DOCSLIB.ORG

Current Resource Portfolio

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Current Resource Portfolio Appendix F Current Resource Portfolio City Light uses a combination of conservation Conservation programs encourage customers to Energy Saved by and power resources to meet its customers’ use power more efficiently and allow the utility energy needs. The utility’s current resource to defer the acquisition and expense of new Conservation Programs portfolio includes conservation, owned resources. Conservation is low cost and has low From 1977 through 2009, City Light’s generation resources and long-term contract environmental impacts, including no greenhouse conservation programs saved over 15 million resources, supplemented with power exchange gas emissions. It is integral to developing City megawatt-hours by increasing the efficiency agreements and near-term purchases and Light’s Integrated Resource Plan, to maintaining of electricity use in Seattle homes, businesses sales made in the wholesale power market. City its status as a greenhouse gas neutral utility, and industries. Ten years ago, the average City Light owns transmission facilities and depends to supporting the City’s climate change policy Light residential customer used 10,739 kilowatt- primarily on Bonneville Power Administration goals, and to meeting the requirements of I-937. hours of electricity per year, 500 kilowatt-hours (BPA) for electric transmission outside its service It has also been good policy in a transforming more than the national average. Today, the area. energy market because it reduces price risk and average City Light residential customer uses availability risk. approximately 8,975 kilowatt-hours, about 1,000 The following sections discuss existing kilowatt-hours fewer than the national average. conservation, generation, and market resources Conservation programs are designed for all City Light uses to meet its customers’ need for customer classes and address specific energy City Light’s new conservation measures saved energy services. end-uses such as efficient lighting, water about 14.2 average megawatts of power in 2009, heaters, laundry appliances, HVAC (heating, including credit for avoided transmission and ventilation and air conditioning), and motors and distribution losses. These savings prevented manufacturing equipment. They also encourage 74,600 tons of carbon dioxide emissions from Conservation weatherization and high-efficiency construction entering the atmosphere, which is roughly methods. Monetary incentives to utility equivalent to removing 16,600 automobiles from City Light meets the power needs for its customers include rebates, loans, or outright Seattle streets for a year. service area with a high degree of reliability. purchase of savings for installed energy efficient Conservation was introduced into the resource City Light’s conservation programs have been measures. mix over 30 years ago and has remained the guided by its Five Year Conservation Action resource of first choice for the utility to meet load Using information from City Light’s most recent Plan, developed in 2008 with guidance from the growth. The conservation partnership between Conservation Potential Assessment, conducted 2008 IRP and covering the period from 2008- the utility and its customers has successfully in 2006, the 2010 IRP assumes there are 2012. deferred acquisition of expensive new resources, approximately 135 aMW of cost-effective energy especially those that negatively affect the savings potential available over the 20 years of environment. the planning horizon. Seattle City Light 2010 Integrated Resource Plan Appendix F 1 Generation Resources Over 90 percent of City Light’s power is Figure 1. City Light’s Generation Resources generated by hydropower, including its own low-cost hydroelectric facilities in Washington High Ross Agreement CANADA state. As a municipal utility, City Light enjoys Ross Boundary Diablo preferential status in contracting for the purchase Gorge of additional low-cost power that the Bonneville Burlington Biomass Newhalem Power Administration (BPA) markets. The utility has contracts with several other owners of hydroelectric projects in the region. In 2002, GCPHA South Fork Tolt GCPHA City Light signed a 20-year contract with the Cedar Falls Seattle GCPHA Stateline Wind Project; in 2007, City Light began purchasing power from a biomass plant WASHINGTON owned by Sierra Pacific Industries in Burlington. Priest Rapids More recently, City Light contracted with Waste GCPHA Management Renewable Energy for output from Stateline Wind the Columbia Ridge Landfill Gas Project, on-line Columbia Ridge in 2009, and with King County for output from Landfill Gas a planned cogeneration plant at the West Point Energy Resources Treatment Plant in Discovery Park, online in Owned Hydro OREGON IDAHO 2013. Long-Term Hydro Contracts (in addition to the BPA contract; GCPHA is the Grand Coulee The West Point Treatment plant is within City Project Hydroelectric Authority) Light’s service area. Its other resources and their Agreement with British Columbia locations are shown on the map in Figure 1. See Other Long-Term Contracts Lucky Peak Figure 2, following the descriptions of City Light resources, for the amounts generated by City Light resources over the period 1999-2009. Seattle City Light 2010 Integrated Resource Plan Appendix F 2 City Light Resources Contracted Resources base system generation and the other, a market rate for power from other resources. Decisions Boundary Dam is City Light’s largest Bonneville Power Administration City Light’s affecting the marketing of BPA power can resource with a peaking capability of 1,055 largest power purchase contract is with BPA. significantly affect City Light’s resource portfolio MW and average generation of about 490 The contract allows the utility to receive power cost, risk and reliability. aMW annually. Under the Federal Energy from 29 hydroelectric projects and several Regulatory Commission (FERC) license, part thermal and renewable projects in the Pacific High Ross Agreement In an 80-year of Boundary output must be sold to Pend Northwest. Energy is delivered over BPA’s agreement with the Canadian Province of Oreille County Public Utility District No. 1 to transmission grid. British Columbia, City Light abandoned plans to meet the PUD’s load growth. In addition, about raise the height of Ross Dam in exchange for Under the contract, power is delivered in two five aMW of energy must be delivered to the power purchases from British Columbia Hydro forms: a shaped Block and a Slice. Through the PUD in compensation for Boundary Project’s (Powerex). Power delivery and price is similar Block product, power is delivered in monthly encroachment on its Box Canyon Dam. Energy to the generation and costs City Light would amounts shaped to City Light’s monthly net from Boundary is delivered to consumers over have experienced had construction taken place. requirement, defined as the difference between BPA’s transmission grid. Through 2020, the power City Light receives City Light’s projected monthly load and the from the contract has a relatively high cost. In Skagit Project includes the Ross, Diablo and resources available to serve that load under 2020, the cost reduces to a few dollars per MWh Gorge projects, which have a combined one- critical water conditions. Under the Slice product, because the cost portion, equivalent to debt hour peak capability of 690 MW. City Light’s City Light receives a fixed percentage of the service that would have been issued to build the transmission lines carry the power generated actual output of the federal system and pays High Ross Dam, will terminate. BPA delivers the from the Skagit Project to Seattle the same percentage of the actual costs of the power over their transmission lines. system. Power available under the Slice product Newhalem is located on Newhalem Creek, a varies with water conditions, federal generating Because of its location near Boise, tributary of the Skagit River. City Light-owned Lucky Peak capabilities, and requirements for fish and Idaho, Lucky Peak can sell power to all major transmission lines deliver its two megawatts of wildlife protection and restoration. western trading hubs (Mid-C, COB, PV, Mead, power. and Four Corners) without encountering normal In December 2008, City Light signed a contract South Fork of the Tolt has a one-hour peaking transmission constraints. City Light has the with BPA to continue City Light’s access to capability of less than 17 MW. Project costs are option to sell to the highest price market. City the power resources the BPA markets through offset by BPA billing credits. Power from this Light has contract rights to Lucky Peak output September 2028. BPA is involved in structuring project is delivered over a line owned by Puget (approximately 34 aMW annually) until 2034. contracts that will fairly apportion its least Sound Energy. expensive base system generation among its Priest Rapids Project The Priest Rapids Cedar Falls dam has capacity of 30 MW. Power customers. All other BPA power will be available Project consists of two dams: the Priest Rapids is transmitted by Puget Sound Energy. as variously designed products. Power will be Dam and Wanapum Dam. City Light purchases sold primarily at two rate levels – one for the power from this project under two agreements Seattle City Light 2010 Integrated Resource Plan Appendix F 3 with Grant PUD, who owns and operates the Stateline Wind Project City Light has an Columbia Ridge Landfill Gas Project City project. The term of the agreements is to the agreement with J.P.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Game Changer: Centurylink Field Case Study
    CASE STUDY CENTURYLINK FIELD, HOME OF THE SEATTLE SEAHAWKS AND SOUNDERS FC VENUE STATS Location: Seattle, Washington Opened: July 29, 2002 Seating Capacity: 67,000 Owner: Washington State Public Stadium Authority Operator: First & Goal Inc. (FGI) Venue Uses: NFL games; MLS games; NCAA football and international soccer games; Supercross and a variety of community events Construction Cost: $430 million ($566 in 2012 dollars) CENTURYLINK Field’S GREENING STORY: and Event Center. The Kingdome was demolished in 2000 to MOTIVATIONS, CHALLENGES AND LESSONS make way for the new stadium; 97 percent of the concrete was recycled locally, with 35 percent of it reused in the new FROM THE FIELD facility. Thanks to the widespread public and professional interest in “During 2005–2006 many venues and professional teams sustainability in the Northwest, environmental stewardship began the discussion on recycling and composting,” notes was built into CenturyLink Field even before the first U.S. Benge. In 2005 the Seahawks also partnered with Seattle City sports greening programs were established. Back in 2000, Light and Western Washington University to recognize local 35 percent of the concrete from the Kingdome was recycled commitments to renewable energy with a Power Players onsite to construct Seahawks Stadium (which has since been award. “It was an opportunity to highlight and learn from renamed “CenturyLink Field”). different smart energy programs,” Benge says. To this day, CenturyLink Field, the Seattle Seahawks In 2006 FGI launched CenturyLink Field’s recycling and Seattle Sounders FC are leaders in professional sports program with the installation of 75 new recycling bins greening, as founding members of the Green Sports Alliance, around the venue, fan and staff recycling education, and a and business leaders in sustainability, with an onsite new dedicated Recycling Sorting Area created to track and solar array, an aggressive recycling program and a strong separate 17 different recyclable materials.
    [Show full text]
  • Flooding the Border: Development, Politics, and Environmental Controversy in the Canadian-U.S
    FLOODING THE BORDER: DEVELOPMENT, POLITICS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROVERSY IN THE CANADIAN-U.S. SKAGIT VALLEY by Philip Van Huizen A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in The Faculty of Graduate Studies (History) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) June 2013 © Philip Van Huizen, 2013 Abstract This dissertation is a case study of the 1926 to 1984 High Ross Dam Controversy, one of the longest cross-border disputes between Canada and the United States. The controversy can be divided into two parts. The first, which lasted until the early 1960s, revolved around Seattle’s attempts to build the High Ross Dam and flood nearly twenty kilometres into British Columbia’s Skagit River Valley. British Columbia favoured Seattle’s plan but competing priorities repeatedly delayed the province’s agreement. The city was forced to build a lower, 540-foot version of the Ross Dam instead, to the immense frustration of Seattle officials. British Columbia eventually agreed to let Seattle raise the Ross Dam by 122.5 feet in 1967. Following the agreement, however, activists from Vancouver and Seattle, joined later by the Upper Skagit, Sauk-Suiattle, and Swinomish Tribal Communities in Washington, organized a massive environmental protest against the plan, causing a second phase of controversy that lasted into the 1980s. Canadian and U.S. diplomats and politicians finally resolved the dispute with the 1984 Skagit River Treaty. British Columbia agreed to sell Seattle power produced in other areas of the province, which, ironically, required raising a different dam on the Pend d’Oreille River in exchange for not raising the Ross Dam.
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle City Light
    CITY OF SEATTLE Seattle City Light IMPROVEMENT OF: 2015 POLE REPLACEMENT SPEC. No. 3593 FUNDED BY: SCL PW#: 2015-063 ORDINANCE #: 124648 VOLUME 1 OF 3 ADVERTISE: AUGUST 31, 2015 BIDS OPEN: SEPTEMBER 23, 2015 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON This page intentionally left blank City of Seattle 2015 POLE REPLACEMENT Bid Opening: September 23, 2015, 2:00 P.M. Ordinance 124648 PW# 2015-063 PROJECT LOCATION: This Project is located in portions of the City of Seattle, WA and the City of Burien, WA. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project consists of the following elements of Work: Remove and replace 363 Wooden Local Electrical Distribution Poles, relocate the existing overhead conductor or replace with new conductor, and relocate or replace all applicable electrical equipment to the new poles. The Owner may elect to add additional poles from SCL’s Pole Replacement Program list. Any additional work would be similar in nature and scope to the pole replacement work described in these Contract Documents. All additional work shall be in accordance with Section 1-04.4. ESTIMATE: The Engineer's Estimate for this Project is $2,600,000. PRE-BID MEETING: Bidders must attend one of the following mandatory pre-bid meetings, which will be held on the following dates: 1. September 10, 2015, at 10 A.M. at: Room 1940/46, Seattle Municipal Tower 700 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 2. September 11, 2015 at 10 A.M. at: Room 1940/46, Seattle Municipal Tower 700 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 No bid will be accepted from any bidder who does not attend at least one of the mandatory pre-bid meetings.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 -2024 City Light Strategic Plan
    Letter from the General Manager Visitors flying into the Seattle-Tacoma International completion of our streetlight conversions to energy- Airport see a skyline dotted with cranes and new efficient LEDs. And this year, we’ll energize a new skyscrapers, lofty signals of the boom underway substation—our first in thirty years—which will power in the Seattle metropolitan area. New office space the businesses and residences in Seattle’s bustling is being leased before construction is completed, urban core. and the proliferation of new dwellings can’t keep up with housing demand. The greater Seattle area is These projects are only made possible with the experiencing unprecedented growth, and it is being support and tireless efforts of our workforce. I’m driven largely by technological innovation. committed to fostering a positive workplace culture, one where all employees feel valued and respected Seattle City Light has a long history of providing for their contributions. Without this we cannot energy to technological innovation. In 1905, we deliver the level of service that our customers powered the first electric streetlights to illuminate deserve. the streets of Seattle. As technology evolved, we powered the first electric radios in Seattle, the The Seattle area is growing and evolving, and so first electric refrigerators and the first televisions. is City Light. As you read this Strategic Plan, you’ll The course of human history has seen many learn about our initiatives and our challenges. As technological innovations that made our lives better, part of an ongoing commitment to affordability, cost and for more than a century City Light’s power has control, and fiscal accountability, this Strategic Plan made that technology run in the Seattle area.
    [Show full text]
  • The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement
    Volume 26 Issue 2 U.S. - Canada Transboundary Resource Issues Spring 1986 The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement Jackie Krolopp Kirn Marion E. Marts Recommended Citation Jackie K. Kirn & Marion E. Marts, The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement, 26 Nat. Resources J. 261 (1986). Available at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nrj/vol26/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Natural Resources Journal by an authorized editor of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. JACKIE KROLOPP KIRN* and MARION E. MARTS** The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement SETTING AND BACKGROUND The Skagit River is a short but powerful stream which rises in the mountains of southwestern British Columbia, cuts through the northern Cascades in a spectacular and once-remote mountain gorge, and empties into Puget Sound approximately sixty miles north of Seattle. The beautiful mountain scenery of the heavily glaciated north Cascades was formally recognized in the United States by the creation of the North Cascades National Park and the Ross Lake National Recreation Area in 1968, and earlier in British Columbia by creation of the E.C. Manning Provincial Park. The Ross Lake Recreation Area covers the narrow valley of the upper Skagit River in Washington and portions of several tributary valleys. It was created as a political and, to environmentalists who wanted national park status for the entire area, controversial, compromise which accom- modated the city of Seattle's Skagit River Project and the then-planned North Cascades Highway.
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle City Light Customer Care and Billing Audit
    Seattle City Light Customer Care and Billing Audit April 3, 2020 Jane A. Dunkel David G. Jones, City Auditor Seattle Office of City Auditor Seattle City Light Customer Care and Billing Audit Report Highlights WHY WE DID THIS AUDIT Background We conducted this audit in Seattle City Light (City Light), the City of Seattle’s public electric utility, response to Seattle City serves about 461,500 customers in Seattle and surrounding Councilmember communities. In September 2016, City Light implemented a new billing Mosqueda’s request to system, the Customer Care and Billing System (CCB) and in October review Seattle City Light’s 2016 began installing advanced meters. These two factors resulted in billing and customer many City Light customers receiving unexpected high bills due to services practices. We were delayed and estimated bills. In response to numerous concerns from asked to examine how City City Light customers about alleged over-billing, Seattle City Light: Councilmember Teresa Mosqueda asked our office to review City Light’s billing and customer service practices. Prevents erroneous and/or unexpected high What We Found bills Communicates with We found that City Light’s implementation of a new billing system and customers about advanced meters resulted in customers receiving an increased number of unexpected high bills unexpected high bills due to estimated and delayed bills. City Light has Resolves customer taken steps to reduce unexpected high bills but could further reduce complaints and appeals them by changing two key system parameters. City Light’s dispute Provides payment resolution process can involve multiple hand-offs to resolve customer options, and complaints and lacks controls to ensure customers are informed that their Reimburses customers issue has been resolved.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Scoping Summary Report
    Early Scoping Summary Report April 2018 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Summary Purpose Sound Transit conducted early scoping for the West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions (WSBLE) Project in Seattle, Washington, from February 2 through March 5, 2018. The early scoping started the public planning and environmental processes for the project. This report describes how Sound Transit conducted early scoping and summarizes the comments received from local and regulatory agencies, tribes, and the public during the early scoping period. This information will be considered by Sound Transit as it identifies and studies alternatives for the WSBLE Project. The Early Scoping Process Sound Transit published an early scoping notice in the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) register on February 2, 2018, which initiated early scoping and started the 30-day comment period. Additional public notification was provided with mailed postcards, print and online advertisements, and social media notices. Three public open houses and an agency meeting were held during this comment period, as well as an online open house from February 12 to March 5, 2018. Sound Transit requested comments on the purpose and need, the Representative Project, other potential alternatives, and potential community benefits and impacts. Comments were accepted by mail, email, online comment forms, and on comment boards and maps at the open houses (both in person and online). Agency Early Scoping Thirty-four federal, state, regional, and local agencies received
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Hydroeiectirc Projects Continuation Sheet
    NPS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-O018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service skagit ^VQT & Newhalem Creek National Register of Historic Places Hydroeiectirc Projects Continuation Sheet Section number ___ Page ___ SUPPLEMENTARY LISTING RECORD NRIS Reference Number: 96000416 Date Listed: 4/26/96 Skagit River & Newhalem Creek Hvdroelectirc Projects Whatcom WA Property Name County State Hydroelectric Power Plant MPS Multiple Name This property is listed in the National Register of Historic Places in accordance with the attached nomination documentation subject to the following exceptions, exclusions, or amendments, notwithstanding the National Park Service certification included in the nomination documentation. Signature of tty^Keejifer Date of Action Amended Items in Nomination: Photographs: The SHPO has verified that the 1989 photographs accurately document the current condition and integrity of the nominated resources. Historic Photos #1-26 are provided as photocopy duplications. Resource Count: The resource count is revised to read: Contributing Noncontributing 21 6 buildings 2 - sites 5 6 structures 1 - objects 29 12 total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register 16 . A revised inventory list is appended to clarify the resource count and contributing status of properties in the district, particularly at the powerplant/dam sites. (See attached) This information was confirmed with Lauren McCroskey of the WA SHPO. DISTRIBUTION: National Register property file Nominating Authority (without nomination attachment) NFS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Skagit River & Newhalem Creek National Register of Historic Places Hydroelectirc Projects Continuation Sheet Section number The following is a list of the contributing and noncontributing resources within the district, beginning at its westernmost—downstream—end, organized according to geographic location.
    [Show full text]
  • The Damnation of a Dam : the High Ross Dam Controversy
    THE DAMYIATION OF A DAM: TIIE HIGH ROSS DAM CONTROVERSY TERRY ALLAN SIblMONS A. B., University of California, Santa Cruz, 1968 A THESIS SUBIUTTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of Geography SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY May 1974 All rights reserved. This thesis may not b? reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. APPROVAL Name: Terry Allan Simmons Degree: Master of Arts Title of Thesis: The Damnation of a Dam: The High Ross Dam Controversy Examining Committee: Chairman: F. F. Cunningham 4 E.. Gibson Seni Supervisor / /( L. J. Evendon / I. K. Fox ernal Examiner Professor School of Community and Regional Planning University of British Columbia PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE I hereby grant to Simon Fraser University rhe righc to lcnd my thesis or dissertation (the title of which is shown below) to users of the Simon Fraser University Library, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or other educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users. I further agree that permission for multiple copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by me or the Dean of Graduate Studies. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed ' without my written permission. Title of' ~hesis /mqqmkm: The Damnation nf a nam. ~m -Author: / " (signature ) Terrv A. S.imrnonze (name ) July 22, 1974 (date) ABSTRACT In 1967, after nearly fifty years of preparation, inter- national negotiations concerning the construction of the High Ross Dan1 on the Skagit River were concluded between the Province of British Columbia and the City of Seattle.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wild Cascades
    THE WILD CASCADES December 1969-January 1970 2 THE WILD CASCADES JXTOR/rH CASCADE3S TJTSTDIEiR. AT1 T_As.C> Je^ BATTLE LINES DRAWN by The Kerosene Kid duty it should have been to protect the park. Each such campaign has been accompanied by barrages of propaganda that the resources of the park were essential to the continued growth of the surrounding area or that new roads were needed along the wilderness beach or across the park's wilderness core "to open it up for the peepul. " Each time the friends of Olympic have rallied, mounted counter-attacks and saved the park. We have no reason to believe the history of the North Cascades over the next third of a century will be any different. But, to para­ phrase Mr. Churchill, the North Cascades Conservation Council (N3C) was not organized to preside over the dissolution of the North Cascades. We expect attacks and we confi­ dently expect to win. To prevent Seattle City Light from imple­ menting its destructive proposals in the Ross Lake National Recreation Area will require as If any conservationist felt he was honor­ tough a fight as conservationists ever have ably discharged from the wars upon passage waged. The nature of the adversary contrib­ of the 1968 North Cascades Act, he lacked utes to the difficulty of the battle. Seattle City knowledge of the history of the American Light is no ordinary despoiler of wilderness. National Park system. He may have said to In fact, it's hard to say just what Seattle City himself, "Whew! I'm glad that's over.
    [Show full text]
  • THE WILD CASCADES October - November 1970 2 the WILD CASCADES
    'Ha, Ha, Ha . And Not a Cloud in Sight' THE WILD CASCADES October - November 1970 2 THE WILD CASCADES SEATTLE PASSES THE ROSS DAM BUCK! Conservationists have tried for over a year to open the Seattle City Council's eyes to the fact that Seattle City Light has presented a very biased, one-sided story on the raising of Ross Dam. We have had to lobby the City Council and the Mayor from without the walls of City Hall while John Nelson has done his lobbying from within. A year ago the Seattle City Council voted 5 to 4 against the environment by authorizing City Light to proceed with its Ross High Dam plans. Today, one year and one Council election later, the vote was 6 to 2, still against the environment and now making it mandatory that City Light apply to the Federal Power Commission for permission to raise Ross Dam. It might have been 6 to 3 if Sam Smith had been present. (1) On December 19, 1970 Seattle City Light filed its Ross High Dam application with the F. P. C. (2) Immediately the North Cascades Conservation Council also filed with the F. P. C. , but in opposition to City Light's application. (3) The Federal Power Commission will hold hearings on High Ross in 1971 and 1972, possibly in Seattle (we shall let you know). (4) Washington State Department of Ecology will hold public hearings on raising Ross Dam (see page 36). (5) The Canadian Federal Government will conduct judicial hearings on the flooding of the upper Skagit by High Ross (see page 36).
    [Show full text]
  • Water Power License Fees
    Chelan River Hydroelectric Facility on Chelan River Report to the Legislature on Water Power License Fees Expenditures, Recommendations, Accountability, and Recognition June, 2020 Publication no. 20-10-027 Publication and Contact Information This report is available on the Department of Ecology’s website at https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/2010027.html For more information contact: Water Quality Program P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Phone: 360-407-6600 Washington State Department of Ecology www.ecy.wa.gov Headquarters, Olympia 360-407-6000 Northwest Regional Office, Bellevue 425-649-7000 Southwest Regional Office, Olympia 360-407-6300 Central Regional Office, Union Gap 509-575-2490 Eastern Regional Office, Spokane 509-329-3400 ADA Accessibility The Department of Ecology is committed to providing people with disabilities access to information and services by meeting or exceeding the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Washington State Policy #188. To request an ADA accommodation, contact Ecology by phone at 360-407-6600 or email at [email protected]. For Washington Relay Service or TTY call 711 or 877-833-6341. Visit Ecology’s website for more information. Publication 20-10-027 June 2020 i Report to the Legislature on Water Power License Fees Expenditures, Recommendations, Accountability, and Recognition by Water Quality Program Washington State Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Washington State Department of Ecology Olympia,
    [Show full text]