DOCSLIB.ORG

Applicant's Opening Testimony on AEC FSA Part 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Applicant's Opening Testimony on AEC FSA Part 1 DOCKETED Docket Number: 13-AFC-01 Project Title: Alamitos Energy Center TN #: 214099 Document Title: Applicant's Opening Testimony on AEC FSA Part 1 Description: N/A Filer: Elyse Engel Organization: CH2M Submitter Role: Applicant Consultant Submission Date: 10/18/2016 3:02:54 PM Docketed Date: 10/18/2016 Alamitos Energy Center (13-AFC-01) Applicant’s Opening Testimony Submitted to California Energy Commission Prepared by AES Alamitos Energy, LLC October 18, 2016 2485 Natomas Park Drive Suite 600 Sacramento, CA 95833 Contents Section Page Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Description ............................................................................................................................ 2 I. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2 II. Summary of Testimony ....................................................................................................... 2 A. Generating Technology .......................................................................................... 6 B. Major Electrical Equipment and Systems CCGT Block ........................................... 7 C. Major Electrical Equipment and Systems SCGT Power Block ................................ 9 D. Plant Cooling Systems .......................................................................................... 10 E. Fire Protection ..................................................................................................... 11 F. Interconnection to the Electrical Grid ................................................................. 12 G. Construction Schedule and Workforce ................................................................ 12 III. Facility Operation .............................................................................................................. 12 A. Facility Reliability ................................................................................................. 12 B. Facility Operating Range and Availability ............................................................ 12 C. Redundancy of Critical Components CCGT .......................................................... 13 D. Redundancy of Critical Components SCGT .......................................................... 13 E. Fuel Availability .................................................................................................... 13 F. Water Availability................................................................................................. 13 G. Sewer and Wastewater Treatment Availability ................................................... 13 IV. Electric Production and Thermal Efficiency ...................................................................... 13 A. Thermal Efficiency CCGT ...................................................................................... 14 B. Thermal Efficiency SCGT ...................................................................................... 14 V. Response to Certain Issues Raised in the FSA................................................................... 14 VI. Proposed Licensing Conditions ......................................................................................... 14 Transmission System Engineering ..................................................................................................... 15 I. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 15 II. Summary of Testimony ..................................................................................................... 16 A. Affected Environment .......................................................................................... 16 B.Potential Construction and Operational Related Impacts; Avoidance and Minimization Measures ....................................................................................... 16 C. Summary of Compliance with Applicable LORS ................................................... 17 D. Summary of the Potential Cumulative Impacts ................................................... 17 III. Response to Certain Issues Raised in the FSA................................................................... 17 IV. Proposed Licensing Conditions ......................................................................................... 17 Biological Resources ......................................................................................................................... 18 I. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 18 II. Summary of Testimony ..................................................................................................... 18 A. Affected Environment .......................................................................................... 18 B. Potential Construction Related Impacts; Avoidance and Minimization Measures ............................................................................................................. 19 C. Potential Operational Related Impacts; Avoidance and Minimization Measures ............................................................................................................. 20 D. Summary of Compliance with Applicable LORS ................................................... 20 E. Summary of the Potential Cumulative Impacts ................................................... 20 ii CONTENTS Section Page III. Response to Certain Issues Raised in the FSA................................................................... 21 IV. Proposed Licensing Conditions ......................................................................................... 21 A. Proposed Revisions to CONDITION BIO-1 ............................................................ 21 B. Proposed Revisions to CONDITION BIO-8 ............................................................ 22 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................................... 24 I. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 24 II. Summary of Testimony ..................................................................................................... 25 A. Affected Environment .......................................................................................... 25 B. Potential Construction Related Impacts; Avoidance and Minimization Measures ............................................................................................................. 27 C. Potential Operational Related Impacts; Avoidance and Minimization Measures ............................................................................................................. 28 D. Summary of Compliance with Applicable LORS ................................................... 28 E. Summary of the Potential Cumulative Impacts ................................................... 28 III. Response to Certain Issues Raised in the FSA................................................................... 29 IV. Proposed Licensing Conditions ......................................................................................... 29 A. Proposed Revisions to Condition CUL-1 .............................................................. 29 B. Proposed Revisions to Condition CUL-6 .............................................................. 31 Geological Hazards and Resources .................................................................................................... 35 I. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 35 II. Summary of Testimony ..................................................................................................... 35 A. Affected Environment .......................................................................................... 35 B. Potential Construction and Operational Related Impacts; Avoidance and Minimization Measures ....................................................................................... 36 C. Summary of Compliance with Applicable LORS ................................................... 36 D. Summary of the Potential Cumulative Impacts ................................................... 36 III. Response to Certain Issues Raised in the FSA................................................................... 37 IV. Proposed Licensing Conditions ......................................................................................... 38 Hazardous Materials Handling .......................................................................................................... 39 I. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 39 II. Summary of Testimony ..................................................................................................... 39 A. Affected Environment .......................................................................................... 39 B. Potential Construction Related Impacts; Avoidance and Minimization Measures ............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 15 Project Bonds to Change Your Preconceptions
    Project Bond Focus 15 Project Bonds to Change Your Preconceptions 15 Project Bonds To Change Your Preconceptions The Global Project Bond Market The Capital Markets are an established source of funding financing for issuers developing complex infrastructure for project financing. and energy projects. Project Bonds have been used to finance user-pay traffic Project Bonds offer distinct advantages to issuers such as risk toll roads and greenfield power plants in the US, long tenor typically matching the underlying offtake offshore wind farms in Europe, and airports, renewables agreements, fixed pricing, quick-to-market execution, and and oil & gas asset portfolios in Latin America. These are deep market for investment. Tapping the Capital Markets just a few transactions that demonstrate the new frontiers has also proved beneficial for investors, allowing them to that Project Bonds have reached. diversify their investment portfolio. In this article, we review select noteworthy transactions Throughout the years, the Project Bond market has that have shaped the Project Bond market. Below we advanced with the issuance of ground-breaking present an overview of the transactions covered in this transactions. Issuances backing new asset classes, new article. This list represents only a small sample of some of geographies, and innovative structures have developed the transactions that have transformed the market. this market, allowing it to become a reliable source of Timeline Illustration of 15 Noteworthy Project Bond Transactions Jun 2013 Jun 2015
    [Show full text]
  • Board-Approved 2013-2014 Transmission Plan
    2013-2014 ISO Transmission Plan March 25, 2014 APPENDIX A: System Data California ISO/MID A-1 2013-2014 ISO Transmission Plan March 25, 2014 A1 Existing Generation Table A1-1: Existing generation plants in PG&E planning area Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Humboldt Bay 166 Kekawaka 4.9 Pacific Lumber 32.5 PG&E - LP Samoa 25 Humboldt Fairhaven 17.3 Blue Lake 12 Humboldt Area Total 258 Santa Fe 160 Bear Canyon 20 Westford Flat 30 Western Geo 38 Geysers 5 53 Geysers 6 53 PG&E - North Coast and Geysers 7 53 North Bay Geysers 8 53 Geysers 11 106 Geysers 12 106 Geysers 13 133 Geysers 14 109 Geysers 16 118 California ISO/MID A-2 2013-2014 ISO Transmission Plan March 25, 2014 Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Geysers 17 118 Geysers 18 118 Geysers 20 118 Bottle Rock 55 SMUD Geo 72 Potter Valley 11 Geo Energy 20 Indian Valley 3 Sonoma Landfill 6 Exxon 54 Monticello 12 North Coast and North Bay Area Total 1,619 Pit River 752 Battle Creek 17 Cow Creek 5 North Feather River 736 South Feather River 123 PG&E - West Feather River 26 North Valley Black Butte 11 CPV 717 Hatchet Ridge Wind 103 QFs 353 North Valley Area Total 2,843 California ISO/MID A-3 2013-2014 ISO Transmission Plan March 25, 2014 Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Wadham 27 Woodland Biomass 25 UC Davis Co-Gen 4 Cal-Peak Vaca Dixon 49 Wolfskill Energy Center 60 Lambie, Creed and Goosehaven 143 EnXco 60 Solano 100 High Winds 200 Shiloh 300 Bowman Power House 4 PG&E - Camp Far West (SMUD) 7 Central Valley Chicago Park Power House 40 Chili Bar Power House 7 Colgate Power House 294 Deer Creek Power House 6 Drum Power House 104 Dutch Plat Power House 49 El Dorado Power House 20 Feather River Energy Center 50 French Meadow Power House 17 Green Leaf No.
    [Show full text]
  • Calpine Corporation (A Delaware Corporation) I.R.S
    10-K 1 cpn_10kx12312014.htm CALPINE 10-K FOR YEAR-ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2014 UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 ____________________ Form 10-K ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF [X] 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT [ ] OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission File No. 001-12079 ______________________ Calpine Corporation (A Delaware Corporation) I.R.S. Employer Identification No. 77-0212977 717 Texas Avenue, Suite 1000, Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 830-2000 Not Applicable (Former Address) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Calpine Corporation Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value Name of each exchange on which registered: New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes [X] No [ ] Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes [ ] No [X] Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX A: System Data
    2012-2013 ISO Transmission Plan March 20, 2013 APPENDIX A: System Data California ISO/MID A-1 2012-2013 ISO Transmission Plan March 20, 2013 A1 Existing Generation Table A1-1: Existing generation plants in PG&E planning area Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Humboldt Bay 166 Kekawaka 4.9 Pacific Lumber 32.5 PG&E - LP Samoa 25 Humboldt Fairhaven 17.3 Blue Lake 12 Humboldt Area Total 258 Santa Fe 160 Bear Canyon 20 Westford Flat 30 Western Geo 38 Geysers 5 53 Geysers 6 53 PG&E - North Coast and Geysers 7 53 North Bay Geysers 8 53 Geysers 11 106 Geysers 12 106 Geysers 13 133 Geysers 14 109 Geysers 16 118 California ISO/MID A-2 2012-2013 ISO Transmission Plan March 20, 2013 Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Geysers 17 118 Geysers 18 118 Geysers 20 118 Bottle Rock 55 SMUD Geo 72 Potter Valley 11 Geo Energy 20 Indian Valley 3 Sonoma Landfill 6 Exxon 54 Monticello 12 North Coast and North Bay Area Total 1,619 Pit River 752 Battle Creek 17 Cow Creek 5 North Feather River 736 South Feather River 123 PG&E - West Feather River 26 North Valley Black Butte 11 CPV 717 Hatchet Ridge Wind 103 QFs 353 North Valley Area Total 2,843 California ISO/MID A-3 2012-2013 ISO Transmission Plan March 20, 2013 Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Wadham 27 Woodland Biomass 25 UC Davis Co-Gen 4 Cal-Peak Vaca Dixon 49 Wolfskill Energy Cener 60 Lambie, Creed and Goosehaven 143 EnXco 60 Solano 100 High Winds 200 Shiloh 300 Bowman Power House 4 PG&E - Camp Far West (SMUD) 7 Central Valley Chicago Park Power House 40 Chili Bar Power House 7 Colgate Power House 294 Deer Creek Power House 6 Drum Power House 104 Dutch Plat Power House 49 El Dorado Power House 20 Feather River Energy Center 50 French Meadow Power House 17 Green Leaf No.
    [Show full text]
  • Transmission Plan
    2017-2018 TRANSMISSION PLAN March 14, 2018 REVISED DRAFT Foreword to Revised Draft 2017-2018 Transmission Plan This revised draft transmission plan reflects a number of changes from the draft plan released on February 1, 2018. To assist our stakeholders following the transmission plan cycle, we have summarized a number of those changes, with particular emphasis on a number of projects where the recommendations have progressed since the release on February 1 and the subsequent stakeholder meeting on February 8: • The model estimating the impact of the transmission plan on the ISO’s High Voltage TAC has been updated and the results added to the model. • The Oakland Clean Energy Initiative project is recommended for approval • The Phasor Measurement Unit project has been added and is recommended for approval • The Bridgerville-Garberville #2 115 kV line project is recommended to remain on hold. • The Kearney-Caruthers 70 kV Line Reonductor project is recommended to proceed with the original scope. • The recommended revised scope for the Kern 115 kV Area Reinfoement has been updated as presented at the February 8 stakeholder meeting. • Section 2.10 addressing the need for phasor measurement units to be installed on all ISO balancing authority area interties has been added. • Several projects approved in the 2016-2017 transmission planning cycle have been added to Table 7.1-1: Status of Previously-approved Projects Costing Less than $50M, that had been omitted from the table in the Draft 2017-2018 Transmission Plan. • The in-service date for a number of previously approved projects have been updated. A number of clarifications and edits have also been added throughout the plan to address other stakeholder comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Motion for Party Status of Aes Southland Development, Llc
    FILED BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 11/13/20 OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 09:34 AM Order Instituting Rulemaking to Oversee the Resource Adequacy Program, Consider R.19-11-009 Program Refinements, and Establish Forward (Filed November 7, 2019) Resource Adequacy Procurement Obligations. MOTION FOR PARTY STATUS OF AES SOUTHLAND DEVELOPMENT, LLC Seth D. Hilton (SBN 181899) Stoel Rives LLP Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1120 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 617-8913 Email: [email protected] Dated: November 13, 2020 Attorneys for AES Southland Development, LLC 1 1 / 4 BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Rulemaking to Oversee the Resource Adequacy Program, Consider R.19-11-009 Program Refinements, and Establish Forward (Filed November 7, 2019) Resource Adequacy Procurement Obligations. MOTION FOR PARTY STATUS OF AES SOUTHLAND DEVELOPMENT, LLC Pursuant to Rule 1.4(a)(4) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, AES Southland Development, LLC hereby seeks party status in the above-referenced proceeding. I. DESCRIPTION OF AES SOUTHLAND DEVELOPMENT, LLC AES Southland Development, LLC is the parent company of AES Alamitos Energy, LLC, which owns the Alamitos Energy Center, a 640-megawatt (MW), natural gas-fired, combined- cycle power plant located on the site of the AES Alamitos Generating Station. AES Alamitos is also developing a 400 MWh battery energy storage system (BESS) at the same site. Alamitos Energy Center has a twenty-year power purchase agreement with Southern California Edison Company (SCE); the BESS also has a 20-year agreement with SCE to provide resource adequacy capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Unitary Value-Setting Meeting May 25, 2021
    2021 Unitary Value-Setting Meeting May 25, 2021 This document was created for public distribution and does not contain the Lead Values or Staff Recommended Values provided to the Board Members State-Assessed Properties Division Jack McCool, Chief _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TED GAINES MALIA M. COHEN ANTONIO VAZQUEZ MIKE SCHAEFER BETTY T. YEE BRENDA FLEMING BOARD MEMBERS First District Second District Third District Fourth District State Controller Executive Director Sacramento San Francisco Santa Monica San Diego Item AA (Rev1: 5/19/21) CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 5/25/21 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION – STATE-ASSESSED PROPERTIES DIVISION UNITARY VALUE-SETTING WORKBOOK LIEN DATE 2021 PAGE INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION NUMBER Electric Generation Facilities (1100 – 1199) 1 – 2 Energy Companies (100 - 199) 3 – 4 Pipeline Companies (400-499) 5 Railroad Companies (800-899) 6 Telecommunications Companies (Local Exchange) (200 - 399) 7 Telecommunications Companies (Wireless) (2500 - 3999) 8 Telecommunications Companies (Interexchange) (2000-2499 and 7500-8999) 9 – 14 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION - STATE-ASSESSED PROPERTIES DIVISION Unitary Value Setting Workbook - Lien Date 2021 Electric Generation Facilities Item SBE No. No. Assessee Name 1 1100 AES Alamitos, LLC 2 1101 AES Redondo Beach, LLC 3 1102 AES Huntington Beach, LLC 4 1103 Dynegy Moss Landing, LLC 5 1105 Dynegy Oakland, LLC 6 1111 Long Beach Generation LLC 7 1112 CXA La Paloma, LLC 8 1115 GenOn California South LP - Ormond Beach 9 1117 GenOn California South LP - Ellwood 10 1122 MRP San Joaquin Energy, LLC - Hanford 11 1123 MRP San Joaquin Energy, LLC - Henrietta 12 1124 MRP San Joaquin Energy, LLC - Tracy 13 1126 Elk Hills Power, LLC 14 1127 High Desert Power Trust 15 1128 Delta Energy Center, LLC 16 1129 Gilroy Energy Center, LLC 17 1131 Pastoria Energy Facility, LLC 18 1132 CCFC Sutter Energy, LLC 19 1133 Metcalf Energy Center, LLC 20 1134 Otay Mesa Generating Company, LLC 21 1136 Blythe Energy, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Responses to Comments on The
    CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA Dual-Branded Hotel at Coleman and Brokaw RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE INITIAL STUDY & MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2021 Responses to Comments RESPONSES TO COMMENTS This document contains all of the written comments received by the City of Santa Clara on the Dual-Branded Hotel at Coleman and Brokaw Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and presents the City’s responses to each of the substantive comments submitted by public agencies and members of the public. Written comments were received during the 30-day public review period, which extended from March 26, 2021 to April 26, 2021. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), prior to approving a project, the decision- making body of the lead agency must consider the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all comments received during the public review process. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15074.) Although written responses to comments on an MND are not required by CEQA, the City has determined to exceed the minimum requirements and prepare a response to the comments received that pertain to the adequacy of the IS/MND. According to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), the State agencies that were invited to review the IS/MND included the following:1 • California Natural Resources Agency • California Department of Conservation (DOC) • California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Regions 2 and 3 • California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) • California Department
    [Show full text]
  • Final 2018-2019 Study Plan
    2018-2019 Transmission Planning Process Unified Planning Assumptions and Study Plan March 30, 2018 Final ISO Market and Infrastructure Development Division March 30, 2018 Intentionally left blank Study Plan 2018-2019 Transmission Planning Process Table of Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 2 Overview of 2018-2019 Stakeholder Process Activities and Communications .. 2 2.1 Stakeholder Meetings and Market Notices ....................................... 2 2.3 Interregional Coordination ................................................................ 5 2.4 Stakeholder Comments .................................................................... 5 2.5 Availability of Information .................................................................. 5 3 Reliability Assessments ..................................................................................... 7 3.1 Reliability Standards and Criteria ..................................................... 7 3.1.1 NERC Reliability Standards ........................................................ 7 3.1.2 WECC Regional Criteria ............................................................. 8 3.1.3 California ISO Planning Standards ............................................. 8 3.2 Frequency of the study ..................................................................... 8 3.3 Study Horizon and Years .................................................................. 8 3.4 Study Areas .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Stacking up the Benefits of Storage for New England 1
    Stacking Up the Benefits A White Paper in Support of Integrating Energy of Storage for New England Markets and Public Policy Authors Sam Hill-Cristol, Guest Author Spencer Fields October 2017 ABOUT THIS WHITE PAPER In August 2016 the New England Power Pool (NEPOOL) held its first meeting in the Integrating Markets and Public Policy (IMAPP) stakeholder discussion. This process intends to explore and propose changes to the New England energy, capacity, and ancillary markets for the purpose of better reconciling them with state-specific public policy goals. Synapse Energy Economics (Synapse) represents several end-users and alternative resource providers in this process. This paper, based on the research and thesis of guest author Sam Hill-Cristol, is a contribution from Synapse to the overall IMAPP discussion. It outlines how battery storage systems located at substations can provide a range of important services for the grid that reduce carbon intensity, increase reliability, and provide savings to consumers. Battery storage systems are successfully operating today elsewhere in the United States and there are substantial opportunities in New England to capture the benefits they can provide. The study began with a survey of battery storage projects in the United States in order to determine how widespread they were, where they were located, how much they cost, and what services they were providing. From here, the study focused on a few projects that seemed particularly successful and assessed the main drivers behind their development. Through this came the concept of ‘“revenue stacking,” which informs many of this paper’s recommendations. Acknowledgements This study was a collaborative effort driven by Sam Hill-Cristol’s thesis research for Brown University.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C to California’S Proposed Compliance Plan for the Federal Clean Power Plan: Target Recalculation Calculations
    Appendix C to California’s Proposed Compliance Plan for the Federal Clean Power Plan: Target Recalculation Calculations Prime Nameplate Generator mover Capacity Summer ARB Updated List EPA Original Plant Name Operator Name ORIS Code ID Fuel type type (MW) Capacity (MW) EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Rollins Nevada Irrigation District 34 1P WAT HY 12.1 12.1 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Venice Metropolitan Water District 72 1 WAT HY 10.1 10.1 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE J S Eastwood Southern California Edison Co 104 1 WAT PS 199.8 199.8 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE McClure Modesto Irrigation District 151 1 DFO GT 71.2 56.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE McClure Modesto Irrigation District 151 2 DFO GT 71.2 56.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Turlock Lake Turlock Irrigation District 161 1 WAT HY 1.1 1.1 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Turlock Lake Turlock Irrigation District 161 2 WAT HY 1.1 1.1 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Turlock Lake Turlock Irrigation District 161 3 WAT HY 1.1 1.1 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Hickman Turlock Irrigation District 162 1 WAT HY 0.5 0.5 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Hickman Turlock Irrigation District 162 2 WAT HY 0.5 0.5 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Volta 2 Pacific Gas & Electric Co 180 1 WAT HY 1.0 0.9 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Alta Powerhouse Pacific Gas & Electric Co 214 1 WAT HY 1.0 1.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Alta Powerhouse Pacific Gas & Electric Co 214 2 WAT HY 1.0 1.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Angels Utica Power Authority 215 1 WAT HY 1.4 1.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Balch 1 Pacific Gas & Electric Co 217 1 WAT HY 31.0 31.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Balch 2 Pacific Gas & Electric Co 218 2 WAT HY 48.6 52.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE Balch 2 Pacific Gas & Electric Co 218 3 WAT HY 48.6 55.0 EXCLUDE EXCLUDE
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment 13
    ATTACHMENT 13 Project List PROJECT NAME CEC DOCKET# PROJECT OWNER* ALMOND 2 POWER PLANT 09-AFC-2C Turlock Irrigation District ALAMITOS ENERGY CENTER 13-AFC-01C AES ALLIANCE CENTURY ENERGY 01-EP-04C FACILITY Clarion Energy West, LLC ALLIANCE DREWS ENERGY 01-EP-05C FACILITY Clarion Energy West, LLC ALMOND II POWER PLANT 09-AFC-02C Turlock Irrigation District BLYTHE ENERGY PROJECT 99-AFC-08C AltaGas/Blythe Energy Inc BLYTHE ENERGY / 99-AFC-08C TRANSMISSION LINE AltaGas/Blythe Energy Inc BLYTHE SOLAR POWER 09-AFC-06C NextEra Energy Resources PROJECT BORDER PROJECT 01-EP-14C CalPeak Power-Border, LLC BOTTLE ROCK GEOTHERMAL 79-AFC-4C AltaRock Energy CALISTOGA GEYSER 81-AFC-1C Calpine Corporation CAMPBELL COGENERATION 93-AFC-3C SPA SMUD So California Public Power CANYON POWER PLANT 07-AFC-9C Authority CARLSBAD ENERGY CENTER 07-AFC-6C Carlsbad Energy Center LLC COLUSA GENERATING 06-AFC-9C STATION PG&E COSUMNES POWER PLANT 01-AFC-19C SMUD *The Energy Commission compiled the list of project owners based on the application for c Energy Commission. This list may be incomplete. Project Owner includes the business en certification or petition to amend, all of its parent companies and subsidiaries, and investo ownership interest. The Applicant is responsible for listing all Project Owners that meet the listed on this Attachment 15. CPV SENTINEL ENERGY 07/AFC-3C PROJECT Attachment 13 CPV Sentinel, LLC RFQ-19-703 Page 1 of 12 On Call DCBO ATTACHMENT 13 Project List PROJECT NAME CEC DOCKET# PROJECT OWNER* CROCKETT COGENERATION 92-AFC-1C Crocket Cogeneration
    [Show full text]