HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-05-13; City Council; 19445; Outlining the City's opposition to the power plantCITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL 12
J 9,445
05/13/08
CM
CONSIDERATION OF CITY POSITION
ON PROPOSED POWER PLANT AND
UPDATE ON ENERGY COMMISSION
PROCEEDINGS
DEPT. HEAD
CITY ATTY
CITY MGR.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive staff update on NRG's proposal to construct a new power plant and consider adoption
of Resolution No. 2008-138 which outlines the City's opposition to the proposed project and
direct staff to continue to work with NRG and San Diego Gas and Electric to identify alternate
solutions to regional energy needs.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The City of Carlsbad recognizes the need to develop energy resources that meet the growing
demands of our region. As home to the existing Encina Power Station and numerous other
regional uses, such as the McClellan-Palomar Airport, and the Encina Water Pollution Control
Facility, Carlsbad understands a community's responsibility in hosting regional facilities and the
impacts associated with such.
On September 14, 2007, Carlsbad Energy Center, LLC, (the Applicant) submitted an
Application for Certification (AFC) to the California Energy Commission (CEC) for the Carlsbad
Energy Center Project (CECP). Carlsbad Energy Center LLC is an indirect wholly-owned
subsidiary of NRG Energy, Inc. (NRG), which owns the existing Encina Power Station. The
proposed project is to be located on the 32-acre parcel of land, northeast of the existing Encina
Power Station, east of the rail lines and west of Interstate 5.
The City recognizes that the CEC has exclusive jurisdiction to license this project. City staff has
been actively reviewing NRG's application and is working closely with the CEC's staff to fully
understand and evaluate the impacts that the proposed CECP will have on the community. In
view of the CEC's jurisdiction and the City's desire to work cooperatively with the project
applicant, the City has withheld adopting a formal position on the CECP. However, considering
the lack of critical project information, the substantial impact the CECP will have on the
community and the lack of any extraordinary public benefit, staff believes it is prudent for the
City Council to consider taking a formal position to OPPOSE the CECP at this time.
DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Joe Garuba, Municipal Project Manager 760-434-2893
jgaru@ci.carlsbad.ca.us
FOR CITY CLERK'S USE ONLY.
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED
DENIED
CONTINUED
WITHDRAWN
AMENDED
jar
nnn
n
CONTINUED TO DATE SPECIFIC
CONTINUED TO DATE UNKNOWN
RETURNED TO STAFF
OTHER -SEE MINUTES
n
n
n
n
Page 2
Over the past six months, staff has submitted several letters to the CEC highlighting its
questions and concerns regarding the CECP. Listed below are those aspects of the proposed
project which continue to be either undefined or objectionable based on the City's laws,
ordinances, regulations, standards (LORS) and policies. They include:
• Land Use Compatibility
• Water Supply
• Industrial Wastewater Discharge
• 1-5 Widening Project
• Visual Impacts
• Noise Impacts
• Green House Gas Emissions
• Potential Alternate Locations
• Project Schedule
• Extraordinary Public Benefit
• Quality of Life
Additionally, due to advances in technology, a state-of-the-art power plant is no longer a
coastal-dependent land use, and as such, the City recognizes that any proposed power plant
should be sited away from the coastline to avoid impacting significant coastal resources.
By adopting a formal position on the proposed CECP, staff believes the City would be better
able to represent its interests in its interactions with the CEC, NRG, San Diego Gas and
Electric, and the community.
Although staff is recommending Council consider opposing the CECP, the regional demand for
new and reliable energy exists and Carlsbad may be able to help contribute in some part to a
potential solution. Therefore, staff also requests that the City Council authorize staff to continue
to work with both NRG and San Diego Gas and Electric on developing alternate solutions to the
region's energy needs.
CEC Process
Attached for Council's information is the most recent project schedule for the CECP (Exhibit 2).
As is reflected in that schedule, the CEC is still engaged in project fact-finding and analysis,
which is expected to initially conclude by summer 2008. As the schedule highlights, the CEC's
anticipated release of a draft staff assessment has gone from early April to July. Although the
July date is currently projected, considering the nature of the outstanding items, this could be
subject to further delay.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impacts of the CECP are undetermined due to a number of issues. Although the
proposed project will generate approximately $4 million per year for the City and the South
Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Agency, development of the CECP may result in the inability
to fully redevelop the existing Encina Power Station site. The diminished value of this
redevelopment could represent an equal, if not greater amount, than those revenues generated
by the CECP. Furthermore, due to the proposed project location and in conjunction with the
expansion of the 1-5, the CECP has the ability to negatively affect the City's quality of life
through visual, noise, and land use impacts. These impacts and their potential financial
implications have yet to be fully analyzed, and staff is working with the CEC to do so.
Page 3
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
The CEC has the responsibility of acting as the Lead Agency in the review of the proposed
CECP. The CEC's project review process is considered CEQA-equivalent, and any
environmental impact should be mitigated under its review process. Staff is still assessing the
CECP's environmental impacts and will continue to do so as more information becomes
available. At this time, staff has identified Land Use, Visual Resources, Water, and Noise as
probable areas of significant impact.
EXHIBITS:
1. Resolution No. 2008-138
2. CEC Project Schedule for proposed CECP
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2008-138
2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING THE PROPOSED
3 CARLSBAD ENERGY CENTER PROJECT (CECP)
4
5 WHEREAS, NRG Energy, Inc., has submitted an Application for Certification
6 (AFC) for the Carlsbad Energy Center Project (CECP) to the California Energy
1 Commission (CEC), and
8 WHEREAS, the CEC has jurisdiction in approving new power plants, and
9
WHEREAS, the proposed CECP would be a new 540-megawatt power plant
10
located at the existing Encina Power Station (EPS) site, and
11
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad recognizes the need to develop energy
12
resources that meet the growing demands of our region, and
WHEREAS, as home to the existing EPS since the 1950s and numerous other
15 regional facilities, Carlsbad understands a community's responsibility in hosting regional
16 resources and the impacts associated with such, and
17 WHEREAS, due to recent advances in technology, a state-of-the-art power plant
18 is not a coastal dependent land use, and
19 WHEREAS, the proposed CECP would continue the industrial land use at the
20 EPS site for an additional 40 years, and
21
WHEREAS, the proposed CECP may negatively impact the future
22
redevelopment of the EPS site, and
23
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has reviewed the AFC and found it to be
25 inconsistent and detrimental to the best interests of the community, and
26 WHEREAS, the proposed CECP contains several unidentified and/or
27 objectionable concerns, including: land use compatibility, water supply, visual
28
1 resources, noise impacts, green house gas emissions, and industrial wastewater
2 discharge, and
3 WHEREAS, the proposed CECP has not adequately analyzed alternate site
proposals, and
5 WHEREAS, any proposed power plant should be located away from the
6
coastline to avoid impacting significant coastal resources, and
7
WHEREAS, the proposed CECP has failed to demonstrate any extraordinary8
public benefit as required by the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Plan.
10
11 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
12 Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
14
2. The City Council declares its intention to oppose the proposed Carlsbad
15
Energy Center project.
16
3. The City Council supports the re-use of the existing Encina Power Station
site to provide greater public benefit.
19 4. City Staff is hereby directed to continue to work with NRG and San Diego
20 Gas and Electric to help identify alternate solutions to regional energy
21 demands.
22 //
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council
of the City of Carlsbad on the 13th day of May, 2008, by the following vote to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Hall, Packard and Nygaard.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
E A LSWIS./MaVor
/LORR/ME M. WJ&OD, city deft l,llllld
/(SEALJK ,"% - '^ or.-;««^-.'r^'x
•*<!.' I -£l • V" *
rO:^*^!^-";
Exhibit 2
Vice Chair James Boyd, Presiding Member
Commissioner Karen Douglas, Associate Member
Page 4 of 4
*The
Committee's
Initial Schedule
31-Oct-07
17-Dec-O?
N/A
N/A
8-Jan-08
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
28-Feb-08
4-Apr-08
15-Apr-08
28-Apr-08
30-May-08
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
1-Nov-OS
Staffs Current
Projected/Schedule
31-Oct-07 •
17-Dec-07
21-Nov-07
21-Dec-07
24-Jan-08
28-Feb-08
18-Mar-08
26-Mar-08
11-Apr-08
18-Apr-08
30-April-08
1-July-08
15-July-08
1-Jul-08
15-Sep-08
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
1-Feb-09
Hearing/Workshop/Planned
Event or Filing
AFC data adequate
^Informational Hearing and Site Visit
Staff transmits Data Request, Set 1
Applicant provides Data iResponses,
Set1 ',
Data Response and Issue Resolution
Workshop 1 , ,
Staff transmits Data Request,
Set 2
Applicant provides Data Responses,
Set 2
Data Response and Issue Resolution
Workshops
Parties file Status Report 1
Staff files Data Requests,
Set2A
Draft PDOC from San Diego County
Air Pollution Control Distsrict
Staff files Preliminary Staff
Assessment (PSA)
PSA Workshop
Local, state and federal agency final
determinations and Air District FDOC
Staff files Final Staff Assessment
(FSA)
Evidentiary hearings*
Committee files proposed decision*
Hearing on the proposed decision*
Committee files revised proposed
decision*
Commission Decision*
Committee will determine this part of the schedule
(07-AFC-6) Carlsbad Energy Center Project Status Report 1 -April 11 2007
Carlsbad Energy Center ProjectPresentation to Carlsbad City CouncilMay 13, 2008
•Recent wildfires showed us the importance of having in-basin electric generation reliability.•When transmission lines throughout the region were taken out of service, local plants – such as Encina - stepped up to fill the power void.•The State of California says more than 500 megawatts of additional power generation is needed in San Diego by 2015.•Supports renewable energy resources that will be committed to the grid.Essential regional power generation resourceLocal electric reliability
• Already designated for Utility and Industrial Application. – The desalination plant, supported by the City, is at the same site.• Maintains much-needed electric reliability• Reduces potential community impact• Existing infrastructure, transmission and gas pipeline• Avoids costly delays associated with plant relocation • Other locations present environmental and logisticalchallengesWhy the current location is ideal...Already used for power generation
New, state-of-the-art technology•Uses 30% less gas resulting in a smaller carbon footprint and fewer overall emissions.•Reduced seawater use protects marine life •Quick-starting units to be able to support renewable resources on the grid.•Supported by environmental groups (Heal the Bay, Surfrider Foundation, Santa Monica Baykeeper)Environmental benefitsSupports California’s efforts to address global warming
• The City’s “Work Plan” for developing the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project Area calls for:• Demolishing the existing plant • Building the plant between the railroad tracks and I-5 • Once built - and existing plant retired - prime coastal property will be available for real estate development. A shared vision for EncinaMoves redevelopment forward
PROPOSED CARLSBAD ENERGY CENTER PROJECT(CECP)
Introduction Project Overview Work To Date Schedule Outstanding Issues Staff Recommendation
Glossary CEC - California Energy Commission NRG – Power Plant Owners SDG&E – San Diego Gas and Electric CECP – Carlsbad Energy Center Project EPS – Existing Encina Power Station AFC – Application for Certification SP 144 – Specific Plan 144
Project Overview – Proposed Location
Project Overview New 540 megawatt combined-cycle plant “Shoulder” plant – operates up to 3500 hours per year (40%) CECP would be “dry-cooled” - not coastal dependent NRG would shut down Units 1-3 in existing plant Existing Plant stays in operation
Project Overview - CECP Schematic
Work-To-Date Extensive review of CECP’s social, economic, and environmental impacts City input to CEC Commission and staff MeetingsCEC workshopsOngoing discussions with CEC, NRG, and SDG&EPublic Outreach
Schedule July 2008 – Draft Preliminary Staff Assessment July 2008 – CEC Workshop September – Final Staff Assessment 4thQuarter 2008– CEC Hearings 1stQuarter 2009 – CEC Decision Plant Construction – 24/30 monthsSchedule is subject to change
Outstanding Issues Land Use Intensification of Industrial Use Comprehensive Vision PlanExtraordinary Public BenefitAlternate locationsInside CarlsbadOutside Carlsbad
Outstanding Issues (cont.) Water Limited Supply Wastewater Visual ImpactsSmoke stack height undeterminedI-5 freeway wideningCECP
CECPI-5Widening
Putting it in Perspective
5 ft70 ft40 ftPutting it in Perspective
Outstanding Issues (cont.) Noise Impacts Long-term Fiscal Impacts Green House Gas EmissionsApproximately 1 million metric tons Coastal Rail Trail Alignment
Summary Long Term Vision QuestionAlternate Sites Several Outstanding IssuesLand Use ComtabilityWater/WastewaterVisualNoiseExtraordinary Public BenefitEconomic Impacts
Recommendation Approve Resolution No. 2008-138Opposes proposed power plantOutlines City’s intent to see any plant located away from the coast Direct staff to continue to work with NRG and request SDG&E participate where appropriate
Questions ?