The comparables method is just a simple relative valuation based on similar companies - think of it as an educated guess so you know roughly how much the firm should be worth. This is the implied value.

There is no way to know the exact, true intrinsic value, which is why you need to argue why Buffett may want to buy Pacificorp for $9.5bil despite the implied value being ~$9bil.

So the question remains where else might Buffett see value?
For a person in his position:
1) He could make Pacificorp more profitable but placing better managers in there,
2) He could lobby congress to make laws favourable for his acquisition of utility firms,
3) He could just want any large investment to spend his 40$bil cash reserves instead of earning low returns on cash.
4) there may be synergistic benefits between Mid American & Pacificorp.

There are just some basic examples, you need to apply what you've learnt from reading Buffett's investment philosophy and infer where else might he see potential in the acquisition of Pacificorp.

Section 1: with the valuation, you don't need to do your own valuation, however you do need to start with a rough estimate of Pacificorps value by either: looking at the comparables or quickly reading what the tax office valuation says the value should be. Then you need to discuss why Buffett might think Pacificorp is a good buy with respect to his value investing methods.
In other words, use the Pacificorp case an an example to contrast Buffet's value investment method with traditional CAPM/Markowitz Portfolio theory, and how Buffett, givne his position is able to add value to the companies he buys.