Common use of ROBUSTNESS OF THE SOLICITATION Clause in Contracts

ROBUSTNESS OF THE SOLICITATION. Here are some considerations used to evaluate whether PG&E performed successfully in conducting a robust solicitation: 5 Application 00-00-000, “Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company To Implement Its Photovoltaic Program”, February 24, 2009 • Was the response large enough for PG&E to reasonably expect to achieve its goal of procuring 1 – 2% of retail load, given likely attrition of proposals between selection and commercial operation, without having to accept a majority of proposals? • Was the response to the solicitation diverse with respect to technologies? • Was the distribution of responses broadly represented by projects that were assessed as moderately or highly viable, or was there an excess of less viable projects? The proposals PG&E received totaled a rather large volume of projected generation and capacity, far in excess of the expected growth in the utility’s retail energy needs in the next several years. The offered volume totaled a substantial fraction of PG&E’s expected retail load, and should provide plenty of opportunity for PG&E to negotiate, contract for, and procure the stated objective for the RFO of 1 to 2% of retail load, taking into account that some of the shortlisted Participants chose exclusive negotiation with other utilities for their projects instead of PG&E, some projects are likely to fall out of negotiation, and some projects that arrive at executed contracts may yet fail to be completed and enter commercial operation. Total GWh/year volume elicited exceeded the stated objective by a factor of dozens. This large ratio of offered volume to targeted procurement volume reflects a remarkably healthy and robust response, suggesting a strong likelihood that the targeted volume can be achieved at some point in time. While the total size of the response to the RFO, measured in number of proposals, MW capacity offered, or GWh/year volume offered, was quite large, the diversity of renewable technologies appears to have diminished somewhat from the 2008 response. Certain technologies were underrepresented when compared to the outreach contact list or to the attendance at the bidders’ conference. Without directly obtaining feedback from developers who did not submit proposals (such as those who submitted Notices of Intent to participate but chose not to) it is hard to know what factors are limiting the response from other technologies. Xxxxxx speculates that current economic conditions may have worsened the economics of some of these generation methods, or that renewable fuel availability and pricing may have become more adverse. Executive Order S-06-06 states a goal for California to obtain 20% of its renewable electric generation from biomass. In PG&E’s case, the share of renewable power currently procured from biomass generation is already above that. However, as PG&E continues to succeed in negotiating large procurement contracts for renewable power using other technologies, a need may eventually emerge to increase the share of new procurement represented by biomass. Individuals associated with biomass and biogas generation made up about 8% of the utility’s RFO contact list, and biomass and biogas power made up roughly 4% of the attendance of the bidders’ conference, suggesting that PG&E has made efforts to solicit interest from this community, and engaged the attention of members of the biomass and biogas developer population. However, biomass and biogas proposals made up a smaller proportion of total volume offered. PG&E may have a continuing opportunity to increase the focus of its outreach to biomass developers in its future RPS solicitations.

ROBUSTNESS OF THE SOLICITATION. Here are some considerations used to evaluate whether PG&E performed successfully in conducting a robust solicitation: 5 6 Application 00-00-000, “Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company To Implement Its Photovoltaic Program”, February 24, 2009 • Was the response large enough for PG&E to reasonably expect to achieve its goal of procuring 1 – 2% of retail load, given likely attrition of proposals between selection and commercial operation, without having to accept a majority of proposals? • Was the response to the solicitation diverse with respect to technologies? • Was the distribution of responses broadly represented by projects that were assessed as moderately or highly viable, or was there an excess of less viable projects? The proposals PG&E received totaled a rather large volume of projected generation and capacity, far in excess of the expected growth in the utility’s retail energy needs in the next several years. The offered volume totaled a substantial fraction of PG&E’s expected retail load, and should provide plenty of opportunity for PG&E to negotiate, contract for, and procure the stated objective for the RFO of 1 to 2% of retail load, taking into account that some of the shortlisted Participants chose exclusive negotiation with other utilities for their projects instead of PG&E, some projects are likely to fall out of negotiation, and some projects that arrive at executed contracts may yet fail to be completed and enter commercial operation. Total GWh/year volume elicited exceeded the stated objective by a factor of dozens. This large ratio of offered volume to targeted procurement volume reflects a remarkably healthy and robust response, suggesting a strong likelihood that the targeted volume can be achieved at some point in time. While the total size of the response to the RFO, measured in number of proposals, MW capacity offered, or GWh/year volume offered, was quite large, the diversity of renewable technologies appears to have diminished somewhat from the 2008 response. Certain technologies were underrepresented when compared to the outreach contact list or to the attendance at the bidders’ conference. Without directly obtaining feedback from developers who did not submit proposals (such as those who submitted Notices of Intent to participate but chose not to) it is hard to know what factors are limiting the response from other technologies. Xxxxxx speculates that current economic conditions may have worsened the economics of some of these generation methods, or that renewable fuel availability and pricing may have become more adverse. Executive Order S-06-06 states a goal for California to obtain 20% of its renewable electric generation from biomass. In PG&E’s case, the share of renewable power currently procured from biomass generation is already above that. However, as PG&E continues to succeed in negotiating large procurement contracts for renewable power using other technologies, a need may eventually emerge to increase the share of new procurement represented by biomass. Individuals associated with biomass and biogas generation made up about 8% of the utility’s RFO contact list, and biomass and biogas power made up roughly 4% of the attendance of the bidders’ conference, suggesting that PG&E has made efforts to solicit interest from this community, and engaged the attention of members of the biomass and biogas developer population. However, biomass and biogas proposals made up a smaller proportion of total volume offered. PG&E may have a continuing opportunity to increase the focus of its outreach to biomass developers in its future RPS solicitations.

ROBUSTNESS OF THE SOLICITATION. Here are some considerations used to evaluate whether PG&E performed successfully in conducting a robust solicitation: 5 Application 00-00-000, “Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company To Implement Its Photovoltaic Program”, February 24, 2009 • Was the response to the solicitation large enough for PG&E to reasonably expect to achieve its goal of procuring 1 – 2% of retail load, given the likely attrition of proposals Offers between selection short list and commercial operation, without having to accept a majority of proposalsOffers? • Was the response to the solicitation diverse with respect to technologies? • Was the distribution of responses broadly represented by projects that were assessed as moderately or highly viable, or was there an excess of less viable projectsOffers? The proposals Offers PG&E received totaled a rather large an immense volume of projected generation and capacity, far in excess of generation. If all the expected growth in the utility’s retail energy needs in the next several years. The offered volume totaled a substantial fraction of Offers were contracted they would total more than PG&E’s expected entire retail load, and . Such a massive response to the RFO should provide plenty of opportunity for PG&E to negotiate, contract for, and procure the stated objective for the RFO of 1 to 2% of retail load, taking into account that some of the shortlisted Participants chose exclusive negotiation with other utilities for their projects instead of PG&E, some projects are likely to fall out of negotiation, and some projects that arrive at executed contracts may yet fail to be completed and enter commercial operation. Total GWh/year volume elicited in Offers exceeded the stated objective 2009 RFO’s response by a factor of dozensmore than 80%. This large ratio of offered volume to targeted procurement volume reflects a remarkably healthy and robust response. More than 300 in-state projects were proposed for contracts, suggesting often with several variants (e.g. varying on-line dates, pricing packages, delivery terms, etc.). The Offers submitted to the 2011 RPS RFO provided more technology diversity than those submitted to the 2009 RFO. There was a strong likelihood greater volume of 2011 proposals for projects using technologies or resources that were weakly represented in the last solicitation. While it is difficult to attribute this to specific outreach activities by the utility, Xxxxxx is aware that PG&E staff had actively reached out in order to make potential Participants using these weakly represented technologies aware of the availability of the RPS RFO as a means to obtain long-term PPAs. Given the large number of Offers submitted in 2011 using the well-represented technologies such as solar and wind, Xxxxxx does not believe that the targeted volume can be achieved at some point in time. While the total size outreach activities of the response utility were in any way unfair to the RFO, measured in number of proposals, MW capacity offered, or GWh/year volume offered, was quite large, the diversity of renewable technologies appears to have diminished somewhat from the 2008 response. Certain technologies were underrepresented when compared to the outreach contact list or to the attendance at the bidders’ conference. Without directly obtaining feedback from developers who did not submit proposals (such as those who submitted Notices of Intent to participate but chose not to) it is hard to know what factors are limiting the response from other technologies. Xxxxxx speculates that current economic conditions may have worsened the economics of some of these generation methods, or that renewable fuel availability and pricing may have become more adverse. Executive Order S-06-06 states a goal for California to obtain 20% of its renewable electric generation from biomass. In PG&E’s case, the share of renewable power currently procured from biomass generation is already above that. However, as PG&E continues to succeed in negotiating large procurement contracts for renewable power using other technologies, a need may eventually emerge to increase the share of new procurement represented by biomass. Individuals associated with biomass and biogas generation made up about 8% of the utility’s RFO contact list, and biomass and biogas power made up roughly 4% of the attendance of the bidders’ conference, suggesting that PG&E has made efforts to solicit interest from this community, and engaged the attention of members of the biomass and biogas developer population. However, biomass and biogas proposals made up a smaller proportion of total volume offered. PG&E may have a continuing opportunity to increase the focus of its outreach to biomass developers in its future RPS solicitationscommunities.

ROBUSTNESS OF THE SOLICITATION. Here are some considerations used to evaluate whether PG&E performed successfully in conducting a robust solicitation: 5 Application 00-00-000, “Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company To Implement Its Photovoltaic Program”, February 24, 2009 • Was the response large enough for PG&E to reasonably expect to achieve its goal of procuring 1 – 2% of retail load, given likely attrition of proposals between selection and commercial operation, without having to accept a majority of proposals? • Was Xxxxxx’x opinion is that the response to the solicitation diverse was robust; contracting with respect all Offers would provide almost half of all the energy required to technologies? • Was the distribution of responses broadly represented by projects that were assessed as moderately or highly viable, or was there an excess of less viable projects? serve PG&E’s customers. The proposals PG&E received totaled a rather large volume of projected generation and capacitybundled energy Offers proposed, far in excess of ' represented a decrease by about 60% from the expected growth in the utility2011 RPS RFO’s retail energy needs in the next several yearsresponse. The total capacity offered volume totaled a substantial fraction of PG&E’s expected retail loadfor in-state, and should provide plenty of opportunity for PG&E to negotiatebundled generation was ', contract for, and procure the stated objective for the RFO of 1 to 2which is about 30% of retail load, taking into account that some of the shortlisted Participants chose exclusive negotiation with other utilities for their projects instead of PG&E, some projects are likely to fall out of negotiation, and some projects that arrive at executed contracts may yet fail to be completed and enter commercial operation. Total GWh/year volume elicited exceeded the stated objective by a factor of dozens. This large ratio of offered volume to targeted procurement volume reflects a remarkably healthy and robust response, suggesting a strong likelihood that the targeted volume can be achieved at some point in time. While the total size of the response in PG&E’s 2011 RPS RFO. One would expect PG&E to be easily able to meet its volume goal for the RFO, measured in number of proposals, MW capacity offered, or GWh/year volume offered, was quite large, the diversity of renewable technologies appears to have diminished somewhat solicitation from the 2008 such a robust response. Certain technologies were underrepresented when compared to the outreach contact list or to the attendance at the bidders’ conference. Without directly obtaining feedback from developers who did not submit proposals (such as those who submitted Notices of Intent to participate but chose not to) it is hard to know what factors are limiting the response from other technologies. Xxxxxx speculates that current economic conditions may the lower volume of Offers this year vs. last year stems partly from the requirement for new projects to have worsened an active interconnection application that has obtained a Phase I interconnection study. In the economics 2011 RPS RFO, half of all Offers were for the output of proposed projects that had not yet applied for an interconnection or obtained a completed Phase I study. Such projects would have been ineligible to participate if the 2012 requirement had been in place. Also, some developers might have chosen not to offer projects that they would rather bring on line before PG&E’s preferred 2019 and 2020 dates. Imperial Valley Offers. The CPUC has stated a public interest in obtaining a robust response to the IOUs’ RPS solicitations from developers in the Imperial Valley. In the 2009 RPS solicitations it required IOUs to hold special Imperial Valley bidders’ conferences. PG&E received Offers for output of Imperial Valley facilities, of all proposals for bundled energy delivery. In the 2012 solicitation the total capacity of Offers for Imperial Valley projects, ', totaled about of all capacity offered. The total annual volume of Imperial Valley projects, . This representation of Imperial Valley projects seems to be quite robust'' Adequacy of feedback from Participants. PG&E offered an opportunity for Participants whose Offers were rejected to discuss the outcome. Xxxxxx observed of these generation methods, or that renewable fuel availability and pricing may have become more adverse. Executive Order S-06-06 states a goal for California to obtain 20% of its renewable electric generation from biomass. In PG&E’s case, the share of renewable power currently procured from biomass generation sessions ' Xxxxxx’ opinion is already above that. However, as PG&E continues to succeed in negotiating large procurement contracts for renewable power using other technologies, a need may eventually emerge to increase the share of new procurement represented by biomass. Individuals associated with biomass and biogas generation made up about 8% of the utility’s RFO contact list, and biomass and biogas power made up roughly 4% of the attendance of the bidders’ conference, suggesting that PG&E has made efforts to solicit interest sought adequate feedback from this community, Participants about the bidding and engaged the attention of members of the biomass and biogas developer population. However, biomass and biogas proposals made up a smaller proportion of total volume offered. PG&E may have a continuing opportunity to increase the focus of its outreach to biomass developers in its future RPS solicitationsevaluation process.

ROBUSTNESS OF THE SOLICITATION. Here are some considerations used to evaluate whether PG&E performed successfully in conducting a robust solicitation: 5 Application 00-00-000, “Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company To Implement Its Photovoltaic Program”, February 24, 2009 • Was the response large enough for PG&E to reasonably expect to achieve its goal of procuring 1 – 2% of retail load, given likely attrition of proposals between selection and commercial operation, without having to accept a majority of proposals? • Was Xxxxxx’x opinion is that the response to the solicitation diverse was robust; contracting with respect all Offers would provide almost half of all the energy required to technologies? • Was the distribution of responses broadly represented by projects that were assessed as moderately or highly viable, or was there an excess of less viable projects? serve PG&E’s customers. The proposals PG&E received totaled a rather large volume of projected generation and capacitybundled energy Offers proposed, far in excess of represented a decrease by about 60% from the expected growth in the utility2011 RPS RFO’s retail energy needs in the next several yearsresponse. The total capacity offered volume totaled a substantial fraction of PG&E’s expected retail loadfor in-state, and should provide plenty of opportunity for PG&E to negotiatebundled generation was , contract for, and procure the stated objective for the RFO of 1 to 2which is about 30% of retail load, taking into account that some of the shortlisted Participants chose exclusive negotiation with other utilities for their projects instead of PG&E, some projects are likely to fall out of negotiation, and some projects that arrive at executed contracts may yet fail to be completed and enter commercial operation. Total GWh/year volume elicited exceeded the stated objective by a factor of dozens. This large ratio of offered volume to targeted procurement volume reflects a remarkably healthy and robust response, suggesting a strong likelihood that the targeted volume can be achieved at some point in time. While the total size of the response in PG&E’s 2011 RPS RFO. One would expect PG&E to be easily able to meet its volume goal for the RFO, measured in number of proposals, MW capacity offered, or GWh/year volume offered, was quite large, the diversity of renewable technologies appears to have diminished somewhat solicitation from the 2008 such a robust response. Certain technologies were underrepresented when compared to the outreach contact list or to the attendance at the bidders’ conference. Without directly obtaining feedback from developers who did not submit proposals (such as those who submitted Notices of Intent to participate but chose not to) it is hard to know what factors are limiting the response from other technologies. ' '' Xxxxxx speculates that current economic conditions may the lower volume of Offers this year vs. last year stems partly from the requirement for new projects to have worsened an active interconnection application that has obtained a Phase I interconnection study. In the economics 2011 RPS RFO, half of all Offers were for the output of proposed projects that had not yet applied for an interconnection or obtained a completed Phase I study. Such projects would have been ineligible to participate if the 2012 requirement had been in place. Also, some developers might have chosen not to offer projects that they would rather bring on line before PG&E’s preferred 2019 and 2020 dates. Imperial Valley Offers. The CPUC has stated a public interest in obtaining a robust response to the IOUs’ RPS solicitations from developers in the Imperial Valley. In the 2009 RPS solicitations it required IOUs to hold special Imperial Valley bidders’ conferences. PG&E received Offers for output of Imperial Valley facilities, of all proposals for bundled energy delivery. ' '' In the 2012 solicitation the total capacity of Offers for Imperial Valley projects, ', totaled about of all capacity offered. The total annual volume of Imperial Valley projects, . This representation of Imperial Valley projects seems to be quite robust Adequacy of feedback from Participants. PG&E offered an opportunity for Participants whose Offers were rejected to discuss the outcome. Xxxxxx observed of these generation methods, or that renewable fuel availability and pricing may have become more adverse. Executive Order S-06-06 states a goal for California to obtain 20% of its renewable electric generation from biomass. In PG&E’s case, the share of renewable power currently procured from biomass generation sessions Xxxxxx’ opinion is already above that. However, as PG&E continues to succeed in negotiating large procurement contracts for renewable power using other technologies, a need may eventually emerge to increase the share of new procurement represented by biomass. Individuals associated with biomass and biogas generation made up about 8% of the utility’s RFO contact list, and biomass and biogas power made up roughly 4% of the attendance of the bidders’ conference, suggesting that PG&E has made efforts to solicit interest sought adequate feedback from this community, Participants about the bidding and engaged the attention of members of the biomass and biogas developer population. However, biomass and biogas proposals made up a smaller proportion of total volume offered. PG&E may have a continuing opportunity to increase the focus of its outreach to biomass developers in its future RPS solicitationsevaluation process.

ROBUSTNESS OF THE SOLICITATION. Here are some considerations used to evaluate whether PG&E performed successfully in conducting a robust solicitation: 5 Application 00-00-000, “Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company To Implement Its Photovoltaic Program”, February 24, 2009 • Was the response large enough for PG&E to reasonably expect to achieve its goal of procuring 1 – 2% of retail load, given likely attrition of proposals between selection and commercial operation, without having to accept a majority of proposals? • Was Xxxxxx’x opinion is that the response to the solicitation diverse was robust; contracting with respect all Offers would provide almost half of all the energy required to technologies? • Was the distribution of responses broadly represented by projects that were assessed as moderately or highly viable, or was there an excess of less viable projects? serve PG&E’s customers. The proposals PG&E received totaled a rather large volume of projected generation and capacitybundled energy Offers proposed, far in excess of represented a decrease by about 60% from the expected growth in the utility2011 RPS RFO’s retail energy needs in the next several yearsresponse. The total capacity offered volume totaled a substantial fraction of PG&E’s expected retail loadfor in-state, and should provide plenty of opportunity for PG&E to negotiatebundled generation was , contract for, and procure the stated objective for the RFO of 1 to 2which is about 30% of retail load, taking into account that some of the shortlisted Participants chose exclusive negotiation with other utilities for their projects instead of PG&E, some projects are likely to fall out of negotiation, and some projects that arrive at executed contracts may yet fail to be completed and enter commercial operation. Total GWh/year volume elicited exceeded the stated objective by a factor of dozens. This large ratio of offered volume to targeted procurement volume reflects a remarkably healthy and robust response, suggesting a strong likelihood that the targeted volume can be achieved at some point in time. While the total size of the response in PG&E’s 2011 RPS RFO. One would expect PG&E to be easily able to meet its volume goal for the RFO, measured in number of proposals, MW capacity offered, or GWh/year volume offered, was quite large, the diversity of renewable technologies appears to have diminished somewhat solicitation from the 2008 such a robust response. Certain technologies were underrepresented when compared to the outreach contact list or to the attendance at the bidders’ conference. Without directly obtaining feedback from developers who did not submit proposals (such as those who submitted Notices of Intent to participate but chose not to) it is hard to know what factors are limiting the response from other technologies. ' ' '' Xxxxxx speculates that current economic conditions may the lower volume of Offers this year vs. last year stems partly from the requirement for new projects to have worsened an active interconnection application that has obtained a Phase I interconnection study. In the economics 2011 RPS RFO, half of all Offers were for the output of proposed projects that had not yet applied for an interconnection or obtained a completed Phase I study. Such projects would have been ineligible to participate if the 2012 requirement had been in place. Also, some developers might have chosen not to offer projects that they would rather bring on line before PG&E’s preferred 2019 and 2020 dates. Imperial Valley Offers. The CPUC has stated a public interest in obtaining a robust response to the IOUs’ RPS solicitations from developers in the Imperial Valley. In the 2009 RPS solicitations it required IOUs to hold special Imperial Valley bidders’ conferences. PG&E received Offers for output of Imperial Valley facilities, of all proposals for bundled energy delivery. In the 2012 solicitation the total capacity of Offers for Imperial Valley projects, ', totaled about Imperial Valley projects, of all capacity offered. The total annual volume of . This representation of Imperial Valley projects seems to be quite robust' Adequacy of feedback from Participants. PG&E offered an opportunity for Participants whose Offers were rejected to discuss the outcome. Xxxxxx observed of these generation methods, or that renewable fuel availability and pricing may have become more adverse. Executive Order S-06-06 states a goal for California to obtain 20% of its renewable electric generation from biomass. In PG&E’s case, the share of renewable power currently procured from biomass generation sessions Xxxxxx’ opinion is already above that. However, as PG&E continues to succeed in negotiating large procurement contracts for renewable power using other technologies, a need may eventually emerge to increase the share of new procurement represented by biomass. Individuals associated with biomass and biogas generation made up about 8% of the utility’s RFO contact list, and biomass and biogas power made up roughly 4% of the attendance of the bidders’ conference, suggesting that PG&E has made efforts to solicit interest sought adequate feedback from this community, Participants about the bidding and engaged the attention of members of the biomass and biogas developer population. However, biomass and biogas proposals made up a smaller proportion of total volume offered. PG&E may have a continuing opportunity to increase the focus of its outreach to biomass developers in its future RPS solicitationsevaluation process.

ROBUSTNESS OF THE SOLICITATION. Here are some considerations used to evaluate whether PG&E performed successfully in conducting a robust solicitation: 5 Application 00-00-000, “Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company To Implement Its Photovoltaic Program”, February 24, 2009 • Was the response to the solicitation large enough for PG&E to reasonably expect to achieve its goal of procuring 1 – 2% of retail load, given the likely attrition of proposals Offers between selection short list and commercial operation, without having to accept a majority of proposalsOffers? • Was the response to the solicitation diverse with respect to technologies? • Was the distribution of responses broadly represented by projects that were assessed as moderately or highly viable, or was there an excess of less viable projectsOffers? The proposals Offers PG&E received totaled a rather large volume of projected generation and capacity, far in excess of the expected growth in the utility’s retail energy needs in the next several years. The offered volume totaled a substantial fraction of PG&E’s expected retail 6 Application 00-00-000, “Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company To Implement Its Photovoltaic Program”, February 24, 2009 load, and should provide plenty of opportunity for PG&E to negotiate, contract for, and procure the stated objective for the RFO of 1 to 2% of retail load, taking into account that some of the shortlisted Participants chose exclusive negotiation with other utilities for their projects Offers instead of PG&E, some projects are likely to fall out of negotiation, and some projects that arrive at executed contracts may yet fail to be completed and enter commercial operation. Total GWh/year volume elicited in Offers exceeded the stated objective by a factor of dozens. This large ratio of offered volume to targeted procurement volume reflects a remarkably healthy and robust response, suggesting a strong likelihood that the targeted volume can be achieved at some point in time. While the total size of the response to the RFO, measured in number of proposalsOffers, MW capacity offered, or GWh/year volume offered, was quite large, the diversity of renewable technologies appears to have diminished somewhat from the 2008 response. Certain technologies were underrepresented among Offers when compared to the outreach contact list or to the attendance at the bidders’ conference. Without directly obtaining feedback from developers who did not submit proposals Offers (such as those developers who submitted Notices of Intent to participate but chose not toto offer) it is hard to know what factors are may be limiting the response to the RFO from these other technologies. Xxxxxx speculates that current economic conditions may have worsened the economics of some of these generation methods, or that renewable fuel availability and pricing may have become more adverse. Executive Order S-06-06 states a goal for California to obtain 20% of its renewable electric generation from biomass. In PG&E’s case, the share of renewable power currently procured from biomass generation is already above that. However, as PG&E continues to succeed in negotiating large procurement contracts for renewable power using other technologies, a need may eventually emerge to increase the share of new procurement represented by biomass. Individuals associated with biomass and biogas generation made up about 8% of the utility’s RFO contact list, and biomass and biogas power made up roughly 4% of the attendance of the bidders’ conference, suggesting that PG&E has made efforts to solicit interest from this community, and engaged the attention of members of the biomass and biogas developer population. However, biomass and biogas proposals Offers made up a smaller proportion of the total volume offered. PG&E may have a continuing opportunity to increase the focus extent to which it focuses a portion of its outreach to biomass power developers in its future RPS solicitations.