Laserfiche WebLink
<br />002{70 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Colorado River Ooeratioils <br /> <br />Blythe Energy Project Phase II <br /> <br />On July 3, 2002, Cathness Blythe ll, owner and developer of the Blythe Energy Project (BEP), <br />submitted a Revised Application for Certification (Revised AFC) to the California Energy Commission, <br />to construct and operate a second nominally rated 520 MW combined-cycle natural gas-fired power plant. <br /> <br />BEP II is a duplicate ofBEP I, which is currently under construction and consists of two 170 MW <br />combustion turbine generators, one 180 MW steam turbine generator and supporting equipment. BEP II <br />will be located immediately adjacent to the approyed BEP 1 facility. <br /> <br />Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the California Energy Commission <br />(CEC) is the lead agency responsible for reviewing and approving all the applications for thermal electric <br />power plants, 50 MW or greater. On July 17'h, the California Energy Commission determined that the <br />Revised AFC to be adequate in order to initiate the 12-month licensing reyiew. <br /> <br />The CEC is requesting all agencies to review the application, identify areas of concern, and notify <br />the Energy Commission of its concerns. The CEC will be holding public workshops to receive input on <br />the proposed project. Agencies were requested to provide their comments and recommendations to CEC <br />within 180 days of the filing date of the Revised AFC or January 3, 2003. <br /> <br />As preliminary comments, the Colorado River Board staff believe that the major issues are <br />associated with water supply for the Project and how that water would be obtained. At this point, I again <br />plan to raise this issue in the Board's comments. <br /> <br />2003 Annual Operating Plan <br /> <br />The Colorado River Management Work Group (Work Group) reviewed Reclamation's Draft 2003 <br />Annual Operating Plan for Colorado River System Reservoirs (2003 AOP). Responding to Reclamation's <br />proposal to prepare a two tract arumal operating plan, one in the event the Quantification Settlement <br />Agreement (QSA) is executed by December 31, 2002, and the other in the event it is not, I recommended <br />that only one plan be prepared. Work Group representatives generally agreed with this approach which <br />would specify a full domestic surplus for 2003 with execution of the QSA by December 31 and a nornlal <br />condition without execution of the QSA by that date. With a full domestic surplus, MWD would be able <br />to divert 1.25 maf. Preparation of one plan would permit the Secretary ofthe Interior to approve the 2003 <br />AOP and transmit it to the Governors of the Colorado River Basin states prior to execution of the QSA <br />while preparation of two plans would delay the transmittal until, at the earliest, the date the QSA is <br />executed. Also, the plan would specify that should the QSA not be executed, the Interim Surplus <br />Guidelines (Guidelines) would be suspended until such time as California completes all required actions <br />and complies with reductions in water use specified in the schedule identified in the Guidelines. <br /> <br />3 <br />