The project is a nominal 250-MW solar electric generating facility to be located near Harper Dry Lake in an unincorporated area of San Bernardino County. The project is located approximately halfway between Barstow and Kramer Junction, and is approximately nine miles northwest of Hinkley. The project will implement parabolic trough technology to solar heat a heat transfer fluid (HTF). This hot HTF will generate steam in solar steam generators, which will expand through a steam turbine generator to produce electrical power from twin, independently-operable solar fields, each feeding a 125-MW power island. The sun will provide 100 percent of the power supplied to the project through solar-thermal collectors; no supplementary fossil-based energy source will be used for electrical power production.

Our staff has evaluated nearly 80 power plant projects, including:

• Over 45 fossil fuel-fired power plant projects;

• Nearly 20 solar power plant projects;

• Eight wind power plant projects;

• Four geothermal power plant projects, and

• Two waste-to-energy power plant projects

For certain repowering power plant projects Aspen has also evaluated the impacts of the demolition of an existing power plant, such as the demolition of the Encina Power Station in Carlsbad. Additionally, Aspen has completed over 60 visible water vapor and/or thermal plume modeling analyses for power plants, including solar thermal and geothermal facilities.

The AQ and GHG analyses usually focus on the stationary source air pollutant and GHG emissions during operations for fossil fuel-fired power plants. Renewable energy facilities require a focus on construction-related emissions and fugitive dust emissions. Aspen’s experience includes evaluating impacts and determining appropriate mitigation for a wide range of generating facilities, from commercial sized solar that are less than one megawatt in capacity, to major fossil fuel-fired power plants exceeding 1,000 megawatts in capacity.

Aspen has assisted the California Energy Commission in evaluating the AQ and GHG emissions impacts of over 60 proposed power plants in California since 2000, including several non-fossil fuel-fired thermal power plant projects; our staff provides expert witness testimony for these projects as necessary. For these efforts, Aspen often reviews Application for Certifications, provides data requests to obtain necessary documentation, prepares comprehensive air quality and GHG emissions assessments, provides expert witness testimony, and directly supports the managers and counsel throughout the licensing process. Our staff independently reviews and completes the necessary construction and operation emissions estimates or atmospheric dispersion modeling analyses to evaluate whether a proposed power plant could be constructed and operated safely in accordance with laws, ordinances, regulations, and standards (LORS).

Aspen also assists the Energy Commission in assessing compliance with air quality conditions of approval and review of power plant project amendment requests. These evaluations can include specific compliance determinations, reviews of recordkeeping and reporting for compliance, or completion of major amendments. Other field and compliance capabilities include conducting compliance audits and preparing and implementing fugitive dust management plans.

The project is an expansion of a wind energy generation facility to generate up to 530 megawatts of additional electricity from wind turbine generators on an approximately 5,185-acre site in unincorporated Kern County, California. The project required multiple zone changes and Conditional Use Permits. Wind energy from the project is transferred to Southern California Edison’s 220-kilovolt transmission system and sold to a power purchaser in furtherance of the goals of the California Renewables Portfolio Standard.

The EIR evaluated potential impacts of implementing a change in zone classification to incorporate the Wind Energy Combining District to the base district for approximately 2,909 acres of the project site. Aspen also assisted in the review of environmental technical reports prepared by the applicant, preparation of the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and preparation of the mitigation monitoring and reporting program.

The project involved coordination with the CPUC and BLM, and many Federal and State resource agencies. Aspen also managed 10 subcontractors in the preparation of the EIR/S. Key issues included biological and archaeological resources, human health effects of electric and magnetic fields, visual resources and aesthetics, land use, geology, and hydrology. Collected resource and land use data were entered into a Geographic Information System (GIS) for the project’s 660-foot wide study corridor. The GIS information was then utilized to optimize the routing of the transmission line by minimizing the impacts to environmental resources. An extensive analysis of the need for the transmission line was also conducted.

The EIR/S evaluated 20 alternatives to the proposed project, after considering over 50 alternatives in an initial screening process. The alternatives included several transmission system alternatives through Nevada, many variations on the proposed route (totaling over 90 miles), alternative technologies (generation and demand side measures), undergrounding, and the “No Project Alternative.”

This EIR/S evaluated a 345,000-volt (345 kV) transmission line proposed by Sierra Pacific Power Company (SPPCo). The proposed 165-mile transmission line would connect SPPCo’s electric power distribution system in Nevada to the Bonneville Power Administration in the Pacific Northwest. It would feature the construction of two new substations in northeastern California and the expansion of an existing substation in Reno, Nevada.

The Final EIR/S was released in November 1995, and consisted of 2,400 pages and technical appendices covering biological and visual resources, noise, air quality, and a detailed set of annotated base maps covering the proposed transmission line’s 660-foot wide study corridor and alternative route alignments.

The EIR was prepared on an accelerated schedule in order help meet State-mandated goals for the delivery of renewable energy to meet electrical demand as part of California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS). The initial RPS goal was for investor-owned utilities to provide 20 percent of electrical energy from renewable sources by 2010. Development of additional transmission capacity to access wind energy potential in the Tehachapi Wind Resource Area became a priority as a means to meet the 2010 RPS goal. Segments 2 and 3 would provide the transmission capacity to integrate 350 megawatts (MW) of renewable energy into the electrical grid. Segment 1, which was initiated shortly before Segments 2 and 3, would provide transmission capacity for another 350 MW (Aspen prepared a separate EIR/EIS for Segment 1, also referred to as the Antelope-Pardee Transmission Project). Due to the priority placed on getting Segments 2 and 3 built, Aspen prepared a full scope Draft EIR only 3½ months after issuing the Notice of Preparation.

The project garnered substantial public interest and was highly controversial in several of the communities traversed by the transmission lines. Issues of public concern included: land needed for ROW acquisition; visual impacts on rural communities; impacts on ongoing development projects along alternative corridors, including schools; impacts on site layouts for planned wind energy projects; and EMF and property value impacts. Aspen organized and conducted an extensive public outreach program for the project, including scoping meetings, Draft EIR workshops, public meetings with local agencies and groups, maintenance of a project website, and mailing of notices to property owners, interested parties, and local jurisdictions along the proposed transmission corridors.

After project approval, Aspen’s monitoring staff monitored construction on behalf of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and assisted the CPUC in addressing and resolving issues associated with mitigation implementation that arose in the field.

Transmission of wind power from the Tehachapi and Antelope Valley areas had been constrained by the existing transmission line, which would have been overloaded by the addition of new generation. The Antelope-Pardee project was needed to accommodate new wind energy projects that either had applications for approval pending or were expected to submit applications in the near future. However, these wind generation projects could not be interconnected without an increase in transmission capacity south of Antelope Substation. The Antelope-Pardee project allowed these wind energy projects to interconnect to the transmission system and allowed time for future transmission upgrades to be constructed to accommodate more wind generation.

National Planning and NEPA Services for U.S. Department of the Interior and USDA Forest Service – Nationwide
Contract Information:

• Contract No. 140L0618A0015

• Base term: August 23, 2018 – August 22, 2019, with 4 one-year options

• Aspen is one of the two Small Business firms selected

• Contract type: Competitive multiple-award Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs)

• Order types available: Firm Fixed Price and Labor Hour

• Maximum value of orders to be placed per BPA teams (an estimate but not guaranteed): $50,000,000 over the performance period

• Tasks that could be considered under BPAs: 13 identified tasks including:

• Biological Assessment

• Collaboration/Coordination

• Inventories

• Monitoring

• Modeling

• Section 368 Energy Corridors

• Land Use Management Plan and/or NEPA Document

• Data Management

• Contact: Michelle Elliot, BLM Contracting Officer (303) 236-6402

• Aspen Primary Contact: Susan Lee (415) 696-5311 slee@aspeneg.com

GSA Contract for Environmental Consulting Services and Geographic Information Systems – Nationwide
Contract Information:

• Contract No. GS10F0029N

• Term: January 31, 20018 – January 30, 2023

• Contact: Eric Oldendick, Industrial Operations Analyst (415) 793-4294

Environmental and Compliance Monitoring Contractor to Provide Right-of-Way Compliance Monitoring for Right-of-Way Applications and Authorizations on the Bureau of Land Management – California Desert District
Contract Information:

• Contract No. L16PA00109

• Term: June 7, 2016 – June 6, 2021

• Contact: Greg Miller, Deputy District Manager (951) 697-5216

“Provide up to seven million dollars in grants to qualified counties for the development or revision of rules and policies, including, but not limited to, general plan elements, zoning ordinances, and a natural community observation plan as a plan participant that facilitate the development of eligible renewable energy resources and the associated electric transmission facilities, and the processing of permits for eligible renewable energy resources.” (Pub. Res. Code § 25619)

Section 25619 identifies 15 qualified counties as eligible to receive grant funding, 7 of which are located in the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) area. The 15 qualified counties are: Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Los Angeles, Madera, Merced, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Stanislaus, and Tulare. The seven counties with land inside the DRECP include: Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego.

Of the 15 qualified counties, the California Energy Commission has awarded more than $3 million to six California counties (San Luis Obispo, Inyo, San Bernardino, Imperial, Riverside and Los Angeles) to update their local plans with long-term renewable energy development and conservation objectives. Aspen, together with our partners, worked on plans and associated environmental clearance for four of the six chosen counties to support planning efforts.

Aspen worked on the four projects below:

• San Luis Obispo Renewable Energy Streamlining Program

• Inyo County Renewable Energy General Plan Amendment

• San Bernardino Renewable Energy and Conservation General Plan Element

• Imperial County Renewable Energy and Transmission Element Update

The Project is a combined cycle generating plant consisting of two natural gas-fired General Electric 7FA Gas Turbines with Heat Recovery Steam Generators and one General Electric Steam Turbine. Natural gas is provided via a 2.5-mile, 20-inch underground pipeline interconnection to PG&E’s natural gas pipeline transmission system at the Kettleman compressor station. The plant uses a dry cooling process to minimize water consumption. The proposed project would be connected to the PG&E transmission grid via a 6.4-mile single-circuit 230-kilovolt transmission line, traversing agricultural land to the Gates substation in Fresno County.

Beacon Solar, LLC proposed to construct a concentrated solar electric generating facility on an approximately 2,012-acre site in Kern County, California. The project has a nominal electrical output of 250 MW and uses parabolic trough solar thermal technology to produce electrical power using a steam turbine generator fed from a solar steam generator (SSG). The SSG receives heated heat transfer fluid (HTF) from solar thermal equipment comprised of arrays of parabolic mirrors that collect energy from the sun. The project utilizes two auxiliary boilers fueled by natural gas to reduce startup time and for HTF freeze protection. The auxiliary boilers supply steam to the HTF freeze protection heat exchangers during nighttime hours to keep the HTF in a liquid state when ambient temperatures are not sufficient to keep the temperature of the HTF above its relatively high freezing point (54 degrees Fahrenheit). In order to fuel the boilers, a new 17.6-mile, eight-inch gas pipeline would be constructed to connect the project to an existing Southern California Gas Company pipeline in the California City area.

The project allowed electrical output from the Blythe Energy Project (BEP) to be delivered to the southern California ISO-controlled electrical transmission system. Blythe Energy, LLC is the owner of the 520-MW natural gas fired electric-generating facility located within the City of Blythe, California. The proposed transmission line modifications would improve the long-term transmission paths available for delivery of the BEP electrical output to the southern California ISO-controlled electrical transmission system, referred to as “SP-15.” The transmission line modifications also serve to relieve transmission congestion and provide needed energy supplies in southern California in the coming years.

A new support facility was planned on a 50-acre parcel directly north of the Brown Field Airport in the Otay Mesa area of southwestern portion of San Diego County, California. The project includes an air operation facility, vehicle maintenance garage, facilities maintenance shop, electronics shop, fuel island and vehicle wash area, vehicle parking areas, and an offsite storm drain. Under contract to the US Army Corps of Engineers, Aspen prepared an Environmental Assessment and Biological Assessment for the project. This work included biological field surveys to confirm plant and animal species on the project and alternative sites. In addition, soil samples were collected and analyzed to assess the potential for contamination prior to development of vehicle maintenance facilities. To avoid impacts to sensitive biological resources, changes to the project were implemented that made consultation under the Endangered Species Act no longer necessary.

In November 1990, DWR suspended operation of the Bottle Rock project and the plant was eventually placed into cold stand-by state. In April 1993, the CEC approved an amendment modifying monitoring and reporting requirements in consideration of the plant’s shutdown status. U.S. Renewables Group purchased the power plant in October 2005 with the intention of repowering the project. The CEC approved an amendment in December of 2006 to restart the facility with modifications to the design and update the Compliance Plan. As well as reviewing Air Quality, Aspen provided the CEC Compliance Project Manager responsible for overseeing all aspects of the major amendment to restart operations of the geothermal project.

Although the event is temporary, its infrastructure and layout has become a model for urban planners. During the event period and at its current population, Black Rock City is considered the sixth largest city in Nevada and the largest civic art festival in the world. The city includes residential areas, theme camps, art displays, and performance art areas. The total area encompassed by the city within the perimeter fence is about 3,200 acres. Several hundred additional acres outside the perimeter fence would be used for access roads, a temporary airstrip, airport parking, the BLM communications center, a ticket booth, a greeters’ station, and a 50-yard buffer. A 14,153-acre Public Closure Area would surround the perimeter fence and would prohibit access and use by the general public.

In response to the application and on behalf of the BLM, Aspen coordinated with BLM’s Winnemucca Field Office, Nevada State Office, and Denver National Operations Center to develop the proposed action, draft data requests, define assessment areas, and refine analysis methodologies prior to release of the Preliminary EA. Twenty-five (25) issue areas were analyzed in the EA with figures prepared depicting each geographic assessment area for direct, indirect and cumulative impacts. In addition, Aspen also prepared the following separate technical reports: Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas; Natural Lightscapes (Dark Skies); Noise; Socioeconomics (including Environmental Justice); and Traffic Engineering Memo.

Because a BLM decision was needed before the 2012 event, the Preliminary EA was released under a tight schedule in March 2012 and the Final EA, Finding of No Significant Impact, and Decision Record were issued by BLM in June 2012.

In 2014, Aspen won a National Environmental Excellence Award for NEPA Excellence given by the National Association of Environmental Professionals.

The study included identification and evaluation of potential issues associated with the possible modernization, re-tooling, or expansion of California’s 25 coastal power plants including: northern California power plants such as Humboldt, Potrero, Hunter’s Point, Pittsburg, and Oakland; central coast power plants such as Contra Costa, Diablo Canyon Nuclear, Morro Bay, Moss Landing, Elwood, Mandalay, and Ormond Power Plants; and southern California power plants such as the Alamitos, Long Beach, Los Angeles Harbor, Haynes, Redondo Beach, Scattergood, El Segundo, Huntington Beach, Encina, Silver Gate, South Bay, and San Onofre Nuclear.

The study included identification of potential political, social, community, and physical land use impacts that may arise from the potential increased output of energy from plants in highly sensitive coastal communities. The intent of the study was to highlight potential issues for the Energy Commission in order to streamline future licensing processes. The study also included a thorough review of applicable Local Coastal Plans, and Coastal Commission regulations associated with Coastal Development Permits and Consistency Determinations.

Aspen worked on 17 water and energy projects for DWR under this contract, including new reservoir construction, replacement of major water pipelines, modifications to dam releases to simulate natural flows downstream, repairs to access roads and construction of new roads, and various types of repairs and replacement of existing water infrastructure. Work was conducted across a large region of southern California, including desert, mountain, riparian, and urban environments, and involved projects on both the East and West Branches of the California Aqueduct. Aspen completed assignments at various reservoirs along the California Aqueduct, including Pyramid Dam, Tehachapi East Afterbay, Silverwood Lake, Lake Perris, Quail Lake, Castaic Lake, and Crafton Hills Reservoir.

Tasks completed by Aspen under this contract included preparation of environment review documents, such as EIRs and Mitigated Negative Declarations, preparation and processing of environmental permits, such as CWA 404 permits and CDFG 1600 permits, assistance in Endangered Species Act consultation, monitoring of construction activities, preparation of cultural resources surveys and reports, and preparation of biological surveys, reports, and studies. Aspen assisted DWR in the planning and design of projects to avoid or minimize environmental impacts and worked closely with DWR engi­neers, designers, and managers. Aspen also worked closely with DWR field personnel on pre-construction compliance with mitigation measures and monitoring of construction activities for compliance with mitigation and permit conditions.

Siting, Transmission, and Environmental Protection Peak Workload for the California Energy Commission (2009-2012). Under this contract, Aspen has managed 300 work authorizations and 63 subcontractors, with a total contract value $24.2 million. The contract includes the evaluation of energy facilities applications such as: certification of new gas-fired and renewable power plants and related transmission lines, compli­ance monitoring of permitted facilities, designation of transmission corridors, development of the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, and other activities in the areas of environmental impact assessment, engineering, and related regulatory matters. This contract also featured significant effort and quick turnaround on fast-track solar power facilities in the southern California desert region.

Engineering and Environmental Technical Assistance to Support the Energy Facility Planning and Licensing Program (2006-2009). Aspen was the prime contractor to support the Energy Facility Planning and Licensing Programs. Aspen managed this multi-year, multi-task, statewide contract, managing 547 Work Authorizations, 96 subcontractors, and a total contract value of $23.5 million. The Aspen Team was involved in approximately 56 siting cases throughout California during the three year period. Aspen also provided staffing support in the areas of senior project managers, administrative clerks, and technical writers. Besides siting support, Aspen also supported the Energy Planning and Engineering departments at the Energy Commission including the Electricity Assessment, Natural Gas, Generation, and Engineering Offices. Aspen played a major role in the preparation of the Integrated Energy Policy Report.

Engineering and Environmental Technical Assistance to Support the Energy Facility Planning and Licensing Program (2003-2006). Aspen was the prime contractor for this contract, which included managing more than 200 Work Authorizations, 66 subcontractors, and a total contract value of $20 million. This contract included the continued support of power plant siting review, as well as support in preparing a variety of energy planning and policy studies. The energy planning tasks included support on multiple topics, including: Biennial Integrated Energy Policy Report and Update; Environmental Performance Report; Petroleum Infrastructure Environmental Performance; water-energy relationship; global climate change; marine resource impingement and entrainment studies at local coastal power plants; border energy supply and demand; water quality and supply assessments; and other studies.

Review of Power Plant AFCs for the California Energy Commission (2000-2003). Aspen was the prime contractor to support the Energy Commission in reviewing the engineering and environmental aspects of all new power plants in California. With almost 600 Work Authorizations, Aspen worked on 43 power plant projects throughout California. The Aspen Team was originally made up of 50 staff members from Aspen Environmental Group, supplemented by key experts from 25 subcontractor companies that ranged from a one-person expert consulting firm to a firm of 850 employees. As a result of the substantial peak workload and the need to have key experts in a variety of fields, Aspen proactively searched for additional highly qualified companies that could supplement the original Aspen Team, growing the team to nearly 80 subcontractors by the end of the contract.