon Resources on page 5-4. 14 Renewables Portfolio Standard Program: Program and Compliance Information for New California Load-Serving Entities, California Public Utilities Commission, 2023; p 3. 201 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources RPS Compliance Requirements Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-2
The verification program establishes the rules and procedures that CEC will use to determine if the POU meets the required RPS procurement requirements. After the verification reports are adopted, the compliance determination begins according with the RPS POU regulations. The report included: § The amount of eligible renewable energy procured by GWP. § The PCC of eligible renewable energy. § GWP’s procurement target and portfolio balance requirements. § Any optional compliance measures being applied by GWP. § GWP’s additional procurement above requirements, which may be applied to a future CP. For POUs, the CEC has final say in determining the PCC procurement claims, calculating the procurement requirements, and determining the RPS compliance. The CEC is authorized to issue violation notices for noncompliance and refer the POU to CARB to assess penalties.

Renewable Energy Credits RECs are tradable commodities that represent proof that one MWh of electricity was generated from an eligible renewable source. Clean energy emits low or zero amounts of carbon (zero-carbon) but does not meet the RPS qualifications. Eligible renewable resources generate electricity using the following technologies: biomass, solar thermal, PV, wind, geothermal, fuel cells using renewable fuels, hydroelectric under 30 MW, digester gas, municipal solid waste conversion, biogas, ocean wave, ocean thermal, and tidal current. RPS targets are verified based on the procurement quantity requirement (PQR) for each multiyear accounting period rather than annual accounting. The PQR is defined as the statutory percentage of RPS-eligible procurement required per year in a compliance period multiplied by the total retail sales of each year in the compliance period. Table 9 demonstrates an example of a PQR calculation. Table 9. Compliance Period Percent of Retail Sales Requirements15 15 Ibid, p. 9.
202 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources RPS Compliance Requirements Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-3
Portfolio Balance Requirements Product Content Category (PCC), or “buckets”, are categories of RECs characterized by the bundling of renewable attributes with delivered power. PCC-1: A renewable resource located within the state of California or a renewable resource that is directly delivered to California without energy substitution from another resource that came online after June 1, 2010. A PCC-0 is a resource that was already online before this date. The regulation requires at least 75 percent of the procurement quantity requirement is PCC1. PCC-2: A renewable resource that is out-of-state and delivered to California where the RECs are paired with a substitute energy resource imported into the state. PCC-3: A REC from a resource delivered without the energy component. This is commonly called an “unbundled” REC. The regulation limits the use of PCC 3 for compliance to 10 percent of the procurement quantity requirement.

GWP Compliance Status Compliance Period 1: 2011–2013 For CP 1, GWP procured eligible renewable energy equal to 20 percent of its retail sales for CP 1 and met its target of 634,760 RECs. GWP also met its PCC-1 portfolio balance requirement of 72,130 RECs and did not exceed the 36,065 PCC-3 balance limitation. Table 10 lists GWP’s eligible retired and applied RECs for CP 1. RECs Retired and Applied Historic Carryover PCC-0 PCC-1 PCC-2 PCC-3 Pre-June 2010 PCC-3 Total Eligible RECs Retired 669 489,788 73,488 40,771 30,000 44 634,760 Eligible RECs Applied 669 489,788 73,488 40,771 30,000 44 634,760 Table 10. Compliance Period 1 Retired and Applied RECs Compliance Period 2: 2014–2016 For CP 2, GWP retired and reported 940,232 RECs and verified 853,556 RECs as RPS-eligible. GWP had a procurement target of 674,228 RECs and applied 718,817 RPS-eligible RECs toward its procurement requirements. These RECs equal 23.09 percent of its retail sales for CP 2, thus meeting its procurement target. GWP also met its PCC-1 portfolio balance requirement of 304,990 RECs and did not exceed the 70,382 PCC-3 balance limitation. In addition, GWP accumulated 134,739 RECs of excess procurement that can be used for future compliance periods. 203 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources RPS Compliance Requirements Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-4
Table 11 lists eligible retired and applied RECs for CP 2.

RECs Available PCC-0 PCC-1 Pre-June 2010 PCC-1 PCC-2 PCC-3 Pre-June 2010 PCC-3 Historic Carryover Total Eligible RECs Retired 338,848 304,990 0 207,456 1,359 903 — 853,556 Prior Balances Available 0 0 0 0 0 0 356,221 356,221 Total RECs Available 338,848 304,990 0 207,456 1,359 903 356,221 1,209,777 RECs Applied to CP 2 204,109 304,990 0 207,456 1,359 903 0 718,817 Table 11. Compliance Period 2 Available and Applied RECs Compliance Period 3: 2017–2020 For CP 3, GWP has successfully submitted the required documentation for RPS compliance reporting to the CEC for verification. Based on initial verification results, GWP’s procurement obligation is 1,206,153 RECS; it retired 1,614,332 RECS to be applied toward its obligation. The CEC’s final determination is still pending. Table 12 lists the GWP procurement targets and Table 13 lists the retired REC that were reported to the CEC. Procurement Target Calculation (MWh) Year Annual Retail Sales Soft Target Percent Soft Target 2017 1,047,784 27% 282,902 2018 1,019,690 29% 295,710 2019 978,160 31% 303,230 2020 982,761 33% 324,311 Procurement Target 1,206,153 Table 12. Reported Procurement Target Calculations Retired RECs PCC-0 PCC-1 PCC-2 PCC-3 Total 630,518 765,667 122,330 95,817 1,614,332 Table 13. Reported Retired RECs Compliance Period 4: 2021–2024: Current Compliance Period For CP 4, GWP’s procurement obligation is projected to be approximately 1.6 million RECS. The 65 percent long-term contract requirement took effect in 2021. During CP 4, GWP has added three long-term PCC-1 renewable contracts to its portfolio: Star Peak geothermal, Whitegrass geothermal, and Eland 1 solar and battery. 204 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources RPS Procurement
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-5
Compliance Period 5: 2025–2027: Future Compliance Period For CP 4, GWP’s procurement obligation is projected to be approximately 1.5 million RECS based on the energy forecast in this IRP. The Scholl landfill gas facility, a renewable resource, is anticipated to come online in 2026. Compliance Period 6: 2028–2030: Future Compliance Period For CP 4, GWP’s procurement obligation is projected to be approximately 2.2 million RECS based on the energy forecast in this IRP. The anticipated increase in STS capacity will allow GWP to procure more renewable energy on the Southwest AC line.

RPS PROCUREMENT The CEC verified GWP’s successful compliance in both CP 1 and CP 2. GWP continually plans to meet future compliance periods through various procurement strategies. Future CPs follow stricter guidelines to achieve an equal level of compliance and to ensure renewable and clean energy goals are attained. GWP RPS procurement plans are designed to help meet milestones for each year of the CPs and provide a path that ensures GWP's ability to maximize instruments used for compliance as part of GWP’s renewable and clean energy portfolio.

Long-Term Contracts SB 350 established new long-term procurement requirements. Beginning January 1, 2021, at least 65 percent of the procurement counted toward RPS must come from contracts with tenor of 10 years or more. The term of a contract is measured from contract start date until the contract end date except for the following conditions: § If the end date of a long-term contract has been extended, the procurement under the modified term will also be considered as long-term. § If the end date of a short-term contract has been extended, the term of the modified contract will be measured from the amendment execution date until the new end date. § If the modified contract obligates the procurement for a term of 10 continuous years or more, the procurement will be considered as long-term as of the month and year of the amendment execution date. § If the procurement period of a long-term contract has been modified or terminated early and is no longer providing a procurement term of at least 10 continuous years, only the procurement timeframe before the modification or early termination may be considered as long-term. 205 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources RPS Procurement
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-6
A procurement contract will still be considered long-term even if a portion of the procurement, from one or more RPS-certified facilities, is sold to a second POU and regardless of the length of time, as long as the original procurement contract meets the requirement of a long-term contract, and the resale does not affect the underlying procurement terms of the original contract.

Excess Procurement and Historic Carryover PCC-1 RECs may be counted as excess procurement when associated with long-term or short-term contracts. PCC-2 or PCC-3 RECs cannot be counted as excess procurement in all cases. Excess procurement is a long-term compliance tool without the need to follow the continuous 10-year duration requirement. Excess procurement RECs (PCC-0) from historic carryovers are long-term contracts that were signed before June 1, 2010; PCC-0 RECs can count toward RPS procurement quantity requirements. Long-term eligibility can be lost due to certain contract modifications or amendments and may not count in full toward the long-term procurement requirements. However, modifications that increase the expected quantities or share of generation under the same contracting terms qualify as part of the original long-term contract agreement. This could be from efficiency improvements to the certified facility. Contractual modifications or the addition of new capacity, with or without a substitute fuel type, does not qualify unless specified in the original terms during of the agreement. Contractual modifications that reallocate shares of generation among parties of jointly negotiated contracts qualify as part of the original long-term agreement. Agreements that are executed by a Joint Powers Agency on behalf of POUs meet the procurement requirements of a long-term contract. The remaining portion of a long-term contract can be assigned to a second POU and still qualify as a long-term contract as long as the original terms are retained for the remaining duration of agreement.

Procurement Plan and Cost Containment GWP has met and will continue to meet RPS compliance soft and hard targets by procuring sufficient renewable energy to meet the obligations in PUC §399.30(b)(1) and (c)(1) and Section 3204 of the RPS Enforcement Procedures. To ensure compliance to the program while maintaining cost-effectiveness, GWP adopted a comprehensive procurement and cost containment plan. To keep the plan current, GWP: § Refreshes the energy and existing power supply forecast on a regular basis to determine future energy and RPS needs. § Collaborates with other utilities (through SCPPA) to seek long-term PPAs with established renewable energy project developers to provide stable pricing through competitive bidding processes. § Sets procurement targets for specific renewable technologies based on their current maturity, cost competitiveness, and appropriateness in meeting the energy and RPS requirements. § Integrates local and external BESS to store excess energy during peak production periods and discharges it strategically during periods of low renewable energy generation preventing curtailment and ensuring 206 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources RPS Enforcement Procedures Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-7
efficient use of all generated power from renewable sources. This contributes to a higher percentage of renewable energy in the overall energy mix, aligning with compliance requirements and reliability of the system. § Implements flexible contract structures that allow for adjustments in response to market fluctuations, technological advancements, or changes in regulatory frameworks. § Maximizes the use of allowable bundled firmed and shaped (PCC-2), and unbundled RECs (PCC-3), as well as excess procurement and historic carryovers to lower total cost of compliance. § Conducts regular post-implementation evaluation to assess the effectiveness of the plan and refine strategies over time to maximize cost effectiveness for the benefit of GWP customers. § Adopts and implements demand-side load reduction and peak-shifting initiatives including DR, energy efficiency, and residential solar and BESS to reduce overall compliance obligation. § Explores financing options and incentives to support renewable energy projects, including grants and tax credits. Before committing to any long-term renewable resources, understanding potential impact to electricity rates is crucial to ensure that the cost burden is reasonable for consumers particularly for DACs. GWP will seek the approval of City Council for projects requiring major financial obligations.

RPS ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES The CEC’s RPS enforcement procedures for POUs provide the rules and procedures used to assess procurement and compliance measures in meeting the regulatory requirements.

Determination The CEC’s Executive Director determines if a report submitted by a POU is incorrect or incomplete, or if a report was not submitted by the deadline. A written notice, by email or other written communication, will be sent to the POU specifying the reason and/or what correction action is needed. The POU can submit the missing or correct information within the required timeframe to avoid a separate violation for the submission failure. A request for an extension of time must be received by the CEC no later than the due date specified in the Executive Director’s written notice. A request for an extension may be granted by the Executive Director within five business days after it is received. An extension may be granted for up to 30 calendar days from the date the missing or incorrect report. In granting an extension, the Executive Director may consider the following factors: (1) the POU was diligent in gathering the necessary information and preparing the report for submission by the due date; (2) circumstances beyond the control of the POU; and (3) if the extension will facilitate a timely report submitted feasibly by the extended due date. 207 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources RPS Enforcement Procedures Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-8
Complaint The Executive Director may file a complaint against a POU for failing to comply with any of the RPS regulatory requirements that include, but not limited to the following: § Failure to meet an RPS procurement targets. § Failure to meet a PCC-1 portfolio balance requirement. § Failure to meet the long-term procurement requirements. § Failure to adopt an RPS procurement or enforcement plan and/or failure to provide required notice or information to the Commission and public. § Failure to submit a completed annual compliance report or other required documentation. Responses to complaints will include all data, reports, analyses, and any other relevant information provided by the POU for defenses against any claims, allegations, alleged violation, or imposed monetary penalty if noncompliance is determined. A POU’s extenuating circumstances may be included in the response such as the following: (1) any harm the violation will cause. (2) nature and expected persistence of the violation. (3) past violations. (4) mitigation actions by the POU to address the violation. (5) any financial burdens caused to the POU. Any confidential business data, trade secrets, or market information will be submitted, under seal, in a separate filing. The separate filing shall be submitted along with a request for confidential.

Hearing and Final Decision Based on CEC staff responses and POU replies, a hearing on the complaint will be scheduled before the CEC, a committee designated by the CEC, or a hearing officer assigned by the chair at the request of the committee. If the hearing was not held before the CEC, the proposed decision, from the alternative method, will be provided to the CEC no later than 45 days after the hearing has been concluded. The CEC’s decision will be final; the possibility of a reconsideration is unavailable. The decision will include all findings regarding mitigating and aggravating factors leading to the noncompliance.

Penalties CARB may rely on the decision and its findings to assess appropriate penalties against a POU. The decision may also include suggested penalties to consider, as appropriate. Any recommended penalty is comparable to penalties adopted by the CPUC for noncompliance with RPS requirements for retail sellers. A notice of violation will be forwarded to CARB along with the final decision and all records for the penalty determination. If a petition for writ of mandate is filed by the POU, the notice of violation will be delayed until the outcome fully and finally determined. 208 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources Renewable Resources and Clean Energy Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-9
Financial penalties include the following: § Failure to file a routine or verified RPS compliance report or failure to correct a routine or verified report at the time required: $500 per day for the first ten days the filing was late and $1,000 for each day thereafter. § Failure to comply with a request for information from CEC staff that is related to RPS compliance reports in the time or in the manner required: $500 per day for the first ten days an LSE fails to respond to the CEC staff’s request and $1,000 for each day thereafter. § Penalty for shortfall of renewables: $50 per REC (one MWh of electricity). § Penalty cap: large IOUs: $25 million for each annual compliance period; other retail sellers: 50 percent of the procurement quantity requirements multiplied by $50 per REC.

RENEWABLE RESOURCES AND CLEAN ENERGY GWP has taken important steps towards meeting its RPS and clean energy requirements. In 2022, GWP generated 59.9 percent of energy from clean resources, including 35.2 percent from RPS-eligible resources. Over the next four years, GWP is expanding its renewable generation portfolio by acquiring the Eland Solar and Storage project and the Scholl Canyon landfill project. To meet the state’s 60 percent RPS compliance requirements for 2030, GWP will need to pursue additional renewable projects. An analysis of the RPS position with existing resources shows that GWP must begin procuring additional renewables in 2027 to continue on the path to meet that 60 percent target in 2030. The challenges with meeting the targets are the expected load growth in the near term and transmission limits for the long term. 209 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources Renewable Resources and Clean Energy Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-10
Figure 57 depicts the RPS and clean energy levels from GWP’s current portfolio mix.

Figure 57. Current Portfolio RPS and Clean Energy
210 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources Renewable Resources and Clean Energy Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-11
Renewable Generation GWP must acquire more renewable generation to ensure renewable and clean energy mandates are met. GWP continues to collaborate with SCPPA and other utilities for new projects. Table 14 lists GWP’s current renewable sources and their nameplate capacities. Resource Type Nameplate MW Renewable Pebble Springs Wind 20.0 High Winds Wind 9.0 Townsite Solar 50.0 Star Peak Geothermal 12.5 Whitegrass No. 1 Geothermal 3.0 Tieton Small Hydro 6.8 Scholl Canyon Landfill Gas 12.0 Eland Solar and Storage 25.0 Zero-Carbon Hoover Dam Large Hydro 33.0 Palo Verde Nuclear 11.0 Table 14. Current Renewable and Clean Energy Resources 211 of 839

10. RPS Compliance and Resources Renewable Resources and Clean Energy Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 10-12
GWP Clean Energy Projections The IRP considered options for GWP to add more renewable generation to its portfolio. Ascend included the RPS and clean energy requirements in the modeling work for this plan. Starting in 2027, the portfolios assembled in this plan add geothermal and wind initially with solar coming around 2030 to meet the requirements. The preferred scenario adds renewables to the portfolio to ensure GWP will reach the requirements for 2030 and 2035. Figure 58 depicts the RPS and clean energy levels from the IRP’s preferred portfolio.

Figure 58. Preferred Portfolio RPS and Clean Energy
212 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-1

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results
The fundamental purpose of integrated resource planning is to ensure adequate capacity to generate energy for current and forecasted demand while maintaining reliability and competitive and stable rates as well as meeting state regulatory requirements. Modeling evaluates multiple potential future energy paths for GWP to meet forecasted load. Since the future is uncertain, testing different future portfolio scenarios helps plan for that uncertainty. Modeling these IRP scenarios simulates GWP’s energy demand and supply to project how resources might operate under these future conditions. The models are based on estimated future system costs, GHG emission levels, renewable generation penetration, forecasted demand, fuel and carbon prices, and many other factors. Figure 59 depicts the overall IRP modeling process employed by PowerSIMM.

Figure 59. IRP PowerSIMM Modeling Process Flow The future GWP system must be reliable, sustainable, and affordable. Ascend used three different models to test various ways that GWP’s portfolio can meet these needs.

RT Price Spikes
VolatilityLong-run on/off-peak forwards
Price Shapes
Fundamentals
Ancillary Prices
Structural Basis

WEATHER

UNPLANNED OUTAGES

RENEWABLESDISPATCH

CUSTOMERLOADFORWARDPRICES

SPOT PRICESBASIS PRICES
LoadRenewable Generation
Dispatchable Assets
Portfolio ConfigurationHedge Instruments
Meaningful Uncertainty
Portfolio Positions
Cash Flows and Budgets
Automated and Timely ReportingStrategy and What-ifs
Distributions and Payoffs
@ Risk Metrics
Outputs100s of variables and metrics
213 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling and Analysis Framework Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-2
Resource Adequacy Model. Tests whether energy flows regardless of the situation, such as during very hot or cold days. Capacity Expansion Model. Tests the resources that make up the portfolio that meet GWP’s energy needs, and how much will be renewable and zero-carbon. Production Cost Model. Tests the overall cost of the modeled portfolios.

MODELING AND ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK IRP modeling is a multi-step process to create capacity expansion plans and calculate their associated cost to serve Glendale’s load. These costs include the production cost of GWP’s generation assets as well as the costs and revenues associated with energy transactions in the power and fuel markets. The objective is to find the optimum balance among cost, reliability, environmental requirements, and policy objectives. The process starts by defining the objectives, assumptions, and inputs into the capacity expansion models. Primary inputs include the physical and financial parameters of GWP’s current resources, GWP’s energy and peak demand forecasts, the candidate resource options (renewables, BESS, and PPAs), price forecasts (power, natural gas, hydrogen, and carbon), transportation and building electrification forecasts, and model constraints such as capacity needs, energy needs, and resource build limitations. Ascend worked with GWP staff—the modeling team—to create a model of its existing system. Staff gathered data on GWP’s supply resources and load, including historical data along with future plans and projections for resource updates and expected changes in customer load. Capacity expansion models provide a least-cost set of resources that meet the constraints defined in the model. Portfolio outputs from the capacity expansion models are analyzed for resource adequacy. If a portfolio cannot adequately serve load, additional resources are added. Finally, portfolios are analyzed in a production cost model to determine production costs, emissions, and market interactions, among other outputs. Once all the input assumptions are defined, the modeling team developed an initial list of scenarios and sensitivities. Scenarios are core frameworks for possible future portfolios, and sensitivities are variations on the scenarios to test how changing assumptions affect the resource selection and production costs. Scenario development provides an opportunity to consider different future paths. In this case, the scenarios consider alternative targets for transitioning to a clean energy system. Modeling GWP’s system with different scenarios gives important feedback on total system costs, reliability, emissions, and resource operations. GWP relied on this resource modeling to chart a path toward a clean, reliable system with competitive and stable rates. 214 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling and Analysis Framework Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-3
Input Assumptions and Portfolio Modeling GWP licensed PowerSIMM, developed by Ascend Analytics, for the modeling work in this analysis. PowerSIMM provides capacity expansion, resource adequacy, and production cost modeling. The modeling in this IRP relied on stochastic models for capacity expansion and production cost. The modeling team configured PowerSIMM to capture variability and uncertainty in load, renewables, and prices while maintaining structural parameters among the variables. PowerSIMM simulations combine future expectations for load, markets, and renewables, with historical data to create realistic future simulations of the power system. Simulations are scaled to future expectations based on monthly forecasts for renewable generation, load, and prices including price volatility and daily price shapes. The result is a set of simulations covering a useful and accurate range of potential future paths. Automated Resource Selection (ARS) is the capacity expansion module in PowerSIMM. ARS selects the least-cost resource procurements or retirements that satisfy the model constraints. The models begin with a dispatch of existing and candidate resources to determine variable costs, energy generation, carbon emissions, and renewable generation over the long-term planning period.

Modeling Constraints The modeling employed four constraints: PRM, emissions, renewable energy generation, and clean energy generation. Planning Reserve Margin. Requires the candidate portfolios to meet projected annual peak demand plus 164 MW to cover the two largest contingencies in the GWP system: a loss of the Pacific DC Intertie line and a loss of the STS line which feeds into the Southwest AC Intertie line. Reserves to cover the two largest contingencies are required per GWP’s agreement with LADWP. Emissions. Disallows new fossil fuel resource additions and reduces the reliance on existing natural gas assets to ensure the resultant portfolio complies with SB 1020 requirements. Renewable and Clean Energy Generation. Requires adequate renewable and clean generation to comply with SB 350, SB 100, and SB 1020 required for an RPS target of covering 60 percent of load with renewable generation by 2030 and a clean energy target of covering 100 percent of retail sales with zero-carbon resources by 2045. Outputs from ARS provide the timing and quantity of resources to procure over the long-term planning period that satisfies these four constraints at the lowest cost. The model considers full resource costs including capital costs, fixed costs, and variable costs such as start-up costs, fuel, and variable operation and maintenance (VOM) costs. Market sales revenue is treated as a negative cost in the model. 215 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling and Analysis Framework Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-4
Candidate Resources In addition to GWP’s existing resource portfolio, the IRP considered several candidate resources to potentially add to a new resource portfolio. These resources included both renewable generation (geothermal, solar PV, BESS, and wind) and clean energy generation (hydrogen and nuclear SMRs). These resources were included in the modeling of all portfolios. The list of candidate resources was established to consider a range of new resource technology types that GWP could realistically procure. The following provides a brief overview of the candidate resources. Solar. New candidate solar PV resources are assumed to be single-axis tracking with capacity factors of approximately 32 percent. GWP is expected to have the opportunity to contract for more solar in their portfolio over the next few years as solar is developed in Southern California. Wind. As a low risk and mature technology, wind provides carbon-free energy that can also be counted in fulfilling the RPS requirements. Potential wind resources would likely be found in New Mexico or Utah via the Southwest AC Intertie line or in Washington or Oregon via the Pacific DC Intertie line. New candidate wind resources are assumed to have capacity factors approximately 42 percent. Storage. The scenarios considered a range of storage options covering durations of 4-hour, 8-hour, and long-duration storage (modeled as 100-hour duration). Currently, 4-hour and 8-hour batteries are commercially available with longer durations in development. Cost projections for 4-hour and 8-hour batteries were based on the cost trends observed for Li-Ion technology. Long-duration storage technology in development is based on a variety of technologies such as Iron-air, vanadium flow, or liquid-air technologies, among others. The model assumes that space is adequate to install storage in Glendale at the same site where Grayson is currently located. The next generation of storage will bring benefits in addition to longer duration. These technologies bring environmental and reliability benefits because they will be based on sustainable materials that also reduce fire risks. However, long-duration storage will have lower energy density compared to the current battery options. GWP plans to install a 75 MW, 4-hour Li-Ion battery at the Grayson site. A long-duration storage resource would require much more land per MW of capacity, and, therefore, would be limited to a smaller total capacity. The model assumed 50 MW of long-duration storage could be procured in Glendale which may be optimistic given the energy density estimates from long-duration developers.16 Also, long-duration options in development will likely have much lower efficiency compared to current storage options. The model assumed a 60 percent round-trip efficiency for long-duration storage compared to 90 percent for 4-hour and 8-hour storage. To date, no long-duration projects have been built at the utility scale, but several pilot projects are in progress. GWP will continue to monitor this emerging technology. 16 Form Energy states that their product (100-hour iron-air storage) would require one acre of land for every three MW of capacity. ESS, another storage developer, states their product (12-hour iron flow storage) has a footprint of six MW per acre. 216 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling and Analysis Framework Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-5
Geothermal. Geothermal provides reliable clean power around the clock. Generation from geothermal sourced power is firm and dependable since it does not rely on weather. California is the national leader in geothermal energy with more than 5 percent of total generation coming from geothermal resources. Due to high demand for renewable power around the clock, geothermal prices have increased lately. GWP will consider geothermal as an option for future supply acquisitions. The model assumes geothermal will be available via the Southwest AC Intertie line starting in 2028. Green Hydrogen. Hydrogen can power a simple cycle CT or ICE with the fuel piped to the resource location. The model used a projected price forecast for hydrogen fuel with heat rates close to a new natural gas CT (10 MMBtu/MWh). A hydrogen powered generator was modeled within GWP’s territory as a potential replacement for the natural gas resources. GWP is currently planning to replace IPP with a combined-cycle generator powered with a blend of hydrogen and natural gas with the expectation to fully convert to hydrogen by 2035. Currently, there are no generators that can burn 100 percent hydrogen although manufacturers are planning for 100 percent hydrogen fueled options. Fuel cells are the only option for full hydrogen generation but exist in capacities much smaller than GWP needs. GWP expects to learn a great deal about hydrogen powered generation with the IPP conversion and will continue to monitor developments with hydrogen. Nuclear Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). Nuclear technology is evolving towards smaller, flexible generators that can be assembled in a modular fashion for easy future expansion. To date, no SMRs have been installed, but multiple companies are working to develop this emerging technology. There are potential SMR projects in the planning stages.

Candidate Portfolio Options Procurement Plan The IRP considered several options to increase GWP’s renewable share to meet its RPS requirements. Starting in 2027, the portfolios analyzed and modeled by Ascend added wind or solar to GWP’s resource mix to meet RPS requirements in the near term. The analysis for the long-term planning considers replacement options for Grayson in 2035 to meet the 90 percent clean energy target. The long-term considerations for Grayson are Li-Ion energy storage, hydrogen generation, and geothermal generation. Replacement resources are sized to provide the same resource adequacy (RA) as the capacity lost from Grayson. The IRP modeling process selected a set of options for clean energy, which included wind, solar, energy storage (4-hour, 8-hour, and long duration), geothermal, nuclear SMRs, and hydrogen. Wind and solar provide energy and RECs with low capacity value to meet RA requirements. Energy storage provides no energy or RECs, but can support variable resources like wind and solar to provide needed capacity value for RA. Energy storage has over 90 percent capacity value. Geothermal provides both energy and capacity value at a higher cost compared to wind and solar. Finally, hydrogen and SMRs provide dispatchable capacity to supply clean energy around the clock at a higher cost than geothermal. The cost assumptions are but one factor when evaluating the portfolios. The evaluations also include the levelized cost of energy (LCOE), financial assumptions, tax credits, depreciation, and the cost of capital. 217 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling and Analysis Framework Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-6
Table 15 summarizes the cost of potential RPS-compliant resources, clean energy resources, and energy storage for the capacity expansion models to consider when selecting the preferred resource portfolio (for 2025 through 2045). The analysis shows that the lowest cost resources are southern California solar, Pacific northwest wind, and the 4-hour Li-Ion BESS. The lowest cost zero-carbon resource is nuclear small modular reactors followed closely by new geothermal. Technology Resource Price Units First Year Cost Geothermal California Geothermal $/MWh $107.85 Solar Southern California Solar $/MWh $29.92 Northern California Solar $/MWh $35.82 Wind Pacific Northwest Wind $/MWh $49.97 New Mexico Wind $/MWh $39.35 Southern California Wind $/MWh $58.42 Northern California Wind $/MWh $54.75 Hydrogen Hydrogen Combustion Turbine $/kW $1,861.00 Energy Storage 4-hour Li-Ion BESS $/kW $1,404.00 8-hour Li-Ion BESS $/kW $2,505.00 Long-duration $/kW $2,278.00 Nuclear SMR Nuclear Small Modular Reactor $/kW $5,000.00 Table 15. First Year Cost of RPS-Compliant, Clean Energy, and Storage Resource Portfolio Options Ascend prepared cost estimates for candidate resources, which were based on multiple sources of information. One source is the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) report published by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). It provides projections of resource costs for various technologies through 2050. Ascend augmented information from the ATB with data gathered through the administration of utility RFPs to procure new resources throughout California. If, for example, Ascend received an indication that southern California solar prices are higher than the projected ATB values, Ascend adjusted the projections to attain more accurate prices for the southern California region. All price projections include the effects expected from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) on power purchase agreement costs from renewable resources. 218 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Process for Portfolio Scenarios Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-7
MODELING PROCESS FOR PORTFOLIO SCENARIOS To address the issues for meeting forecasted load, Ascend modeled a set of portfolio scenarios to test various resource mixes, assess their viability, and plan a timeline for capacity expansion. These scenarios addressed key market and industry-side trends and conditions, supply and demand possibilities, and energy price forecasts. The scenarios addressed several factors, including peak demand and energy forecasts, GHG emission reduction targets, renewable and clean energy integration, energy efficiency measures, DR, BESS, EV penetration, building electrification, and transmission and distribution constraints. The scenarios are based on a wide-ranging set of assumptions and risk factors that evolve over the long-term planning period of 2023 through 2045.

Six Modeled Scenarios Overall, Ascend modeled six scenarios to understand different paths towards a cleaner grid: three designed by GWP and three designed by the STAG. The STAG scenarios are designed to augment the GWP scenarios. Scenario 1: California Policy The scenario assumes GWP procures resources to meet the California mandates for renewable energy and clean energy. The mandates state that GWP must serve 60 percent of load with renewable energy by 2030 and 100 percent of the retail sales with clean energy by 2045. In this path, GWP continues to develop geothermal, wind, and solar resources remotely while adding distributed solar PV and energy storage in Glendale. Natural gas units are expected to remain online after 2045 to ensure system reliability while operating infrequently. Scenario 2: Carbon Free by 2035 In this scenario, GWP aggressively procures renewable resources including geothermal, wind, and solar while also building storage early in the process. Natural gas generation will be replaced or converted to a clean fuel source (such as hydrogen) by 2035. Energy storage will provide necessary capacity to maintain reliable operations. The costs of this transition are uncertain as they depend heavily on the cost of replacing natural gas with green hydrogen. Scenario 3: California Policy with Offsets In this scenario, GWP procures resources to come within 10 percent of the RPS requirement and fill the remaining gap with REC purchases. This scenario is meant to show the least-cost path to fulfill the renewable energy and zero-carbon energy requirements of SB 350, SB 100, and SB 1020. 219 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Process for Portfolio Scenarios Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-8
Scenario 4: Carbon Free by 2035 with Local Resource Focus In this scenario, GWP aggressively procures utility-scale geothermal, wind, and solar while pursuing customer-sited resources. Rooftop solar increases significantly along with distributed batteries at residences. GWP would also work to increase energy efficiency savings. All natural gas generation transitions to green hydrogen in 2035 supplemented with long-duration storage. Scenario 5: Gradual Carbon Free by 2042 In this scenario, GWP converts natural gas resources to run on green hydrogen by 2042. GWP pushes for increased renewable procurement in the near- and mid-term while working towards transitioning away from natural gas. Given the longer timeline for a carbon free transition, GWP stops normal operation of Magnolia power plant in 2038 keeping it for capacity and reliability purposes. In 2042, all natural gas resources transition to green hydrogen fuel. Scenario 6: Carbon Free by 2040 In this scenario, GWP achieves a carbon-free portfolio by 2040 through increased procurements of renewables and storage along with a full transition of natural gas to green hydrogen by 2040.

Scenario Assumptions The scenarios modeled provide a range of futures where GWP transitions to a cleaner energy generation mix over different time periods. Ascend ran capacity expansion and production cost models in its analysis software, PowerSIMM, to assist GWP in planning its resource mix over the entire extent of the long-term 2023–2045 planning period. A key goal of the scenario planning process is to provide GWP management and the Glendale City Council with a robust quantitative assessment of how its business planning projections could be affected by key risk variables. Implementing the selected preferred portfolio will assist the City in identifying additional detailed analyses needed to further quantify operational and financial requirements while examining business planning risks and potential outcomes. Aside from the candidate resource characteristics and costs, the scenarios included assumptions regarding items such as load, market prices, DERs, DR, and energy efficiency. 220 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Results
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-9
Table 16 shows the resource potential values for each scenario assumed in the model. The base resources in Scenarios 1 through 3 are identical. Resource Scenarios 1–3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Customer-Sited Resource Potential Distributed Energy Resources 50 MW by 2045 100 MW by 2035 75 MW by 2042 75 MW by 2040 Energy Efficiency 1.8% of retail sales through 2031 0.9% of retail sales from 2032–2045

2.7% of retail sales per year for next 10 years 1.35% of retail sales from 2032–2045

1.8% of retail sales through 2031 0.9% of retail sales from 2032–2045

1.8% of retail sales through 2031 0.9% of retail sales from 2032–2045 Demand Response Historical growth trends: 6.7 MW of demand reduced by end of 2028 and 7 MW by end of 2033 1% increase after 2033 10 MW of demand reduced by end of 2027 5% increase after 2027 8 MW of demand reduced by end of 2027 3% increase after 2027 8 MW of demand reduced by end of 2027 3% increase after 2027 Customer Solar Doubling of solar capacity over 20 years: 50 MW by 2045 10% of customers adopt solar by 2027, ramping up to 100 MW total by 2045 60 MW by 2042 60 MW by 2042 Customer Storage None 10 MW by 2034 10 MW by 2034 10 MW by 2034 Local Utility-Owned Resource Potential Utility-Owned Solar 10 MW of utility-owned solar by end of 2030 No defined assumption post-2030 15 MW of utility-owned solar by end of 2030 No defined assumption post-2030 12 MW of utility-owned solar by end of 2030 No defined assumption post-2030 12 MW of utility-owned solar by end of 2030 No defined assumption post-2030 Utility-Owned Storage
75 MW with possibility for increase after 2027 75 MW with possibility for increase after 2027 75 MW with possibility for increase after 2027 One long-duration energy storage project developed in Glendale 75 MW with possibility for increase after 2027
Table 16. Local Resource Assumptions for All Six Scenarios MODELING RESUL TS GWP’s base portfolio shows that GWP will need capacity and energy resources by 2027. Before 2027, the model did not allow for new resource additions as the modeling team assumed new resources would not be possible due to lead times needed for resource procurement. Between 2024 and 2026, GWP will add Eland solar and storage (25 MW), Scholl Canyon Landfill Biogas (11 MW), the Grayson ICE generators (54 MW), and the battery storage (75 MW). These additions will provide needed energy and capacity to assist GWP during periods of system stress. However, due to expected load growth in the near term, GWP will need to continue procuring resources. 221 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Results
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-10
To maintain reliable operations in any condition, GWP employs an N-1-1 reliability target to effectively handle contingencies. During an N-1-1 event, GWP would lose access to the Pacific DC Intertie line and the STS line because these are the two largest contingencies on the GWP system. Thus, to prepare for an N-1-1 event, GWP needs local resources to replace the lost transmission capacity. Table 17 shows the available resources that can be applied towards the requirement in the year 2035. N-1-1 Resource Contribution MW Southwest AC Intertie (without the STS line) 113 Grayson Unit 9 48 Magnolia 35 Internal Combustion Engines 54 Battery Energy Storage System 75 Scholl Canyon 8 Eland Solar and Storage 25 City Solar 10 Demand Response 8 Total 376 Peak Load Forecast 416 Capacity Shortfall 40 Table 17. N-1-1 Resource Contribution for Contingencies Currently, GWP’s resource portfolio has a capacity shortfall of 40 MW (last row of Table 17). To meet this requirement, GWP will need to add resources by 2035 to cover the N-1-1 operating requirement. The shortfall could be covered with additional local supply or demand resources. Removing Grayson Unit 9, Magnolia, and the ICE units from Table 17 increases the total shortfall to 177 MW. By 2035, Scenario 2 and Scenario 4 would have to make up for this shortfall with a combination of hydrogen, energy storage, and DR. 222 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Results
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-11
Reliability analysis includes operational reliability, N-1-1 conditions, and resource adequacy which determines the ability of GWP’s resources to serve load. A common metric for characterizing resource adequacy is the loss of load hours (LOLH) over a wide range of operating conditions that consider load, renewable generation, and forced outages. For GWP, the base portfolio reliability risk drops in 2026 with the additions of Eland, Scholl Canyon, the ICE units, and BESS (Figure 60) but rises with growing demand.

Figure 60. Base Portfolio LOLH by Year
223 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Results
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-12
In 2027, the LOLH will be above the target of 2.4 hours unless more resources are added to the portfolio. In 2035, GWP will need approximately 40 MW to 60 MW of additional capacity to maintain an acceptable risk of load loss (Figure 61).

Figure 61. Reduced LOLH Risk with Resource Additions by Year Outputs from the capacity expansion models were adjusted to account for transmission constraints and LOLH risk. Table 18 shows the capacity by resource type in 2035 and 2045 for all scenarios. Scenarios 1 through 3 assume lower growth in customer-sited resources such as behind-the-meter solar and demand 224 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Results
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-13
response. Scenarios 4 through 6 assume increased growth in these resources which helps offset some of the resource needs from utility-scale resources.

Resource
Capacity in 2035 Scenarios Capacity in 2045 Scenarios 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wind 50 100 50 80 80 80 50 100 50 80 90 90 Solar PV 55 55 55 75 55 55 65 75 65 75 65 65 BTM Solar 38 38 38 98 48 48 48 48 48 100 63 63 Biomass 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 6 6 Hydro 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Natural Gas 140 0 140 0 140 140 140 0 140 0 0 0 Contract 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 Nuclear 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Geothermal 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 Hydrogen 33 123 33 123 33 33 33 168 33 168 168 168 Storage 180 220 180 240 235 240 190 250 190 250 245 245 Demand Response 7 7 7 15 10 10 8 8 8 24 14 14 Table 18. Six Scenarios: Resource Capacity in 2035 and 2045 225 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Results
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-14
Table 19 shows the summary of outputs from the scenario modeling. The percent values in this table represent wholesale load. The California mandate for clean energy is based on retail load, which is approximately 10 percent less that wholesale load. Legend Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Costs in $Million (2024–2045) California Policy Carbon Free 2035 California Policy w/Offsets Carbon Free 2035; High DER Carbon Free 2042; Magnolia Retire 2038 Carbon Free 2040 New Resource Costs $535 $1,251 $491 $1,145 $897 $867 Operating Costs $1,073 $970 $1,098 $1,086 $1,131 $1,142 Total Cost $1,608 $2,221 $1,589 $2,231 $2,028 $2,009 Total Cost with SCC Sensitivity $1,916 $2,490 $1,917 $2,440 $2,278 $2,274 Cost per MWh $93.97 $129.80 $92.87 $130.39 $118.52 $117.41 Cumulative CO2 Emissions (tons) 2,597,041 1,642,076 2,765,838 1,434,150 1,816,241 2,035,232 Emissions Reduction in 2035 Compared to 2024 67% 100% 63% 100% 72% 71% Emissions Reduction in 2040 Compared to 2024 70% 100% 68% 100% 99% 72% Percent Clean in 2035 91% 109% 84% 129% 103% 95% Percent Clean in 2040 97% 108% 90% 123% 109% 100% Percent Clean in 2045 90% 105% 85% 109% 102% 103% Table 19. Six Scenarios: Cost and Emission Summaries The high costs of hydrogen build outs resulted in high costs for the new resource costs in Scenarios 2, 4, 5, and 6. Scenario 1 was the lowest cost of the six primary scenarios modeled. All scenarios achieve the California policy targets; some far exceed the targets. Table 19 also shows the carbon emissions reductions for 2035 and 2040. Scenario 1 shows emissions reduced by 67 percent in 2035 and 70 percent in 2040. The 90 percent clean energy amount in 2045 for Scenario 1 is based on wholesale load. Since retail load is approximately 10 percent less than wholesale load, the California clean energy requirement for 2045 is projected to be met much earlier than the 2045. After IPP coal retires in 2025, Magnolia becomes the largest source of carbon emissions in the portfolio because of its must-run requirement. The impact Magnolia has on the carbon emissions is clearly seen in Scenario 5 where the emissions reduction in 2035 is 70 percent and jumps to 99 percent in 2040 after Magnolia retires in 2038. GWP is working with the other owners of Magnolia to explore options to change the operational policy of Magnolia which would reduce carbon emissions for all owners. The costs for Scenarios 2, 4, 5, and 6 rely heavily on assumptions for hydrogen generation. Currently there is no generator operating on 100 percent hydrogen, so the modeling team had to rely on broad assumptions for the resource cost. In the case of GWP, hydrogen must be produced either on-site at the Grayson location or piped in from a central hub. Both options are costly, but the actual cost is unknown at this point. The 226 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Results
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-15
model assumed the generator would cost roughly $1,900 per kW with balance of plant costs assumed to be $7,100 per kW which includes new pipelines for the hydrogen transport. As a reference, the new IPP generator under construction will burn 30 percent hydrogen produced onsite and stored in underground caverns and will cost roughly $6,000 per kW. Upgrading IPP to burn 100 percent hydrogen will further increase the costs. Excess generation beyond GWP’s needs could possibly have sales value outside of GWP depending on the needs and resource mix of the other utilities in the region. Table 20 lists a best-case projection of market sales revenue for the six scenarios. There is no guarantee that excess power can be sold or that the projected selling prices would be realized. In southern California, excess solar generation is regularly curtailed during mid-day hours in the spring. The potential net costs (the bottom row) are derived from the scenario costs plus market purchases minus market revenues. Market purchases are quite low in all scenarios due to projected market prices and increased supply resources. Scenarios 2 and 4 have much higher potential revenue to offset costs compared to the other scenarios due to the high levels of excess generation. Legend Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Costs in $Million (2024–2045) California Policy Carbon Free 2035 California Policy w/Offsets Carbon Free 2035; High DER Carbon Free 2042; Magnolia Retire 2038 Carbon Free 2040 Market Purchases 5 4.8 5 3.7 4.8 4.5 Market Sales 103 219 53 424 162 174 Potential Net Costs including Market Revenues $1,510 $2,053 $1,541 $1,811 $1,870 $1,839 Table 20. Six Scenarios: Market Purchases and Sales There are considerable risks in getting hydrogen to Glendale as the pipelines will need to receive permits and might not be able to share the same right of way with existing natural gas lines. Existing natural gas lines are not suitable for hydrogen transport. If no pipelines are built, the only option for hydrogen generation would be to produce hydrogen onsite. If GWP were to pursue onsite generation, there is no guarantee of adequate water to produce the amount of hydrogen needed for GWP. In 2023, the US Department of Energy awarded $8 Billion in hydrogen hub grants to boost the development of hydrogen production across the country. A California project was among the recipients of the award. The California project will produce hydrogen for use in multiple sectors including transportation and power generation. If grant objectives are met, the California project will accelerate the development and deployment of renewable, clean hydrogen projects and infrastructure. The goals of the California project align with California’s statewide mandate of 100 percent clean energy by 2045. Production targets in 2035 have not been announced. 227 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Results
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-16
SoCalGas is considering developing a hydrogen pipeline through the LA Basin called the Angeles Link. If the project is completed, it would deliver hydrogen fuel to resources in the LA Basin, allowing generators to run on green hydrogen without the need to produce hydrogen locally. If the Angeles Link or the California hydrogen hubs come to fruition, GWP would be able to leverage these projects towards meeting decarbonization goals. Figure 62 shows the annual costs for all six scenarios. The scenarios begin to diverge in costs starting in 2030 with significant differences showing up in mid to late 2030s. The chart represents the total cost for each scenario, inclusive of the costs for building new resources, operating the system, and making market sales and purchases.

Figure 62. Six Scenarios: Annual Total Cost
228 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Results
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-17
Carbon emissions from the scenarios are shown in Figure 63. Emissions drop to zero in 2035 for Scenarios 2 and 4, 2040 for Scenario 6, and 2042 for Scenario 5.

Figure 63. Six Scenarios: CO2 Emissions The emissions from Scenario 5 show a large drop in 2038 when Magnolia comes offline, leaving only a small amount of emissions from Grayson and the ICEs until 2042. California Policy with Seasonal Magnolia shows the effects of Magnolia on the model by allowing Magnolia to run seasonally as a must-run unit only in the summer months. By running Magnolia less, the model shows carbon emissions could drop from 100,00 tons per year to under 50,000 tons per year. 229 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Modeling Results
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-18
All scenarios meet the California RPS (Figure 64) and clean energy (Figure 65) requirements. The scenarios with higher levels of DER resources exceed the requirements significantly.

Figure 64. Six Scenarios: RPS Generation
Figure 65. Six Scenarios: Clean Energy Generation
230 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Preferred Candidate Portfolio Scenario Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-19
PREFERRED CANDIDATE PORTFOLIO SCENARIO GWP’s preferred portfolio is Scenario 1, the California Policy scenario. This scenario meets the aggressive California mandates while keeping costs lower for the residents of Glendale. The preferred scenario also presents the most realistic path forward as it does not rely on uncertain technological progress. While green hydrogen is the most promising of the options for clean and dispatchable energy, there is no certainty that hydrogen will be available by 2035 or what the cost will be. If hydrogen generation develops over the next few years, GWP will revisit hydrogen as a resource option. The DR and DER assumptions in Scenario 4 show that demand-side resources can provide value by reducing stress on supply resources. While the assumptions in Scenario 4 show a departure from historical adoption of demand resources, GWP will continue to push for more DERs. The capacity build out for the preferred portfolio scenario is shown in Figure 66. In the build out for Scenario 1, natural gas capacity remains online through 2045. There is some hydrogen generation in Scenario 1 which is the IPP conversion that is already in planning.

Figure 66. Scenario 1: California Policy Capacity Build-Out 231 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Preferred Candidate Portfolio Scenario Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-20
The path forward includes a mix of geothermal, wind, solar, and storage while keeping Grayson 9, the ICEs, and Magnolia online. Figure 67 shows the energy mix from the resources in the preferred scenario.

Figure 67. Scenario 1: California Policy Annual Energy Produced and Consumed Generation from natural gas remains constant year over year in the model which is a result of the Magnolia generation. Magnolia’s must-run status means that it runs continuously in the model. Generation from Grayson and the ICEs drops to a combined amount of less than 30,000 MWh per year while Magnolia remains around 46,000 MWh per year. The decline in natural gas generation is a function of added resources to serve load, a decline in power prices, and increasing carbon costs.

Risk Analysis The future can only be predicted through research and forecasts. Modeling, based on numerous assumptions, and its incumbent analysis, comes with risk. Every effort is made to minimize risk, nonetheless, risk must be considered when devising and implementing any plan. Risks inherent in resource planning include: § Higher than expected environmental compliance costs § Higher than expected carbon prices § Higher than expected resource generation costs 232 of 839

11. Portfolio Analysis and Results Preferred Candidate Portfolio Scenario Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 11-21
§ Higher than expected transmission and distribution costs § Direct and indirect environmental costs § Transportation costs Additional risks include increased demand and energy requirements, regulatory energy policy changes, and financial liquidity risks. Resource planning attempts to mitigate these risks as much as possible so that resultant actions remain viable for the foreseeable future. The preferred scenario involves the least risk when compared to the other options. GWP will work to mitigate risks through the following actions: § Reduce generation from natural gas resource to avoid future price risks. § Increase procurement of renewables to meet RPS and clean energy mandates without exposure to REC prices. § Maintain local, dispatchable resources for periods of high need such as system peaks and contingencies. § Increase customer adoption of energy efficiency, demand response and distributed energy resources.

Conclusion Scenario 1, California Policy, achieves 91 percent clean energy by 2035. While this scenario does not meet the City Council’s goal of 100 percent zero-carbon by 2035, the result nonetheless represents a significant achievement. The final 10 percent necessary to attain a 100 percent clean energy portfolio is generally acknowledge within the energy industry as the most challenging and cost prohibitive aspect. This aligns with the common understanding that the final steps toward complete decarbonization often require innovative solutions and cutting-edge technologies. In fact, several studies have been performed recognizing this concern and suggest that preparing for possibilities as well as allowing for time and technologies to fill the gap may be prudent. Scenario 1 provides flexibility for GWP to adjust course in the future as conditions change. For example, GWP will continue to explore possible changes with the Magnolia power plant with the other owners. Changes in the operational policy or upgrading Magnolia to use less or no natural gas directly addresses the California RPS and clean energy requirements for all owners. Scenario 1 also provides GWP the option to develop green hydrogen at IPP while exploring the possibility of upgrading the remaining natural gas generators to hydrogen. 233 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 12-1

12. Action Plans
The IRP focuses on driving carbon out of GWP’s energy system and seeks to foster ways for its customers to do the same. The intent is to attain this goal in a way that reduces costs, strengthens reliability, and improves the lives of its customers. These GWP action plans itemized the steps it is undertaking to maintain reliable service to its customers and affordable rates while meeting the RPS requirement for 2030 and the zero-carbon requirement for 2045. Some action plan steps are constant and are already being implemented, others are planned for the immediate future, while others are planned for the longer term. The steps outlined here represent the most prudent approach given current and forecasted information. As situations change, GWP will adjust its plans as necessary to fully consider new information. GWP bases the implementation of this IRP on sound operating and business principles that consider technical, regulatory, and financial aspects to best balance reliability, environmental stewardship, statutory and regulatory requirements, and rates.

CAPACITY EXPANSION ACTION PLAN GWP plans to continue to maintain existing owned generation and PPAs while looking for opportunities to acquire new resources that will produce long-term value to its customers. This capacity expansion focuses on adding a diverse mix of long-term renewable and zero-carbon resources to best comply with RPS and clean energy goals. In the short term, the GWP action plan focuses on meeting load with mature, proven technologies such as geothermal, wind, utility-scale solar PV, customer-sited solar PV, and short-duration battery storage systems. Short term plans also include a continued focus on its effective energy efficiency savings initiatives, including DR and other DSM measures. The IPP transition to hydrogen will play a large role in GWP’s path to a clean grid. GWP expects to gain a lot of knowledge regarding hydrogen production and generation which can inform potential future plans to convert Grayson and the ICEs to run on green hydrogen fuel. Replacing the IPP coal plant with a plant that 234 of 839

12. Action Plans Capacity Expansion Action Plan
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 12-2
runs on a blend of natural gas and hydrogen will reduce GWP carbon emissions by 50 percent. This project is expected to complete in 2025. In the long term, GWP plans to investigate the potential of using green hydrogen in its current natural gas units, and to explore the potential for other emerging technologies such as long-duration storage and SMRs. Figure 70 depicts the planned resource additions and retirements in the California Policy scenario.

Figure 68. Scenario 1: California Policy Annual Resource Additions and Retirements 235 of 839

12. Action Plans Capacity Expansion Action Plan
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 12-3
Table 21 lists the capacity expansion for each resource by year. The planned ICE units will be added to the portfolio mix in 2026, and the existing coal-fired IPP PPA will expire in 2026. The action plan calls for capacity to be expanded every year over the next decade. After 2037, the action plan only calls for 10 MW of solar PV to be added to the portfolio mix. Resource Capacity Expansion (MW) Year Storage Wind Solar PV Hydrogen Geothermal Coal Natural Gas Total 2025 0 0 0 10 0 –35 23 –2 2026 75 0 0 0 0 0 54 129 2027 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 30 2028 10 –7 0 0 0 0 0 3 2029 55 0 0 0 30 0 0 85 2030 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 20 2031 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 2032 5 0 10 7 0 0 –7 15 2033 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 2034 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2035 10 20 0 17 20 0 –17 50 2036 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2037 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Table 21. Resource Portfolio Expansion by Year 236 of 839

12. Action Plans Capacity Expansion Action Plan
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 12-4
Figure 69 shows the annual cost of the capacity expansion action plan. There is no cost for capacity expansion in the first three years. The expenditures for the ICE units that are being added to the resource mix during these years has already been allocated.

Figure 69. Annual Cost of New Resources GWP will ensure that the 75 MW BESS project and the installation of three ICE units, are completed in 2026, as currently scheduled. In addition, GWP will ensure the Eland 1 Solar and Storage project for 25 MW of solar energy and 18.75 MW (75 MWh) of BESS is completed in 2024 as planned. GWP will continue to pursue savings from DR and energy efficiency programs. GWP will continue to pursue opportunities to acquire more renewable resources, such as geothermal, wind, and solar PV and BESS while working to site local renewable generation. GWP needs local firm dispatchable clean capacity. Modeling for the 2024 IRP assumed this need will be satisfied with hydrogen fuel. The utility will continue to monitor improvements and developments in clean hydrogen, renewable gas, and long-duration storage. During the next planning cycle, GWP will re-evaluate a transition to hydrogen fuel and assess opportunities for different forms of renewable and clean generation. The focus is on local generation. GWP will also continue to evaluate another emerging technology: nuclear SMRs. To continue to reduce its GHG emissions, GWP will participate in decisions around Magnolia’s emission reductions and learn from the Intermountain Power Plant’s conversion to hydrogen fuel. 237 of 839

12. Action Plans Customer-Oriented and Reliability Driven Action Plans Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 12-5
Through this transition, GWP will continue its ongoing practice of planning for and responding to the energy and environmental needs from transportation electrification, building electrification, and DACs all while actively involving the Glendale community.

CUSTOMER-ORIENTED AND RELIABILITY DRIVEN ACTION PLANS Through these action plans, GWP continues its ongoing commitment to customer engagement and the goal of reliable, affordable service.

Distributed Energy Resources Action Plan GWP is currently conducting a DER study to assess the feasibility of 10 percent of customers installing rooftop solar PV plus storage systems by 2027 with a cumulative total of 100 MW of peak load. Currently, 2.7 percent of GWP customers have rooftop solar systems for a cumulative total of 27 MW of generation. If the penetration cannot be attained by 2027, the study will determine the year in which this goal can reasonably be attained. The study is ongoing; GWP will update these action plans with the results of that study. GWP will continue to push for more adoption of DERs and look for innovative models to engage customers in these programs.

Transportation and Distribution Action Plan GWP continues to meet with representatives of LADWP and Burbank Water & Power to discuss and plan for renewable resource development and expanded transmission lines to ease GWP’s bottleneck caused by constraints on the Pacific DC Intertie and the Southwest AC Intertie. GWP staff are updating the Electric Services Master Plan to ensure that GWP’s distribution system continues its high level of reliability, and the system can effectively carry the forecasted increasing load. The Plan contains projects for upgrading substations, upgrading distribution voltages, replacing existing communication systems, and upgrading and repowering the distribution infrastructure.

Integrating Community Input Throughout the IRP process, GWP gained insightful direction from the Glendale community about steps it could take to strengthen its commitment to clean energy while bolstering the role for customers in GWP’s energy transition. Stakeholders made numerous suggestions at STAG meetings, Townhalls, and other venues. GWP listened to all this input, incorporated much of it into this IRP, and will consider it in future IRPs. Stakeholder input covered several areas of consideration. Not all of these suggestions are within GWP’s authority. They are included here to create a public record. 238 of 839

12. Action Plans Customer-Oriented and Reliability Driven Action Plans Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP 12-6
Glendale community members showed interest in: § Expanding offerings for customer energy efficiency, DR, and solar and storage programs. § Better engaging renters and multi-family units in these programs. § Creating avenues to better aggregate and leverage customer-sited resources toward GWP’s load obligations (for instance, through VPPs). § Accelerating progress toward 100 percent clean energy and striving for the City Council’s clean energy goals. § Evaluating non-traditional options for local solar development, such as above bike trails, highways, canals, or parts of the Scholl Canyon landfill. § Coordinating with other City of Glendale departments in reducing energy use by mitigating the urban heat island effect by expanding tree cover and shading, painting roofs and pavement white, and implementing other strategies. § Continuing to find solutions to GWP’s transmission constraints through strengthened collaborations with neighboring cities and utilities. § Continuing to increase opportunities for community engagement and public transparency in future IRPs and in the course of GWP’s normal operations. GWP plans to use all suggestions to guide conversations and collaborations with other City of Glendale departments and utility partners. 239 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP A-1

A. IRP Guidelines Cross-Reference
In August 2022, the CEC published its Publicly Owned Utility Integrated Resource Plan Submission and Review Guidelines, Revised Third Edition, as draft Commission Guidelines. Chapter Two of these guidelines dictate the contents of all IRPs submitted to the CEC. This appendix contains a cross-reference between the sections specified in Chapter Two and the relevant sections of the GW 2024 IRP. In addition to this 2024 IRP submitted for its filing, GWP included its City Council Resolution Adopting the IRP, a Risk Policy, and an RPS Procurement Plan. Included in the filing is the CEC Standardized Tables.xlsx Excel file containing the data used to create the CRAT, RPT, EBT, and GEAT. Section Requirement GWP 2024 IRP Reference Page A Planning Horizon Planning Horizon 2-3 B Scenarios and Sensitivity Analysis Modeling Process for Portfolio Scenarios Preferred Candidate Portfolio Scenario 11-7 11-19 C Standardized Tables No response required. — C1 Capacity Resource Accounting Table (CRAT) Preferred Candidate Portfolio Scenario Capacity Resource Accounting Table (CRAT) 11-19 D-1 C2 Energy Balance Table (EBT) Preferred Candidate Portfolio Scenario Energy Balance Table (EBT) 11-19 D-2 C3 RPS Procurement Table (RPT) Resource Procurement Table (RPT) D-3 C4 GHG Emissions Accounting Table (GEAT) GHG Emissions Accounting Table (GEAT) D-4 D Supporting Information No response required. — D1 Analyses, Studies, Data, Work Papers, or Others Refer to filed supplemental material — D2 Additional Information Refer to filed supplemental material — E Additional Supporting Information No response required. — E1 Analyses, Studies, Data, Work Papers, or Others Refer to filed supplemental material — E2 Additional Information Refer to filed supplemental material — F Demand Forecast Load Forecasts 6-3 F1.1 Reporting Requirements 6. Planning Forecasts and Requirements E. Key Modeling Assumptions 6-1 E-1 240 of 839

A. IRP Guidelines Cross-Reference
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP A-2
Section Requirement GWP 2024 IRP Reference Page F2.2 Demand Forecast Methodology and Assumptions Forecast Methodology 6-1 F3.3 Demand Forecast—Other Regions This requirement does not apply to GWP as it does not forecast regions outside its jurisdiction because such forecasting is irrelevant to its IRP. — G Resource Procurement Plan 12. Action Plans Appendix F. PowerSIMM Planner 12-1 F-1 G1.1 Diversified Procurement Portfolio Chapter 12. Action Plans 12-1 G2.2 RPS Planning Requirements Additional Planning Objectives for the IRP Renewable Portfolio Standard and Zero-Carbon Resources RPS Compliance Requirements 2-4 5-4 10-1 G2.2a Forecasted RPS Procurement Targets Renewable Resources and Clean Energy 10-9 G2.2b Renewable Procurement Chapter 10. RPS Compliance and Resources 12. Action Plans 10-1 12-1 G2.2c RPS Procurement Plan Chapter 10. RPS Compliance and Resources GWP Clean Energy Projections 12. Action Plans 10-1 10-12 12-1 G2.2d Recommended RPS Information Chapter 10. RPS Compliance and Resources GWP Clean Energy Projections 12. Action Plans 10-1 10-12 12-1 G2.2e Recommended Zero-Carbon Resource Information Renewable Portfolio Standard and Zero-Carbon Resources Renewable Resources and Clean Energy Preferred Candidate Portfolio Scenario 5-4 10-9 11-19 G3.3 Energy Efficiency, Fuel Substitution, and Demand Response Resources Energy Efficiency and Demand-Side Management Chapter 8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Energy Efficiency Programs Transportation Electrification Initiatives Electric Vehicle Charging Initiatives Demand Response Programs 5-7 8-1 8-3 8-14 8-19 8-11 G3.3a Recommendations for Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Analysis Chapter 8. Energy Efficiency Programs and Initiatives Energy Efficiency Programs Demand Response Programs 8-1 8-3 8-11 G3.3b Calculating and Reporting Energy Efficiency Impacts Energy Efficiency Savings Forecast Energy Efficiency Programs Energy Efficiency Portfolio Results Setting Energy Efficiency Potential Targets 6-5 8-3 8-7 8-9 G3.3c Calculating and Reporting Demand Response Impacts Demand Response Programs Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification Studies 8-11 8-12 241 of 839

A. IRP Guidelines Cross-Reference
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP A-3
Section Requirement GWP 2024 IRP Reference Page
G4.4 Energy Storage Distributed Solar and Storage Internal Combustion Engines and Battery Energy Storage Systems Candidate Resources 4-2 4-3 11-4 G4.4a Recommendations for Energy Storage Analysis Candidate Resource Cost Forecasts Candidate Resources 6-14 11-4 G5.5 Transportation Electrification Analysis Transportation Electrification Transportation Electrification Analysis Transportation Electrification Initiatives Electric Vehicle Charging Initiatives 5-7 5-8 8-14 8-19 G5.5a Transportation Electrification Rate Design Transportation Electrification Initiatives Electric Vehicle Charging Initiatives 7. Cost of Service and Rate Impacts 8-14 8-19 7-1 G5.5b Recommendations for Transportation Electrification Analysis Transportation Electrification Initiatives Electric Vehicle Charging Initiatives 8-14 8-19 G5.5c Calculating and Reporting Transportation Electrification Impacts Transportation Electrification Impacts Transportation Electrification Initiatives Electric Vehicle Charging Initiatives 6-7 8-14 8-19 H System and Local Reliability Bulk Transmission System The Need for More Transmission Capacity System Reliability Requirements 9-1 9-6 9-6 H1.1 Reliability Criteria System Reliability Requirements Capacity Resource Accounting Table (CRAT) 9-6 D-1 H2.2 Local Reliability Area Bulk Transmission System Transmission Load Pocket Bottleneck The Need for More Transmission Capacity System Reliability Requirements 9-1 9-4 9-6 9-6
H3.3 Addressing Net Demand in Peak Hours Chapter 2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process Customer-Oriented Priorities Overriding IRP Goals Modeling Results Preferred Candidate Portfolio Scenario 2-1 2-2 2-3 11-9 11-19
I Greenhouse Gas Emissions Chapter 2. The Integrated Resource Planning Process Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Statutes Contributions to Peak Demand Modeling Results Preferred Candidate Portfolio Scenario 2-1 5-2 8-2 11-9 11-19 J Retail Rates Chapter 7. Cost of Service and Rate Impacts 7-1 K Transmission and Distribution Systems Chapter 9. Transmission and Distribution 9-1 K1.1 Bulk Transmission System Bulk Transmission System 9-1 242 of 839

A. IRP Guidelines Cross-Reference
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP A-4
Section Requirement GWP 2024 IRP Reference Page K2 Distribution System Distribution System 9-8 L Localized Air Pollutants and Disadvantaged Communities Current Low Income Programs New Programs for Disadvantaged and Low-Income Customers 8-13 8-22 L2.1 Reporting Requirements Localized Air Pollution and Disadvantaged Communities 8-22 L3.2 Other Recommended Topics Current Low Income Programs Community Solar 8-13 8-14 Table 22. CEC IRP Guidelines Cross-Reference 243 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-1

B. Glossary and Definitions
AAEE: Additional Achievable Energy Efficiency Defined by the CEC as incremental savings from the future market potential identified in utility potential studies not included in the baseline demand forecast, but reasonably expected to occur, including future updates of building codes, appliance regulations, and new or expanded investor-owned utility or publicly owned utility efficiency programs. AATE: Additional Achievable Transportation Electrification Defined by the CEC as the estimated incremental transition to electric vehicles over the baseline transportation electrification forecasts. AB: Assembly Bill Legislation that originates or is modified by the entire California State Assembly. ACC II: Advanced Clean Cars II The rule that requires all car sales in California to be 100 percent zero emission by 2035 ACF: Advanced Clean Fleets The requirement for medium- and heavy-duty fleets to purchase an increasing percentage of zero-emission trucks.

ACT: Advanced Clean Trucks The regulation requiring manufacturers to sell ZEV trucks and school buses. AMI: Advanced Metering Infrastructure A primary component of a modern grid that provides two-way communications between the customer premises and the utility. An AMI is a necessary prerequisite to the interactions with advanced inverters, customer sited storage, demand response through direct load control, and EVs. Ancillary Services Those services that are necessary to support the transmission of capacity and energy from resources to loads while maintaining reliable operation of the electric system in accordance with good utility practice. APPA: American Public Power Association National service organization representing the nation’s more than 2,000 publicly owned electric utilities. ARC: Autonomous Renewable Charge A 100 percent renewable, transportable, off-grid electric vehicle charging option that charges during blackouts and grid interruptions. 244 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-2
ARS: Automated Resource Selection A component of Ascend’s PowerSIMM modeling software that chooses resources for a least-cost portfolio expansion plan. ATB: Annual Technology Baseline A database that provides a publicly available source of the forward curves for capital costs and operations and maintenance expenses for several different power generation technologies; published by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. BA: Balancing Authority The responsible entity that integrates resource plans ahead of time, balances supply with demand, and supports interconnection frequency in real time. BAASA: Balancing Authority Area Services Agreement An agreement between a utility and a balancing authority that provides the procedures and requirements for generators operating under the BA’s authority. Baseload The minimum electric or thermal load that is supplied continuously over a period of time. BEV: Battery Electric Vehicles A type of electric vehicle that exclusively uses chemical energy stored in rechargeable battery packs with no secondary source of propulsion. BESS: Battery Energy Storage System Rechargeable batteries that store energy that can be discharged when needed. Types include lithium-ion, lead-acid, and flow batteries, and flywheels. Common capacities include 4-hour, 8-hour, and 10-hour batteries, designating the length of time the battery can discharge energy.

BTM: Behind the Meter Refers to the amount of generation captured in customer meters that impacts demand. BTS: Backbone Transportation Service Provides firm and interruptible access to the Southern California Gas and San Diego Gas & Electric integrated natural gas transmission system. Btu: British Thermal Unit A unit of energy equal to about 1,055 joules that describes the energy content of fuels. A Btu is the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one pound of water by 1°F at a constant atmospheric pressure. When measuring electricity, the proper unit would be Btu per hour (or Btu/h) although this is generally abbreviated to just Btu. CAISO: California Independent System Operator A nonprofit independent system operator that oversees the operation of bulk electric power system, transmission lines, and electricity market generated and transmitted by its participants. CAISO is the largest balancing authority in California. CalEPA: California Environmental Protection Agency Protects the California environments by developing, implementing, and enforcing environmental laws that regulate air, water and soil quality, pesticide use, and waste recycling and reduction. Capacity The MW rating of the unit. Capacity must be assured for at least four hours and controllable during the 24-hour day. Capacity Factor The ratio of the average operating load of an electric power generating unit as a percent of the nameplate capacity rating of the unit. The capacity factor of a variable renewable resource can vary widely. 245 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-3
CARB: California Air Resources Board Responsible for promoting and protecting public health, welfare, and ecological resources through the effective and efficient reduction of air pollutants while recognizing and considering the effects on California’s economy. Carbon-Free Percent Similar to the RPS calculation, attained by dividing the total non-carbon emitting resources (including the non-RPS eligible resources nuclear and large hydroelectric) by the total retail sales. CC: Combined Cycle A combination of combustion turbines (CTs) and one steam turbine (ST). The CT exhaust is passed through a heat recovery waste heat boiler which produces steam to drive the ST. Possible configurations include three CTs (3x1), two CTs (2x1), and one CT (1x1) paired with one ST. CCA: Community Choice Aggregator Communities formerly served by the IOUs that have formed a separate organization to aggregate the buying power to procure energy. CCI: California Compliance Instrument A permit created and issued by CARB that allows the holder to legally emit one metric ton of GHG measured in carbon dioxide equivalents. CCS: Carbon Capture and Sequestration A process that captures, separates, and treats CO2 emissions from a power plant, then transports it for long-term storage so that it doesn’t enter the atmosphere. CEC: California Energy Commission California’s primary energy policy and energy planning agency. Responsible for ensuring publicly owned utilities’ compliance with the state’s Renewables Portfolio Standard and Title 20 data reporting requirements.

CEDU: California Energy Demand Update The biennial update to various statewide energy-related forecasts, included in the CEC IEPR. CF: Capacity Factor The percentage a time a resource generates electricity compared to its maximum generation output. CIP: Capital Improvement Plan A plan that described the future infrastructure investments and estimated costs. CMUA: California Municipal Utilities Association An association incorporated in 1933 to represent the interests of California’s publicly owned electric utilities before the California Legislature and other regulatory bodies. CO2: Carbon Dioxide A colorless, odorless gas found in the atmosphere that is associated with global warming. It is released into the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas. CO2-e: Carbon Dioxide Equivalent The standard measurement that expresses the impact of different greenhouse gases as an equivalent of the amount of CO2 that would create the same amount of warming. COS: Cost of Service A study performed by utilities to forecast the cost to provide services to retail customers. CP: Compliance Period There are six compliance periods for attaining Renewables Portfolio Standard goals as defined in Public Utilities Code section 399.30 (c): Compliance Period 1: January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2013. Compliance Period 2: January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016. Compliance Period 3: January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2020. 246 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-4
Compliance Period 4: January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2024. Compliance Period 5: January 1, 2025 to December 31, 2027. Compliance Period 6: January 1, 2028 to December 31, 2030. CPUC: California Public Utilities Commission Regulates California’s investor-owned electric utilities, telecommunications, natural gas, water, and passenger transportation companies, in addition to household goods movers and the safety of rail transit. CRAT: Capacity Resource Accounting Table Defined by the CEC as the annual peak capacity demand in each year and the contribution of each energy resource (capacity) in a POU’s portfolio to meet that demand. CT: Combustion Turbine Any of several types of high-speed generators using principles and designs of jet engines to produce low cost, high efficiency power; also commonly referred to as a gas turbine. CVR: Conservation Voltage Reduction The intentional operation of the transmission and distribution system to provide customer voltages in the lower end of the acceptable range, with the goal of achieving energy and demand reductions for customers. DAC: Disadvantaged Community Disadvantaged communities are designated by CalEPA pursuant to Senate Bill 535 using the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool; identified by census tract, they score at or above the 75th percentile. DCFC: Direct Current Fast Charger Fastest available EV chargers, designed to fill a battery to 80 percent in 20–40 minutes, and 100 percent in 60–90 minutes.

Demand The rate at which electricity is used at any one given time (or averaged over any designated interval of time). Demand differs from energy use, which reflects the total amount of electricity consumed over a period of time. Demand is measured in kilowatts (kW) or megawatts (MW). Load is considered synonymous with demand. (See also Load on page A-7.) DER: Distributed Energy Resource Any resource (such as solar and wind power, energy efficiency, demand response, fuel cells, energy storage, electric vehicles, and building electrification) on the distribution system that produces electricity. Dispatchable Generation A generation source that is controlled by a system operator or dispatcher who can increase or decrease the amount of power from that source as the system requirements change. DOE: United States Department of Energy An executive department of the U.S. government that is concerned with the United States’ policies regarding energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges. DR: Demand Response An electricity tariff or program established to motivate changes in electric use by end-use customers, designed to induce lower electricity use typically at times of high market prices or when grid reliability is jeopardized. DSM: Demand-Side Management The planning, implementing, and monitoring programs that encourage consumers to manage their electricity usage patterns to shift or reduce demand. EBT: Energy Balance Table Defined by the CEC as the annual total energy demand and annual estimates for energy supply from various resources. 247 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-5
EE: Energy Efficiency Practices or programs designed to reduce the amount of energy required to provide the same level and quality of output. ELCC: Effective Load Carrying Capacity The ability to effectively increase the generating capacity available to a utility without increasing the utility’s loss of load risk, quantified as the amount of new load that can be added to a system after capacity is added by a generator without increasing the loss of load probability or expectation. EM&V: Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification Practices used to assess the performance of energy efficiency and demand response programs to determine which are cost effective and to guide decisions on which ones to offer. Energy The amount of electricity a generation resource produces, or an end user consumes, in any given period of time, measured in kWh, MWh, or GWh. Energy is computed as capacity or demand multiplied by time (hours). A one MW power plant running at full output for one hour produces one megawatt-hour (1 MWh) of electrical energy. ERMC: Energy Risk Management Committee A GWP committee with the responsibility for managing the target energy risk profiles and leading GWP’s energy risk management efforts on a path of continuous improvement. ESP: Electric Service Provider A non-utility entity that offers electric service to customers within the service territory of an electric utility. EV: Electric Vehicle A vehicle that uses one or more electric motors for propulsion.

EVSE: Electric Vehicle Supply (Service) Equipment Equipment that provides electric power to the vehicle and uses that to recharge the vehicle's batteries. FCEV: Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles An electric vehicle that uses a fuel cell, sometimes in combination with a small battery or supercapacitor, to power its onboard electric motor. Fossil Fuel Any naturally occurring fuel formed from the decomposition of buried organic matter, essentially coal, petroleum (oil), and natural gas. Fossil fuels take millions of years to form, and thus are non-renewable resources. Because of their high percentages of carbon, burning fossil fuels produces about twice as much carbon dioxide (a greenhouse gas) as can be absorbed by natural processes. FYE: Fiscal Year End The date when an entity’s financial fiscal years ends. GWP’s FYE is June 30. GEAT: GHG Emissions Accounting Table Defined by the CEC as the annual GHG emissions associated with each resource in a POU’s portfolio to demonstrate compliance with the GHG emissions reduction targets established by the CARB. Generation (Electricity) The process of producing electrical energy from other forms of energy; also, the amount of electric energy produced, usually expressed in kilowatt-hours (kWh) or megawatt hours (MWh). Nameplate Generation (Gross Generation): The electrical output at the terminals of the generator, usually expressed in megawatts (MW). Net Generation: Gross generation minus station service or unit service power requirements, usually expressed in megawatts (MW). The energy required for pumping at a pumped storage plant is regarded as plant use and must be deducted from the gross generation. 248 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-6
GHG: Greenhouse Gas A gas that contributes to the greenhouse effect by absorbing infrared radiation, including carbon dioxide, methane, and fluorocarbons. GW: Gigawatt A unit of power, capacity, or demand equal to one billion watts, one million kilowatts, or one thousand megawatts. GWh: Gigawatt-Hour A unit of electric energy equal to one billion watt-hours, one million kilowatt-hours, or one thousand megawatt-hours. Heavy-Duty Vehicle A vehicle with a gross weight greater than five tons, including the vehicle, fuel, occupants, and cargo (such as large transit buses, common tractor-trailer trucks, and refuse trucks). HVDC: High Voltage Direct Current An electric power transmission system that uses direct current, rather than alternating current, for bulk transmission. IHD: In-Home Display A touch-screen display attached to a smart thermostat that shows energy usage and contains controls for monitoring and adjusting usage. IEPR: Integrated Energy Policy Report A report adopted by the California Energy Commission and transmitted to the Governor and Legislature every two years. It includes trends and issues concerning electricity and natural gas, transportation, energy efficiency, renewables, and public interest energy research. IOU: Investor-Owned Utility A for-profit utility owned by either public or private shareholders that serve 72 percent of United States electricity customers.

ICE: Internal Combustion Engine A heat engine that combines fuel with an oxidizer (usually air) in a combustion chamber that creates pressure and mechanical force to generate electricity. IPP: Intermountain Power Project A two-unit, coal-fired plant located near Delta, Utah operated under the supervision of Los Angeles Department of Water & Power. IRP: Integrated Resource Plan A long-term comprehensive plan that balances the mix of demand and supply resources over a long-term planning horizon to meet specified policy goals. kW: Kilowatt A unit of power, capacity, or demand equal to one thousand watts. The demand of an individual electric customer or the capacity of a distributed generator is often expressed in kilowatts. kWh: Kilowatt-hour A unit of electric energy equal to one thousand watt-hours. The standard billing unit for electric energy sold to retail consumers is the kilowatt-hour. L1: Level 1 A private, residential EV battery charger, taking approximately 24 hours to fully charge an empty battery. L2: Level 2 A public EV battery charger designed to fully charge an empty battery in eight hours or less. L3: Level 3 A public EV battery charger (also known as a DCFC), the fastest EV charger available, uses a 480-volt direct current capable of producing a 100-mile charge per hour. 249 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-7
LADWP: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power A publicly owned utility that supplies electric and water to residents and businesses in Los Angeles and surrounding communities. LCFS Credit: Low Carbon Fuel Standard Credit A CARB program that aims to reduce emissions in the transportation sector by providing incentives to install EV charging equipment. LCOE: Levelized Cost of Energy The price per kilowatt-hour for an energy project to break even; it does not include risk or return on investment. Light-Duty Vehicle A vehicle with a gross weight less than five tons including the vehicle, fuel, occupants, and cargo (such as passenger cars and light- and medium-sized pickup trucks). Load, Electric The moment-to-moment measurement of power that an end-use device or an end-use customer consumes. The total of this consumption plus planning margins and operating reserves is the entire system load. Load is often used synonymously with demand. (See also Demand on page A-4.) Baseload: The constant generation of electric power load to meet demand. Connected Load: The sum of the capacities or ratings of the electric power consuming apparatus connected to a supplying system, or any part of the system under consideration. LOLE: Loss of Load Expectation The total duration of increments when the loss of load is expected to occur, specified in days using the peak value for the entire day.

LOLH: Loss of Load Hours The total duration of increments when the loss of load is expected to occur, specified in hours using the peak value for each hour. LOLP: Loss-of-Load Probability The probability that a generation shortfall (loss of load) would occur. This probability can be used as a consideration in generation adequacy requirements. LSE: Load-Serving Entity An energy-related company that serves end users and has been granted authority by California to sell electric energy to the same. Medium-Duty Vehicle A vehicle with a gross weight greater than five tons, including the vehicle, fuel, occupants, and cargo (such as moving trucks, large step vans, and some heavy-duty pickups). MMBtu: One Million British Thermal Units One million of the units of energy equal to about 1,055 joules that describes the energy content of fuels. MMT: Million Metric Tons A weight measurement used to determine the quantity of greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere. MSRC: Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee Composed of representatives from numerous state agencies; it establishes and adopts a work program for the distribution of AB 2766 discretionary funds to monitor and control mainly vehicular air quality. MT: Metric Tons A weight measurement used to determine the quantity of greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere. 250 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-8
MW: Megawatt A unit of power, capacity, or demand equal to one million watts or one thousand kilowatts. Generating capacities of power plants and system demand are typically expressed in megawatts. MWh: Megawatt-Hour A unit of electric energy equal to one million watt-hours or one thousand kilowatt-hours, used to specify the amount of energy consumed by customers over time. N-1 Contingency The unexpected loss (failure or outage) of a single system component (such as a generator, transmission line, circuit breaker, switch, or other electrical element) and can include multiple electrical elements if they are linked so that failures occur simultaneously at the loss of the single component. N-1-1 Contingency An initial unexpected loss of a single system component (such as a generator, transmission line, circuit breaker, switch, or other electrical element), followed by system adjustments, followed by the loss of another single system component. N-2 Contingency The unexpected simultaneous loss of two major system components (such as a generator or a transmission line). NEM: Net Energy Metering A billing arrangement that credits a customer with an eligible renewable distributed generator (mostly for solar photovoltaic rooftop systems) for electricity added to the grid. The customer only pays for the net amount of electricity taken from the grid. Net Load The remaining load after non-dispatchable resources (such as renewable energy) have been accounted for.

NOB: Nevada-Oregon Border A wholesale electricity energy market in which GWP participates. Nominal Dollars At its most basic, nominal dollars are based on a measure of money over a period of time that has not been adjusted for inflation. Nominal value represents a cost usually in the current year. As such, nominal dollars can also be referred to as current dollars; in other words, what it costs to buy something today. Nominal dollars are often contrasted with real dollars. NOx: Nitrogen Oxide A pollutant and strong greenhouse gas emitted by combusting fuels. NREL: National Renewable Energy Laboratory The Federal laboratory dedicated to researching, developing, commercializing, and using renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies relied on by utilities across the country for integrated resource planning. O&M: Operations and Maintenance The recurring costs of operating, supporting, and maintaining authorized programs, including costs for labor, fuel, materials, supplies, and other current expenses. ORC: Organic Rankine Cycle An evolving energy system for power production utilizing geothermal resources and recovered waste-heat using an organic, high-molecular-mass fluid whose vaporization temperature is lower than that of water. OTEC: Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion A process that produces electricity by using the temperature difference between deep cold ocean water and warm tropical surface waters. 251 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-9
Outage The period during which a generating unit, transmission line, or other facility is out of service. The following are types of outages or outage-related terms. Forced Outage: The removal from service availability of a generating unit, transmission line, or other facility for emergency reasons or a condition in which the equipment is unavailable due to unanticipated failure. Planned (or Scheduled Maintenance) Outage: The removal or shutdown of a generating unit, transmission line, equipment, or other facility for inspection or maintenance according to an advance schedule. PBC: Public Benefits Charge A charge required for all publicly-owned utilities for programs that would benefit the public, required for energy efficiency, low-income assistance, renewable resources, and research, development, and demonstration projects. PCC: Portfolio Content Category A category of electricity products procured from an eligible renewable energy resource (as specified by the CEC) for meeting RPS requirements. PCC-0: A renewable resource that meets the criteria of PCC-1 but was signed or went online before June 1, 2010. PCC-1: A renewable resource located within the state of California or, a renewable resource that is directly delivered to California without energy substitution from another resource. PCC-2: A renewable resource that is out-of-state and delivering to California, where the RECs are paired with a substitute energy resource imported into the state. PCC-3: A tradable or unbundled REC from a resource, delivered without the energy component.

Peak Demand The maximum amount of power necessary to supply customers; in other words, the highest electric requirement occurring in a given period (for example, an hour, day, month, season, or year). For an electric system, it is equal to the sum of the metered net outputs of all generators within a system and the metered line flows into the system, less the metered line flows out of the system. From a customer’s perspective, peak demand is the maximum power used during a specific period of time. PG&E: Pacific Gas & Electric An investor-owned utility that provides natural gas and electric services to northern and central California. PHEV: Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle A vehicle that operates using a battery recharged by plugging it into an external source of electric power or by using an on-board gas engine. POU: Publicly-Owned Utility Not-for-profit utilities owned by customers and subject to local public control and regulation. PPA: Power Purchase Agreement A contract to purchase energy and or capacity from a commercial source at a predetermined price or on pre-determined pricing formulas. PRM: Planning Reserve Margin The percent of unused available capability above projected annual peak demand to meet expected demand and maintain adequacy of supply. Planning reserve margin is designed to measure the amount of generation capacity available to meet expected demand in a planning horizon. PUC: Public Utilities Code A directive issued by the CPUC. 252 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-10
PV: Photovoltaic The technology that converts light into electricity using semiconducting materials that exhibit the photovoltaic effect by absorbing photons and then emitting electrons. PVNGS: Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station A nuclear power plant located in Arizona consisting of three generating units with a total capacity of 3,937 MW that produce the largest amount of energy of any plant in the United States. Reach Code A local building energy code that goes beyond or “reaches” past the state minimum requirements for energy use. Real Dollars At its most basic, real dollars are a measure of money over a period of time that has been adjusted for inflation. Real dollars represents the true cost of goods and services sold because the effects of inflation are stripped out of the cost. Over time, real dollars are a measure of purchasing power. As such, real dollars can also be referred to as constant dollars; in other words, if the price of something goes up over time at the same rate as inflation, the cost is the same in real dollars. Real dollars are often contrasted with nominal dollars. REC: Renewable Energy Credit Tradable commodities that represent proof that 1 MWh of electricity was generated from an eligible renewable source. Reliability The degree of performance of the elements of the bulk electric system that results in electricity being delivered to customers within accepted standards and in the amount desired. Reliability can be measured by the frequency, duration, and magnitude of adverse effects on the electric supply.

Renewable Energy Resources Energy resources that are naturally replenished and are virtually inexhaustible, but might be limited in their constant availability. Unlike fossil fuel generation plants (which can be sited where most convenient because the fuel is transported to the plant), most renewable energy generation plants must be sited where the energy is available. RFP: Request for Proposal A competitive solicitation for suppliers to submit a proposal on a specific commodity or service, often through a bidding process. RICE: Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines A reciprocating internal combustion engine uses the reciprocating movement of pistons to create pressure that is converted into electricity. RP3: Reliable Public Power Provider A designation that lasts three years and recognizes utilities that demonstrate high proficiency in reliability, safety, work force development, and system improvement. RPS: Renewable Portfolio Standard The program that, by law, requires all California-sanctioned electric utilities to increase the production and procurement of energy from renewable energy resources. RPT: RPS Procurement Table Defined by the CEC as a detailed summary of a POU’s resource plan to meet the RPS requirements. SB: Senate Bill Legislation that is either proposed or modified in the California State Senate. SC: Simple-Cycle A generating unit in which the combustion turbine operates in a stand-alone mode, without waste heat recovery. 253 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-11
SCADA: Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition A system used for monitoring and control of remote equipment using communications networks. SCAQMD: South Coast Air Quality Management District A control agency responsible for regulating sources of air pollution covering Orange County and the urban portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino County. SCPPA: Southern California Public Power Authority A joint powers agency comprised of eleven publicly owned utilities and one irrigation district located in Southern California. SIP: State Implementation Plan A CARB document that governs the implementation of building electrification initiatives. SMR: Small Modular Reactor Advanced nuclear fission reactors capable of generating up to 300 MW that can be built in one location, then shipped, commissioned, and operated at a separate site. Spinning Reserves Available generating capacity that is synchronously connected to the electric grid and capable of automatically responding to frequency deviations on the system. ST: Steam Turbine A turbine that extracts thermal energy from pressurized steam and uses it to rotate an output shaft. Stochastic Modeling Modeling analysis using as input a random collection of variables that represent the uncertainties associated with those variables (as opposed to deterministic modeling that analyzes a single state). Stochastic modeling analyzes multiple states and the range of their uncertainty, then captures the probabilities of those uncertainties.

Substation A small building or fenced in yard that contains switches, transformers, and other equipment that steps down voltages for customer use, switches and monitors transmission and distribution circuits, and performs other service functions. T&D: Transmission and Distribution Transmission lines are used for the bulk transfer of electric power across the power system, typically from generators to load centers. Distribution lines are used for transfer of electric power from the bulk power level to end-users and from distributed generators into the bulk power system. TRC: Total Resource Cost A calculation used to measure and determine program cost-effectiveness. TOU: Time-of-Use A rate structure for on-peak, off-peak, and mid-day times designed to encourage customers to shift energy use to lower rate periods. VOM: Variable Operation & Maintenance A function of the hours of operation of a power plant, and include yearly maintenance and overhaul, repairs, consumables, water supply, and environmental costs. VPP: Virtual Power Plant A network of distributed energy resources that is aggregated and managed as a single entity to provide energy services to the grid. WAPA: Western Area Power Administration One of four power marketing administration, it markets wholesale hydropower generated at 57 hydroelectric federal dams operated by the Bureau of Reclamation, United States Army Corps of Engineers, and the International Boundary and Water Commission. 254 of 839

B. Glossary and Definitions
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP B-12
WECC: Western Electric Coordination Council Ensures bulk electric system reliability for the entire Western Interconnection. ZEV: Zero-Emission Vehicle A vehicle that emits no exhaust gas from its source of power, such as plug-in electric vehicles and hydrogen electric vehicles. 255 of 839

Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-1

C. Stakeholder Outreach
As a municipally owned utility, GWP appreciates the need for, and value of, involving the Glendale community in the process of creating its IRP. Following feedback both from City Council and the public about a desire for greater community involvement in this year’s IRP process, GWP sought to enhance the Glendale community’s engagement in creating the 2024 IRP compared to past iterations. This appendix contains the details of its stakeholder outreach. Chapter 2, as well as other pertinent sections of this IRP, discusses the results of its outreach. Across the IRP period, GWP updated the public on its progress and encouraged their participation in the IRP’s creation via its IRP webpage, social media accounts, customer mailers, and email outreach. The IRP website page was updated regularly to list the most current information regarding the IRP process. It included links to: § Pages that presented IRP information in Spanish and Armenian, the two most predominant languages spoken by Glendale residents beside English. § Its social media platforms: Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. § The STAG web page. § Presentations and video recordings from each Townhall. § Email for questions, comments, or to inquire about general IRP information. We contracted with Ascend Analytics and Strategen Consulting to devise and facilitate a comprehensive stakeholder outreach effort. Toward that end, Strategen designed a comprehensive two-pronged process: community Townhalls for at-large customer involvement, and a Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG) for impactful working sessions with a small group of informed and committed customers. Both processes directly informed how we designed and modeled candidate resource mixes to meet forecasted load, as well as other parts of the planning process. 256 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-2
COMMUNITY TOWNHALLS GWP hosted four community Townhalls to gather public input and feedback on the IRP. Through an Integrated Resource Planning page on its website, we encouraged Glendale residents and business owners to get involved and spread the word about the IRP to foster broad community participation. The Townhalls had three main objectives: § Increase community understanding of integrated resource planning and utility operations. § Provide the Glendale community with substantive updates on the IRP development process. § Solicit community input on IRP priorities and other preferences to inform IRP development. We held the Townhalls on: § Thursday, June 29, 2023 at the Pacific Community Center, 501 South Pacific Avenue, 6:30 PM–8:30 PM. § Monday, July 24, 2023 at the Sparr Heights Community Center, 1613 Glencoe Way, 6:30 PM–8:30 PM. § Saturday, August 12, 2023 at Brand Studios located at Brand Park, 1601 West Mountain Street, 10:00AM–12:00 noon. § Thursday, November 16, 2023 at the Sparr Heights Community Center, 1613 Glencoe Way, 6:30 PM–8:30 PM. Roughly 30 people attended each Townhall. GWP and its consultants scheduled these meetings to be at key points in the IRP process, to be held on a variety of days of the week (including a weekend for individuals unable to attend on weeknights), and to be held at a variety of locations across the city. Summaries of the input received at each Townhall follows, together with the meeting’s presentation slides. 257 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-3
Townhall 1: Thursday, June 29, 2023 The first Townhall was held on Thursday, June 29, 2023 at the Pacific Community Center from 6:30 PM until 8:30 PM. Approximately 35 people attended the first Townhall. Townhall 1 Summary The first Townhall offered an introduction to the Integrated Resource Planning process. It included presentations by GWP (slides 4–11), Ascend Analytics (slides 12–16), and Strategen Consulting (slides 17–28). Strategen then conducted a ‘community resource preference’ activity that gathered attendees’ input on their preferred and unpreferred energy resources that might be procured through this IRP (using green stickers to indicate preferences and red stickers to indicate areas of concern). Community members were encouraged to apply to the IRP Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG) at this meeting, with applications made available for attendees to submit. Main takeaways from this Townhall included: § Some community members raised concern about the number of GWP and community-developed scenarios being run (with GWP having three scenarios and the community having two). § There was a strong desire for transparency and community involvement in the IRP process, including the analysis of results and the decision on GWP’s ultimate preferred scenario. § Community members had strong interest in prioritizing customer distributed energy resources, like rooftop solar, energy efficiency, and demand response. The exception to this interest was customer-sited energy storage, which some attendees opposed due to concerns about fire risk. § Community members’ perspectives on certain resources depended on whether the resource would be local to Glendale or remote. For instance, some opposition to utility-scale wind only applied if projects were to be sited in Glendale (which is not technically feasible). § Natural gas was the resource of greatest concern to attendees, followed by small modular nuclear reactors. Resource Green Stickers Red Stickers Utility scale solar 9 0 Utility scale wind 5 4 Green hydrogen 1 7 Natural gas 5 22 Grid-scale energy storage 10 0 Small modular nuclear reactors 0 17 Geothermal 4 1 Customer-sited storage 5 8 Customer-sited solar 16 0 Energy efficiency and demand response 14 0 Table 23. Results of Community Resource Preference Activity 258 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-4
Townhall 1 Presentation GWP (slides 4–11), Ascend Analytics (slides 12–16), and Strategen Consulting (slides 17–28) gave presentations on the basics of GWP’s energy system, how modeling in an IRP works, and how the public can be engaged in the IRP process.

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + June 29, 2023
Glendale Water and Power 2024 Integrated Resource PlanTownhall 1 2 Agenda+What is an IRP, and why is it important? (25 min)+Presentation and Q&A with Scott Mellon, Glendale Water and Power+What are we studying in this IRP? (20 min)+Presentation and Q&A with Brandon Mauch, Ascend Analytics+How can the Glendale community help shape this IRP? (10 min)+Presentation with Dhruv Bhatnagar, Strategen Consulting+Community resource preference activity (35 min)+Open discussion (30 min) 3 Objectives for this townhall
+Introduce the concept of an Integrated Resource Plan, why it’s important, and how the plan will be developed+Describe ways for the Glendale community to get involved in the IRP process+Get community input on the priorities to reflect in this IRP Scott Mellon, GWP
What is an Integrated Resource Plan, and why is it important? What is an Integrated Resource Plan (IRP)?
5 +IRPs are planning documents required to be developed by California law every 5 years.+They study how much energy GWP will need in the future and develop potential strategies to supply that energy over the next 20 years.+The IRP will answer important questions about Glendale’s future energy system: +Where will Glendale get its power? +How much of that power will be renewable or clean? +How much will that power cost? +IRPs are a snapshot in time. They represent our best understanding of our system’s needs – and options to meet it – at this moment.+Things change quickly, which is why it’s important to update this plan regularly.

What do IRPs do?
6 +IRPs help GWP prepare for the future by developing multiple potential strategies (called “scenarios”) to meet Glendale’s future energy needs. +The scenarios can test: +Different mixes of energy resources (rooftop solar, wind, energy efficiency, etc.) +Different timelines for achieving clean energy goals +Different cost preferences +Other variables+The scenarios are then explored to see how they’d perform in the future in terms of reliability, environmental responsibility, and cost. +Based on the results, GWP will choose the scenario that best meets its need for reliable power, while minimizing costs and maximizing environmental performance. 259 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-5

How will the IRP be developed?
7 1. GWP and the Glendale community will develop multiple future energy scenarios to test in the IRP modeling process. 2. Ascend Analytics will test these strategies in their model to see how they compare on reliability, costs, and environmental responsibility.

3. GWP will present and discuss the results with the community to provide an opportunity for feedback. 4. Based on the results, GWP will choose a “preferred portfolio” of resources it will develop to meet Glendale’s energy needs over the next 20 years. 8 Overview of GWP’s power system and planning challenges+GWP needs to meet Glendale’s need for reliable power, at a reasonable cost, while also meeting California Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements. +SB100: +60% renewable energy by 2030+100% zero-carbon by 2045 +Glendale goal: 100% clean energy by 2035+Reliability and clean energy mandates create the ‘guardrails’ for our planning in this IRP. +Meeting our reliability and clean energy requirements depends heavily on our ability to get power from the Western U.S. into Glendale. 9 10
Glendale’s system is constrained by only two transmission lines.

Q&A (10 minutes)
Brandon Mauch, Ascend Analytics
What are we studying in this IRP?
13 Introduction to Ascend Analytics+Software and advisory services firm based in Boulder, CO. +Provides analytical solutions and consulting support for resource planning, power system operations, and portfolio risk management. +We work with utilities across the United States and have completed multiple IRPs for California utilities. +Glendale and Ascend have worked together since 2018. +PowerSIMM modeling software provides a full suite of tools to support Glendale’s resource plan. 14 IRPs use modeling to evaluate multiple future energy paths for GWP. +The future is uncertain, and testing different versions of the future allows us to plan for that uncertainty.+Modeling is a way to simulate the future so we can study it. +IRP models simulate GWP’s energy demand and supply to project how resources operate under future conditions. +Power system models provide estimates of future system costs, GHG emissions, renewable generation, and many more outputs.+To create a model, we need to determine assumptions (model inputs) about the future.+What technologies will be available and what are their characteristics?+What is the risk of certain events (like wildfires) impacting GWP’s system?+What does future electricity demand look like? +What are Glendale’s clean energy policies/targets? +What will future energy and fuel prices be? Can we project or estimate them? 260 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-6

What changes are already expected to GWP’s system?
15 +GWP is making changes to its portfolio to increase clean energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.+Expected changes in the next decade include: +Intermountain Power Plant converting fully to hydrogen+Addition of Eland solar and storage project+Addition of Scholl biogas (landfill gas)+Grayson repowering and battery storage+This IRP will focus on how to close the gaps to meet CA and Glendale clean energy goals.

Q&A (10 minutes)
Dhruv Bhatnagar, Strategen Consulting
How can the Glendale community help shape this IRP?
18 What is the process for creating this IRP?
Preparation and study designModelingCommunity feedbackReviewing and finalizing IRPFinal approval IRP submitted to California Energy Commission
JulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuary
All scenarios ready for modelingInitial modeling results presented Draft IRP written IRP presented to GWP CommissionIRP approved by Glendale City Council 19 When can the community be involved in the IRP process? 7/4: STAG applications due
7/24: Townhall on scenarios8/30*: Townhall on initial modeling results 10/4*: Townhall on final results and draft IRP
11/6*: Opportunity for public comment at GWP Commission 12/5*: Opportunity for public comment at City Council
Preparation and study designModelingCommunity feedbackReviewing and finalizing IRPFinal approval JulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuary
*Dates pending. Check glendaleca.gov/2024IRP for latest information. 20 There are multiple ways to help shape GWP’s IRP.
+Multiple townhalls through October+Held in person throughout Glendale+Recordings and presentations will be posted online+All townhalls will explore different topics! Community townhalls+Opportunity for detailed input to the IRP +Six in-person meetings through late September+Applications close Tuesday, July 4+Meeting minutes will be posted online Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG)+Will go live on the GWP IRP website: www.GlendaleCA.gov/2024IRP Community survey
+Email [email protected] with questions or comments+Great way to provide feedback if you can’t attend a townhall Getting in touch!
21 GWP needs your input to inform this plan! +The Glendale community can help inform: +The energy resources we’d like to include in scenario testing+How much of GWP’s energy portfolio each resource should make up +When those resources should be deployed+The timeline on which GWP should provide 100% clean energy +Today we’re focusing in on the first two items.

Activity: Exploring community resource preferences
261 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-7

Figure 70. Townhall 1 Presentation Slides
23 Instructions+Strategen will present a range of potential energy resources that GWP could explore developing in the future. +These resources are also listed on posters hung throughout the room. +Attendees will be given six stickers to place on the resources they most prefer and least prefer. +Three green stickers = resources you most prefer+Three red stickers = resources you least prefer +You don’t have to use all your stickers, but you can only use one sticker per resource. And no trading or bartering for additional stickers ☺ 24 Goals of the activity+Get direction from the Glendale community on the types of energy resources they prefer, or don’t prefer.+Explore the reasons behind the preferred resources and implications for energy costs, reliability, and the environment.+Use the results of the activity to inform the development of community-informed scenarios to test in the IRP modeling.+Note that we’re NOT attempting to finalize these scenarios today. That will be the goal of the next townhall. 25 Potential resourcesCustomer side resources+Distributed solar+Distributed energy storage+Energy efficiency & demand response Utility scale resources+Intermittent+Solar+Wind +Firm or flexible+Natural gas+Green hydrogen+Geothermal+Small modular nuclear reactors+Grid scale energy storage 26 How can we evaluate and compare these resources? +Maturity – how proven or widely adopted the technology is. +Cost – how much the resource costs. +Reliability impacts – the way the resource might impact the reliability of electricity service on the grid, and any reliability benefits it provides. +Firm resources = stable, non-intermittent sources of power. +Flexible or dispatchable resources = able to be ramped up and down quickly to meet grid reliability needs on short notice. +Environmental impacts – climate and other environmental impacts of the resource. +Note that this information is only meant as a reference for completing this exercise. Don’t focus too much on whether these descriptions are comprehensive as they only provide a snapshot for each resource! 27 Open discussion+What factors influenced your selection of preferred and least preferred resources? +What would be the implications of creating an energy portfolio of the group’s most preferred resources? +Do the group’s most preferred resources create a reliable, cost effective, and environmentally responsible energy portfolio? +If not, what additional resources might be needed to complement the most preferred resources? +Is there any additional input you want to be considered regarding the resource selection in the modeling scenarios? 28 Thank you and next steps!
+7/4: STAG applications due! +Visit glendaleca.gov/2024IRP for application information. +7/24: Townhall 2+Time and location to be announced+This townhall will be a deep dive into the scenarios to be explored in modeling 28 262 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-8
Townhall 2: Monday, July 24, 2023 The second Townhall was held on Monday, July 24, 2023 at the Sparr Heights Community Center from 6:30 PM until 8:30 PM. Approximately 35 people attended the second Townhall. Townhall 2 Summary The second Townhall included a presentation with more details on GWP’s energy system, including data on customer solar, customer energy efficiency, and other local resources, all of which were of high interest at the first Townhall. Strategen updated the community on the IRP process (including the selection of STAG members and the results of the first two STAG meetings; slides 6–17) and introduced GWP’s three anticipated modeling scenarios (slides 18–31). The community was able to ask questions and comment on these topics before doing another ‘community preference’ activity, which asked for their input on a range of questions related to Glendale’s potential clean energy timeline, preferred and unpreferred resources, and cost sensitivities. The results of this community preference activity were then fed back to STAG to inform the development of the two community scenarios. Main takeaways from this Townhall included: § The large majority of attendees preferred Glendale to achieve 100 percent clean energy by 2035. § Multiple attendees raised issue with the assumption that achieving 100 percent clean energy faster might result in higher rates. They emphasized that community members, and low-income customers in particular, might value these two priorities equally and shouldn’t be asked to choose one over the other. § Attendees reported that they were more supportive of paying higher rates to achieve 100 percent clean energy faster than they thought the rest of the Glendale community was. (That is, the rest of the community may be more price sensitive than those in the room at the Townhall.) § Attendees continued to have high interest in customer-sited resources (namely solar), along with utility-owned solar and storage, as priorities for this IRP. § Attendees favored battery storage and long-duration energy storage (over green hydrogen, biogas, and natural gas) as options to provide energy flexibility as GWP increases renewable energy penetration. § Numerous attendees expressed desire for clean energy programs (for example, rooftop solar programs) tailored to renters and condo owners, who often can’t opt into existing programs on their own. They expressed that there’s untapped potential with these customers. § Multiple attendees raised concern about the inclusion of renewable energy credits (RECs) in GWP’s third scenario as a means to meet California’s clean energy mandate. 263 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-9
Townhall 2 Presentation

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + July 24, 2023
GWP 2024 Integrated Resource Planu
Townhall 2
Who here attended the last townhall? Welcome!
3 Agenda+Presentation from Strategen Consulting (20 min) +Context on IRPs, GWP’s system, results of last townhall+Q&A (20 min) +Presentation from Strategen Consulting (15 min) +Update on IRP modeling process and scenario development+Q&A (20 min) +Discussion on community priorities and preferences for this IRP (45 min) 4 Townhall objectives
+Familiarize community with Glendale’s energy system +Provide updates on the IRP process+Get insight on community priorities and better understand resource preferences to inform the Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG) and modeling 5 Townhall reminders!
+We have translators available in Armenian and Spanish. Please ask if you know someone who may need translation help. +Look out for the nametags! +Please hold any questions on presentations until the Q&A portions. +We’ll try to create opportunities for as many folks to contribute as possible, so please allow space for other perspectives. +Please use a microphone when speaking so the recording equipment can hear you.

Overview of Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs)
6 +IRPs are planning documents required to be developed by California law every 5 years.+They study how much energy GWP will need in the future and develop potential strategies to supply that energy over the next 20 years.+These strategies are called “scenarios” and can test: +Different mixes of energy resources (rooftop solar, wind, energy efficiency, etc.) +Different timelines for achieving clean energy goals +Different cost preferences +The scenarios will be studied in a model, and results will inform how GWP plans its energy system into the future. +This IRP represents GWP’s best approach as of today, given today’s understanding of technology, costs, future demand, etc. GWP will repeat its IRP every 5 years and reevaluate its approach with updated inputs. 7 Central planning considerations in this IRP +Reliability: GWP must meet or exceed certain reliability standards in its planning and operations.+Federal planning standards: cannot exceed one day of outage in ten years+GWP must maintain a certain level of energy resources to meet this standard+Sustainability: GWP must meet or exceed California’s clean energy requirements. +SB100 & SB 1020: +60% renewable energy by 2030+100% zero-carbon by 2045 +Glendale City goal: 100% clean energy by 2035+Affordability: GWP must accomplish these first two while maintaining lowest possible costs, and accordingly, customer rates. Costs are a direct result of how reliable and sustainable GWP’s portfolio is.

How will the IRP be developed?
8 1. GWP and STAG, informed by the Glendale community, will develop multiple future energy scenarios to test in the IRP modeling process. 2. Ascend Analytics will test these strategies in their model to see how they compare on reliability, sustainability, and affordability.

3. GWP will present and discuss results with the STAG and the community to provide an opportunity for feedback. 4. Based on the results, GWP will choose a “preferred portfolio” of resources it will develop to meet Glendale’s energy needs over the next 20 years. 264 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-10

9 Key IRP deadlines
Preparation and study designModelingCommunity feedbackReviewing and finalizing IRPFinal approval 1/1: IRP must be submitted to the California Energy Commission JulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuary
8/11: All scenarios ready for modeling
9/15: Initial modeling results presented
10/15: Draft IRP written 11/6*: IRP presented to GWP Commission 12/5*: IRP presented to City Council
*Dates pending.

Background on Glendale Water & Power+GWP is a not-for-profit municipally owned utility serving approximately 90,000 customers. 85%
15%<1%GWP customers (by number of customers)
ResidentialCommercialIndustrial 40%
32%
28%
GWP customers (by energy usage)
11 By 2026, Glendale will get nearly 60% of its energy supply from resources inside the city but will count on remote generation for a large portion. +By 2026, 59% of Glendale’s power supply will be local [236 MW]: +Grayson natural gas [48 MW]+Magnolia natural gas [47 MW]+Grid-scale battery storage [75 MW]+Scholl Canyon landfill gas [11 MW]+Natural gas internal combustion engines [55 MW]59%41% Glendale Power Supply as of 2026 (Projected)
LocalRemote
12 Power entering Glendale from outside the city is constrained to just two transmission lines. +These transmission constraints mean: +Glendale is particularly vulnerable to any transmission outages +Glendale is dependent on other utilities (LADWP) for access to transmission resources+Glendale cannot meet 100% of its energy needs through importing resources 13 As a result, GWP is using a variety of local resources to meet energy needs, such as distributed energy resources. 2023:Solar PV: 27 MWGrid scale storage: 2 MWSmall scale storage: 1 MW 0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
2008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023 Distributed Energy Resources Installed Capacity (MW)Fiscal Year EndSolar PVPumped HydroFuel CellsGrid Scale StorageSmall Scale Storage 14 GWP also invests heavily in energy efficiency and is among the best performing publicly owned utilities in energy efficiency savings.

0.00%0.20%0.40%0.60%0.80%1.00%1.20%1.40%1.60%1.80% Net savings percentage (% of retail sales), as of 2022 15 What we heard from you at the first townhall+There was a strong desire for transparency and community input in the IRP process. +Clean energy seemed to be attendees’ top priority. +Customer-side resources (customer solar, energy efficiency, demand response) are of high interest. +But there is concern with customer-sited batteries due to fire risk. +Community concern is generally higher for resources being developed in Glendale vs. outside Glendale. 16 Community resource preferences from last townhallResourceGreen stickersRed stickersUtility scale solar9Utility scale wind5 4Green hydrogen1 7Natural gas5 22Grid-scale energy storage10Small modular nuclear reactors17Geothermal4 1Customer-sited storage5 8Customer-sited solar16Energy efficiency / demand response14 265 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-11

Q&A (20 minutes)
18 Update on the IRP process+GWP has formed a Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG), which has met twice.+The STAG is meant to be a bridge between the Glendale community and the IRP modeling team. +Have 8 invited organizations participating. Selected 7 “at-large” members from 22 applications, using set of evaluation criteria. +For STAG member list and meeting minute updates, visit https://glendaleca.gov/2024IRP. +We have held two STAG meetings, which have educated members on GWP’s system and IRP modeling. +Have begun conversations on scenarios, but nothing has been decided. +GWP has developed high-level sketches of three scenarios they’ll test through modeling.+The STAG, informed by community townhalls, will be responsible for developing two additional community-preferred scenarios. 19 Modeling scenarios – what’s being planned?
+Will follow requirements of California’s SB 100 and SB 1020:+60% renewable portfolio by 2030+90% zero-carbon by 2035+95% zero-carbon by 2040+100% zero-carbon by 2045+Will result in all energy brought to Glendale being 100% zero carbon by 2045. +Will meet mandates of SB 100 and SB 1020 at the lowest possible cost, without necessarily meaning all energy brought into Glendale is 100% zero carbon.+Could mean greater use of renewable energy credits (RECs). +Meant as reference to scenario 1 for lowest possible cost of compliance.

California clean energy mandateAffordability first+Will meet Glendale’s 100% clean energy by 2035 goal.+Will result in all energy brought into Glendale being 100% clean by 2035.

Accelerated clean energy pathway (Glendale goal)
20 Community-preferred scenarios
+Interest in maximizing resources inside Glendale to compensate for transmission constraints.+Group has expressed 2 potential timelines for 100% clean energy: 2035 and 2040-2043. +Solar, storage, wind, energy efficiency, and green hydrogen are of interest to STAG members.+The group is mixed on natural gas and nuclear, and some opinions depend on resource location.

What we’ve heard from STAG so far:+STAG is currently discussing options for scenarios, including considering: +The timeline at which GWP should achieve 100% clean energy +Resources that should be prioritized+Resources that should be excluded+Townhalls are meant to generate ideas that are then discussed, refined, and finalized by STAG. +We’ve presented the takeaways from the last townhall to STAG for discussion and will do the same for this townhall. 21 How will these scenarios be modeled? +Ascend Analytics uses detailed forecasts to estimate multiple variables about the future: +How much will Glendale’s energy demand be in the future?+What technologies will be available to GWP? +What will the price of various energy resources be? +After inputting these in their model, they’ll run the 5 scenarios to determine what portfolio of resources meets Glendale’s goals at lowest cost. +Unless specified, the model automatically prioritizes the lowest-cost portfolio that meet the parameters of the scenario. +No restrictions on resources, except as defined by City Council (e.g., biogas). +The model analyzes multiple portfolios of resources to meet the goals of each scenario. Each portfolio is analyzed for reliability, affordability, and sustainability. +How each portfolio performs on these 3 categories will help GWP choose its preferred portfolio.

Q&A (20 minutes)
23 Community preference activity+We have an online activity to gauge your preferences on a variety of topics related to this IRP: +When Glendale should achieve 100% clean energy+How to manage tradeoffs between clean energy and cost +What resources are a priority to develop inside Glendale+What resources are a priority to procure from outside Glendale+How best to provide power flexibility and reliability+Go to www.menti.com and enter code 7288 5048. 24 I want Glendale to achieve 100% clean energy by… +2035 (Glendale goal)+2036-2040+2041-2044+2045 (California mandate)+No preference 266 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-12

Figure 71. Townhall 2 Presentation Slides
25 I would support an increase in electric rates if it meant Glendale would achieve 100% clean energy faster. +Strongly disagree → strongly agree 26 I believe the Glendale community would support an increase in electric rates if it meant Glendale would achieve 100% clean energy faster. +Strongly disagree → strongly agree 27 I would support developing the following resources inside Glendale, in addition to what’s already present:+Customer-sited solar+Utility-owned solar+Customer-sited energy storage+Utility-owned energy storage+Energy efficiency (e.g., lighting)+Demand response (e.g., controlled thermostats)+Natural gas+Green hydrogen 28 I would support procuring the following resource types outside Glendale: +Renewables and energy storage only+Any resource, as long as it is zero carbon (e.g., nuclear)+Any resource, even if not zero carbon (e.g., natural gas), provided Glendale meets state clean energy mandates 29 How should Glendale provide energy flexibility with increasing amounts of renewable energy?+Green hydrogen+Biogas+Battery storage+Long-duration energy storage (more than 8 hours)+Natural gas 30 Discussion questions+What are community priorities coming out of this IRP? What would you like to see? +What potential “versions of the future” are community members interested in seeing tested in this IRP modeling process? +How would you balance tradeoffs between affordability and sustainability? +What are your thoughts on various resource options? 31 Upcoming steps
+We have two more townhalls upcoming! +Check glendaleca.gov/2024IRP for dates and locations. 267 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-13
Townhall 3: Saturday, August 12, 2023 The third Townhall was held on Saturday, August 12, 2023 at Brand Studios from 10:00 AM until Noon. Approximately 27 people attended the third Townhall. Townhall 3 Summary The third Townhall included a presentation about multiple key inputs and assumptions being fed into the IRP model, including those related to Glendale’s electricity demand; future resource costs; customer energy efficiency, demand response, and solar adoption; and the potential for local resource development inside Glendale (slides 5–17). Time for Q&A and discussion was provided on these topics. Strategen then presented the five proposed modeling scenarios (three from GWP—Scenarios 1–3—and two developed by STAG—Scenarios 5–6—using community input), with time for community questions and feedback on these before their finalization (slides 18–27). Main takeaways from this Townhall included: § Multiple attendees expressed interest in knowing more about the key inputs and assumptions driving the IRP modeling, with a call for these data points to be made publicly transparent. § Numerous attendees raised concern with GWP’s third scenario, again because of the inclusion of RECs. Several suggested replacing this scenario with another community-developed scenario. § A few attendees suggested developing another scenario that studies an alternative path to 100 percent clean energy between 2035–2040, with less emphasis on customer-sited resources compared to STAG’s first scenario (which one attendee noted could be expensive). § Multiple attendees raised questions about how the cost of carbon is being considered in the IRP and what impact that would have on GWP’s resource decisions. 268 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-14
Townhall 3 Presentation

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + August 12, 2023
GWP 2024 Integrated Resource Planu
Townhall 3
2 Welcome!
+Who here attended the last townhall? +Who here attended the last 2 townhalls? 3 Townhall objectives
+Provide transparency on some inputs/assumptions feeding into the IRP modeling process. +Update the community on the scenario development process and proposed scenarios. +Receive community feedback to inform scenarios and IRP modeling. 4 Townhall reminders!
+We have translators available in Armenian and Spanish. Please ask if you know someone who may need translation help. +Look out for the nametags! +Please hold any questions on presentations until the Q&A portions. +We’ll try to create opportunities for as many folks to contribute as possible, so please allow space for other perspectives. +Please use a microphone when speaking so the recording equipment can hear you.

Overview of Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs)
5 +IRPs are planning documents required to be developed by California law every 5 years.+They study how much energy GWP will need in the future and develop potential strategies to supply that energy over the next 20 years.+These strategies are called “scenarios” and can test: +Different mixes of energy resources (rooftop solar, wind, energy efficiency, etc.) +Different timelines for achieving clean energy goals +The scenarios will be studied in a model, and results will inform how GWP plans its energy system into the future. +GWP has formed a Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group (STAG), made up of community members, that will create 2 community scenarios to test in this IRP.

How will the IRP be developed?
6 1. GWP and the STAG, informed by the Glendale community, will develop multiple future energy scenarios to test in the IRP modeling process. 2. Ascend Analytics will test these strategies in their model to see how they compare on reliability, sustainability, and affordability.

Inputs and assumptions informing this IRP
7 +There are numerous variables related to the future that we input in the IRP model: +How much will GWP’s electricity demand be in the future? +How much will various energy resources cost in the future? +How much will energy efficiency and demand response reduce energy demand in Glendale? +How much will customer solar grow in Glendale? +How much can GWP develop inside Glendale? +The way we define these variables has implications for the results of the IRP. +For instance, assuming higher electricity demand in Glendale means GWP will need more resources to fill in gaps.+Ascend Analytics and GWP have been working to line up the inputs and assumptions to use in the modeling process.

How much will GWP’s electricity demand be in the future? 8 +Ascend Analytics uses publicly available forecasts from the California Energy Commission (CEC) as the basis for this projection.+The CEC anticipates Glendale’s demand increasing by ~2.4%/year through 2035.+This is higher than average, which is usually 1.0–1.5%.+Factors driving this growth can include electric vehicle purchases, electrification, and new customer growth.+Ascend then couples the CEC forecast with Glendale-specific information, like Glendale’s energy efficiency performance, to arrive at a final forecast for the city.+It’s important to look at Glendale’s energy demand in two ways to plan for both average and extreme conditions:+Total energy demand+Peak demand (1-in-10-year events) 269 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-15

9 Forecast of Glendale’s Future Energy Demand (CEC Projection) 10 Glendale Future Energy Demand (CEC Projection + Energy Efficiency) How much will various energy resources cost in the future? 11 +Ascend Analytics forecasts the cost of new resources (solar, wind, batteries, etc.) into thefuture.+These forecasts consider public sources such as the National Renewable EnergyLaboratory Annual Technology Baseline (ATB).+The ATB only considers the cost to build new resources, not how much it would cost for GWP toactually procure the resource.+Ascend then adds to this baseline information with its understanding of current projectcosts, informed by their work with utilities across California.+These resource costs consider both federal incentives (e.g., tax credits in the InflationReduction Act) and likely future inflation. 12 How much will energy efficiency and demand response reduce energy demand in Glendale? +Energy efficiency:+GWP will assume it will achieve its historical performance on energy efficiency (1.8% of retailsales). This is higher performance than most publicly-owned utilities in California.+Demand response:+Demand response refers to programs in which customers shift or reduce their energy use toreduce GWP’s peak energy demand.+GWP will assume slightly better than historical performance on demand response, based on whatexisting programs have achieved (~3.5 MW over 4 years). 13 +Customer solar in Glendale has grown to provide 26.3 MW of capacity in the past 20years.+Roughly 2.6% of customers have rooftop solar, representing up to 7% of GWP’s peak demand.+Over 10% of single-family homes in Glendale have rooftop solar (2,500 of 24,000).+There are roughly 54,000 households in Glendale that aren’t fully capable of installingsolar (45,000 multifamily homes and 9,000 condos). These make up 69% of GWP’sresidential customers.+Significantly expanding rooftop solar will require launching new programs that can openaccess for those who haven’t traditionally been able to opt in.+GWP assumes it can double rooftop solar adoption in half the time it took to reach currentadoption. This would be ~52 MW total over 10 years.

How much will customer solar grow in Glendale?
14 Customer solar in Glendale – what’s the current state of play?+2,639 installations as of July 2023+2,520 of these are residential.+119 are commercial.+26.3 MW peak capacity total+15.3 MW comes from residential projects.+11 MW comes from commercial projects.+Glendale’s customer solar adoption(2.6%) is slightly below the stateaverage for publicly owned utilities of4.7%.+Publicly owned utilities have significantlylower solar adoption compared to private,investor-owned utilities (18%). 95%
5%By # of customers
ResidentialCommercial
58%42%
By capacity
15 How much can GWP develop inside Glendale? +Glendale has limited available land for resource development.+For example, local nuclear and geothermal are not options.+Glendale does not have space to develop true utility-scale solar in the city but can still develop smaller-scale solar projects.+GWP plans to develop 4 MW of utility-owned solar by 2025 and 10 MW by 2030 (City Solar program).+Sites that are solar-ready now under Phase 1 of City Solar are: Brand Landfill, Sports Complex, GCC lot 34, Central Library, UOC Parking Lot, and the Perkins building.+Scholl Canyon Landfill is not included for Phase 1 because a decision is pending on time required for the land to settle prior to new development. It has the potential to provide ~5 MW, pending land availability.+Some land being retired (Grayson units 1–8) will already be used for other purposes.+Grayson will host the Wartsila natural gas-powered internal combustion engines and new utility-scale batteries. 16 How is GWP considering the social cost of carbon in this IRP?+The social cost of carbon (SCC) is a dollar value that attempts to quantify the oftenunaccounted environmental and health impacts of greenhouse gas emissions.+GWP will be considering two separate carbon prices in this IRP:+California Air Resources Board carbon price – will automatically apply to all scenarios.+Social cost of carbon “sensitivity” analysis – will be run as additional analysis on all scenarios.+Including an SCC analysis will help us understand how a portfolio of resources wouldbehave if a higher price on carbon were placed on the resources in that portfolio.+Ex. Natural gas-fired units would run significantly less when considering the SCC because thehigh cost on their emissions would make it uneconomical to do so.+A source for the SCC hasn’t yet been decided.+EPA recently proposed updating its SCC to $190/ton. This value hasn’t been finalized but couldbe a potential source for the IRP. 270 of 839

C. Stakeholder Outreach Community Townhalls
Glendale Water & Power 2024 IRP C-16

Q&A (30 min)
18 Resource summaries considered in scenarios – what’s technically possible? +Utility-owned energystorage (under 8 hours)+Utility-owned long-durationenergy storage (8+ hours)+Customer-sited batteries+Customer-sited solar+Utility-owned solar+Hydrogen combustion+Hydrogen fuel cells+Natural gas+Customer energy efficiency+Customer demandresponse+Existing biogas Local resource options (inside Glendale)
+New biogas+Nuclear (incl. smallmodular reactors)+Utility-scale wind+Geothermal+Carbon capture forGrayson, Magnolia Excluded local resources
+Utility-scale solar+Utility-scale wind+Utility-scale energy storage(under 8 hours)+Utility-scale long-durationenergy storage (8+ hours)+Offshore wind+Hydrogen combustion+Hydrogen fuel cells+Natural gas+Nuclear (incl. smallmodular reactors)+Geothermal+Existing hydropower Remote resource options (outside Glendale)
+Coal+New hydropower
Excluded remote resources
19 GWP’s modeling scenarios – what’s being planned?
+Will follow requirements of California’s SB 100 and SB 1020:+60% renewable by 2030+90% zero carbon by 2035+95% zero carbon by 2040+100% zero carbon by 2045+Will result in all energy brought to Glendale being 100% zero carbon by 2045. +Will meet mandates of SB100 and SB 1020 at thelowest possible cost,without necessarilymeaning all energy broughtinto Glendale is 100% zerocarbon.+Could mean greater useof renewable energycredits (RECs).+Meant as reference toscenario 1 for lowestpossible cost of compliance.

California 2045 mandate Least-cost pathway to 2045+Will meet Glendale’s 100%clean energy by 2035 goal.+Will result in all energybrought into Glendale being100% clean by 2035.

Glendale 2035 goal
20 Community scenarios: How were they developed?+Community input to scenarios:+Strategen conducted 2 polls of the community at townhalls that identified: 1) energy resources ofinterest, and 2) preferred clean energy timelines.+Most community members preferred a 2035 clean energy date, with some interested in a late2030s or early 2040s date.+Distributed energy resources (customer solar, energy efficiency, etc.), utility-scale solar, utility-scale batteries, and long-duration energy storage (8+ hours) were popular at townhalls.+STAG brainstorming:+STAG members were presented the community input received at townhalls.+Strategen conducted polls and surveys to gather STAG’s ideas on scenarios. These indicated thatSTAG members were interested in many of the same things the larger community was.+The group discussed scenario options until arriving at two scenario ideas that met mostmembers’ needs. 21 Community scenarios: What’s being proposed?
+100% clean energy by 2035.+Assumes achievement of City Council cleanenergy goals:+10% of customers adopting solar by 2027+100 MW of distributed energy resources+Reach code requiring new building electrification,solar installations, and EV charging+Assumes accelerated electrification comparedto GWP scenarios.+Assumes maximum development of utility-owned solar and storage in Glendale.

Local resources + accelerated electrification+Will achieve 90% clean energy by 2035,100% by 2042.+Takes moderate assumptions on customer Scenario 2
22 Community scenarios: What’s being proposed?
+100% clean energy by 2035.+Assumes achievement of City Council cleanenergy goals:+10% of customers adopting solar by 2027+100 MW of distributed energy resources+Reach code requiring new building electrification,solar installations, and EV charging+Assumes accelerated electrification comparedto GWP scenarios.+Assumes maximum development of utility-owned solar and storage in Glendale.

Local resources + accelerated electrification+90% clean energy by 2035, 100% by 2042.+Takes moderate assumptions on customer-sited resource adoption and utility-ownedsolar and storage in Glendale (betweenGWP’s scenarios and STAG scenario 1).+Takes ambitious assumptions on long-duration energy storage.+Assumes accelerated cost declines andcommercial availability+Will model an LDES project in Glendale toexamine impact on cost and reliability Middle path + long-duration energy storage
23 Summary of scenariosScenario100% clean energy dateMeets CA mandateMeets Glendale goalBaseline assumption changesCA mandate2045X --Glendale 2035 goal2035XX--CA mandate – least cost2045X •Not all power supplied to Glendale has to be 100%clean.Local resources + accelerated electrification2035XX•Integrates all City Council clean energy goals.•Assumes maximum customer DER participation.•Assumes maximum utility-owned solar + storage inGlendale.•Assumes accelerated electrification.Middle path + long duration energy storage2042X •Assumes higher customer DER participation thanbaseline (lower than above).•Assumes higher utility-owned solar + storage inGlendale than baseline (lower than above).•Assumes LDES cost declines and earlier availability,with project in Glendale. 24 Next steps on community scenarios+We’ll gather your questions and feedback at today’s townhall and present it to STAG fordiscussion.+STAG may tweak the community scenarios to reflect community input depending on whatwe hear today.+Final scenarios will be agreed upon by STAG in the next two weeks and sent to the Ascendmodeling team. 271 of 839

Glendale City CouncilDecember 12, 2023

Glendale City Council
December 12, 2023