Council Votes to Oppose AES Redondo Beach Application for CEC

After three hours of discussion, the Redondo Beach City Council on Tuesday voted unanimously to continue participating in the California Energy Commission application process for the AES Redondo Beach Generating Station as an intervenor opposed to the repowering of the plant.

Intervenors have the power to request documents, cross-examine witnesses and participate more directly in the CEC’s application process.

The current power plant on Harbor Drive must be retired, retrofitted, rebuilt or provided with exemptions to continue operating past 2020 to comply with the state of California's ban on once-through cooling.

Once-through cooling uses ocean water to cool the superheated steam generated to spin turbines and create electricity in power plants.

AES Southland, the parent company of the Redondo Beach power plant, has filed an application with the California Energy Commission to rebuild the power plant. Officials say the new plant will take up a smaller footprint and run more efficiently.

Opponents of the plant, on the other hand, argue that AES' application shows that the new plant will run more often than the current one and produce more pollution and continue to depress property values in the area.

In addition to stating its intention to oppose AES’ application to repower, the City Council also directed City Attorney Mike Webb to draft a moratorium on construction for the property on Harbor Drive.

Establishing a moratorium is the first step to changing the zoning on the site in hopes of forcing the CEC to perform a power flow analysis. To override local zoning, the CEC must establish that the plant is necessary to the reliability of the grid.

A power flow analysis commissioned by the city of Redondo Beach indicates that AES Redondo Beach is not needed for grid reliability.

=====

Below is a live blog of the discussion. Entries are in chronological order. Please excuse any typos or misspellings!

9:25 p.m.: Finally, time for AES. City Manager Bill Workman is giving a brief executive summary of the city's involvement with the AES project, noting that the previous council passed a resolution against the power plant and directed the city serve as an intervenor in the CEC process.

He adds that City Attorney Mike Webb wants to speak.

9:34 p.m.: Mayor Steve Aspel notes that intervening is expensive—the city approved $260,000. He asks Webb to discuss the costs.

"I was asked to quantify just the internal costs," Webb says. He says this has come up before. With the data adequacy hearing, an outside, niche firm was hired to analyze the application; however, the firm was expensive. As far as Webb knows, the application is not yet deemed data adequate.

"Depending on the scope of the work, it's between 70 percent and full time," Webb explains. "The assumption here was, the intervenor, and then you also have the intervenor in the other regulatory agencies ... that have an impact on this. If you had us fully invested in trying to as a goal (oppose) the power plant being rebuilt, it's essentially a full-time job."

He notes that the waterfront revitalization is also labor-intensive. Too much time spent on AES would delay work on other city issues.

"As a council as a whole, you need to make ... your goals clearer," he says, adding that the council has been kind of "bipolar." "You want to be intervenors ... but you don't actually have the money to pay to do that, and I'm not sure you appreciate fully the impact on other services that we provide."

Webb asks, What's the goal? Is it to prevent a new power plant? Is it to make sure measures are in place to mitigate the effect of a new power plant?

9:36 p.m.: "I don't envy your choice tonight," Webb says. "There are compelling arguments for all the different policy choices you can make."

Later, "I'm just saying we need to know how important this is for you."

He also notes that Assistant City Manager Marissa Christiansen has left her job. She was the one primarily working on the AES project.

9:46 p.m.: "It seems like we're trying to buy a ferrari and can only afford a Kia," Aspel jokes.

He and Webb are still talking about the cost of outside firms. Webb says it was like $660 per hour. He also notes that the city could always hire another firm to work on other issues.

"Our $260,000 cap that night was just to keep the people in the audience quiet," Aspel remarks. He also compares the $220,000 left to the first line of cocaine for a drug addict.

Aspel and Webb continue to talk about what's involve in intervening and the cost. It's basically review of earlier.

9:49 p.m.: Time for others to speak; however, Aspel has a few notes. People should not re-hash Measure A; public comment will be limited to 3 minutes per person and not be extended; and a lot of this is for the new councilmen.

9:55 p.m.: Bill Brand thanks Webb. "What I'm looking to is to inexpensively and effectively oppose the power plant and not just for mitigation reasons," he says. "I don't want to approve these big numbers here tonight, and I don't want to see you spending all your time on this issues."

He does not see a downside to a moratorium. He notes that the moratorium will let them change the zoning, which could force the CEC to perform a needs analysis and find the new power plant is not necessary.

"Again, it doesn't have to cost any money," Webb says. He notes the "Porshe / Kia analysis" was probably the best one.

Brand says he's "leaning toward" giving another $100,000 or so to the intervenor budget.

Webb says he'll still have to shelve other projects.

"Keep in mind, this is the figure for two years," he says.

Brand agrees that it can be revisited; however, Webb says he still needs direction.

10:03 p.m.: "The moratorium gives us an argument," Webb says, but it needs to be followed up with a zoning change. Otherwise, there's no point in doing it.

Brand says he's in favor of a moratorium and giving direction to the planning commission.

Now it's Aust's turn. He doesn't want to spend more than the $260,000 on AES concerns. He notes that San Onofre is offline permanently.

"AES has started to talk alternatives," he notes. He says AES Southland President Eric Pendergraft is more "personable" now. He says Measure A was not a definitive vote; it may have been defeated, but there are still people who don't want a power plant. "Yes, we will have to change the zoning. We will, no matter what happens down there."

Webb wants to know what Aust's goal is.

10:08 p.m.: Webb continues to explain the significance of a moratorium and zoning changes. He also emphasizes why he needs direction.

With the new members of the city attorney's office, "there will inevitably be mistakes" due to inexperience in municipal law, he says.

10:21 p.m.: Kilroy says the fact that San Onofre is gone is beneficial to the determination of whether it's needed. "We're not really making discussions—there's a few missing pieces of the puzzle," he says.

One missing piece: what happens if the city does absolutely nothing? "Spending nothing gets you nothing," he says. He wants to know how much the city has to spend to move the needle or at least break even. "My concern here is that we're going to be penny-wise and pound-foolish."

Kilroy also wants to know how much time it would take if AES said it was not going to build a power plant but wants the city's help with rezoning the property.

"Mr. Pendergraft has been very clear that they're not going to do anything (like that)," Webb says.

Kilroy notes that whether it's 50 acres or 38 acres, at least some of the land will have to be rezoned. If it's rezoned at AES' requests, the cost is on AES via permit fees and such. The burden is on the planning department.

"My attitude is, you could start that zoning process moving forward with the idea that you're still going to stick them with the bill," Kilroy says. "I question how much of that cost we have to absorb."

Webb says his report is about being an intervenor, not about how much it's going to cost to rezone the property.

After back-and-forth where Webb and Kilroy continue to repeat themselves, Kilroy says his status on the power plant has not changed. He doesn't want a power plant, but if one is necessary, he wants adequate mitigation measures.

10:31 p.m.: Aspel, mercifully, cuts this short before calling on Jeff Ginsburg.

"No matter what happens, we have to change the zoning there—right?" Ginsburg says.

If the power plant is built and AES wants to redevelop the other 38 acres as anything but industrial, the property must be at least partially rezoned, Webb says.

Workman notes that the zoning will have to go before the voters due to Measure DD.

Ginsburg says it really comes down to what AES wants to do—if the power plant wants to work with the city, that would be the best of all worlds.

"I agree 100 percent with the important caveat that the clock stops ticking on the application ... I would probably pass out if that was acceptable to AES," Webb says. He calls it a "false choice."

Webb says it'd be great. He doesn't want to work on his intervening skills.

Brand says it'd be great to "avoid this knife fight" if AES would agree to put a hold on their application.

10:42 p.m.: Time to discuss the power study from Advanced Energy Solutions! The speaker, Jaleh Firooz, says the report was originally done in 2011, and the city of Redondo Beach hired Advanced Energy Solutions to update that report to consider various scenarios, including the retirement of SONGS.

Redondo, Huntington and Alamitos aren't needed for load; however, CAISO does want "load pockets" of local generating power. Redondo Beach is part of the Western L.A. load pocket.

She explains how the capacity studies are put together. (You can find the complete report online.)

"Given the existing generation, given all the retirements, given all the new plants coming up and given the forecasts of the nonconventional resources (e.g. solar power, renewable resources) ... you will only need about less than 1,000 megawatts to meet the local capacity requirements identified by Cal-ISO," she says. "Both Huntington Beach and Alamitos are better power plants, better locations to meet the requirements."

Because of the locations of Huntington Beach and Los Alamitos generating stations, fewer megawatts would be needed, she says. AES Redondo Beach could be bypassed. Also, the flexible generating power could come from outside California.

10:56 p.m.: Brand thanks Firooz for coming from San Diego. He says that "from the beginning," he's wanted to know if there's enough power capacity to retire AES Redondo Beach. He says he's glad that this is all based on physics and math.

He notes that her report says that SONGS does not have a significant effect on the local load pocket because of where it's located.

Brand wants to know if the power lines from Edison would need to remain if AES Redondo Beach were retired. Firooz says the transmission lines can probably be removed without issues.

"So that's huge," Brand notes. He says if they'd known that before Measure A was voted on, it might have incentivized some people to vote for it.

Steve Sammarco has a question. He says he never took physics. He wants to know what Firooz would do if she were in his position.

"I think you want to do the best for your community," she says. "And the best thing to do is to choose an alternative that's the least environmentally detrimental." She still thinks that Huntington Beach is a better location for a new power plant; her second choice would be Alamitos.. "If I was AES, I would file for all three ... but all three are not needed."

10:43 p.m.: Aspel wants to know how many companies in California do the same studies, and would the other firms come to the same conclusions.

"To me, it's just physics. It's 2+2=4. I put no opinion of myself in here. This is just based on the data we have now," she says.

11:05 p.m.: Scott Gobel from Southern California Edison is going to talk about SONGS. "Edison has the obligation to serve all our customers—so that's everyone," he says. We're getting a physics lesson on the grid.

"San Onofre was like our pump, and Diablo Canyon is like our pump," he says. They pump electrons. "AES Redondo is being operated like a 'peaker' plant ... It's not producing power all the time."

Electricity needs to be constantly produced. With SONGS out, the shortage is in north San Diego County. Edison had to build power lines from Long Beach to Santa Ana. This year they've done more technical stuff to provide North San Diego County with adequate power.

Gobel says additional capacity is needed in Western L.A. and up near Moorpark.

He's trying to explain how power needs fluctuate. It's similar to a bell curve. Gobel says the excess capacity is needed for unforeseen circumstances; Cal-ISO calls for 5-6 percent. Power purchase direction comes from Cal-ISO.

SCE will be at the table during the application process.

Aspel wants to know if SCE disagrees with the last report. Gobel says that SCE doesn't make the decision.

11:07 p.m.: "Why did the vaults explode on Catalina 10 days ago? Brand asks.

"Cable failure," says Gobel.

Webb says this is not germane and not on the agenda. Brand thanks Gobel for his information.

11:15 p.m.: Eric Pendergraft of AES Southland's turn. He says he hasn't looked at the power flow analysis in detail. "The conclusions drawn are significantly different than the studies done by Cal-ISO and Southern California Edison," Pendergraft says.

He recommends that the council send the study to Cal-ISO to get a "sanity check" on the conclusions.

"We certainly believe that there is at least a likelihood that a new plant will be needed in Redondo Beach," he says. "If the conclusions of the independent study are correct, you can all be confident that there will never be a new power plant built in Redondo Beach because it is not needed."

It's the alphabet soup of Cal-ISO, the Public Utilities Commission and the CEC that will ultimately determine whether the plant is needed.

"We think it is very important to keep as many options open as possible which is why we are pursuing our permit," he says, noting that AES has no issues with the city being an intervenor in the process. "We are committed to work with you through the process in whatever way you decide to participate."

AES is hoping to be on the agenda of a special CEC meeting at the end of July or on the agenda of the August meeting, he says.

In regards to the land-use issue, he reiterates that AES wants to work with the city to find alternative scenarios to help them discover an e

"We have received corporate approval to engage the land use consultant. We expect to have that completed and initiate our analysis early next week," he says. The consultant needs 10-12 weeks to complete it, and AES needs another month or two to vet the results with senior management before it could be discussed publicly. "We can't envision being in any position to collaboratively discuss alternative zoning until we've competed this analysis and at least have some understanding of the feasibility of coming up with zoning to make us economically whole."

11:23 p.m.: Ginsburg says there is a "win-win-win" scenario. He wonders why it will take too long.

Webb explains the timeline. "It can't truly be that win-win" if AES is continuing to push its application, he says.

Ginsburg asks Pendergraft if AES can put its application on hold for six months or so.

Pendergraft says the moratorium decision should come back after AES has finished its economic analysis.

Webb says it shouldn't be put on hold because it's needed to drive the needs analysis. "The problem is the clock ... starts ticking once you're data adequate," he says.

Ginsburg wants Pendergraft to talk to AES corporate to see if they can put a six-month hold on the application.

"We are also working with a timeline to be in a position that if we should move forward with a new plant that it's constructed and operational by the time our existing ... power contract runs out," Pendergraft says.

11:25 p.m.: "I think it would be foolish of us not to pursue the moratorium and not to pursue rezoning," Brand says.

Sammarco wants more info on what Huntington Beach is doing. Webb says they're pretty much doing nothing to fight a new power plant.

11:31 p.m.: Time for public comment!

First is Kay Gagnin. I think she's gone. But Delia Vechi is next!

She welcomes everyone, and tells the new council members that they need to learn fast.

"I was shocked, and surprised, that every time we talk about AES, we go back to square one and talk about the same thing," she says. "It's very simple. I've heard this story hundreds of times. You need to really decide what you want to do. We don't want a power plant, period...

"It's very clear for me that the priority is to oppose the power plant, go with the resolution, change the zoning... We don't need the power plant. This is the best, nice place of the city. We have been with the plant for many years, and I think we need our park. The experts say (the plant) is not needed."

Aspel tells her the whole thing is not to rehash the entire power plant issue; this is a debate on how much money they're spending on an intervenor.

11:37 p.m.: Lezlie Campeggi is up. She agrees with Kilroy's statement that if you spend nothing, you get nothing: "Go all-in, or say, 'we made a mistake, and we're going to get a power plant here.'"

Next is George Takeda. "I just don't understand you people," he says. "AES has started the process because they want a plant at a certain time frame. When this power plant shuts down, they want to be in operation. If you work backwards, figure out how much time you had to fool around—you don't have much time to fool around."

Sandy Marchese is up at the podium. She is trying to find another solution for the expenditure. "What if Mr. Webb would work on this project, and couldn't there be a lesser rate for somebody to cover the paddleboard and the Cars 2 Go that's not as expensive?" she asks. "Is there another way to spend less and still cover both issues?"

11:38 p.m.: Joe Montgomery of Torrance believes this is regional issue. "I want to see the power plant gone," he says. "I want to see a win-win-win solution."

The council should negotiate from a position of strength, he says. The council should do the moratorium and initiate the zoning.

11:43 p.m.: "It seems to me that we're at a point where you're pretty much in or you're out, as far as being an intervenor goes," says John Parsons. "If you think there's value in it, you'd better find out where you can find the money."

He says the city "really need(s) to get to the table" to talk to AES.

John Mirassou, a consultant for AES, is next. "I do not envy you guys," he says. He notes that 30 percent of the electricity has to come from renewable resources in the future, which means that 70 percent will have to come from power plants.

11:58 p.m.: Brand moves to make the city intervenors specifically to oppose a new power plant, direct the city attorney to draft a moratorium and ask Workman to come up with a budget allocation to add $200,000 to the intervenor budget. Kilroy seconds it.

Ginsburg wants to know the latest point in time the city would have to file to become an intervenor and/or establish the moratorium.

"I can tell you the clock starts ticking as soon as they're deemed data adequate," Webb replies. It could be the end of July; it could be the beginning of August. "Once that happens, you have to apply and the CEC has to approve you as intervenors." Better to do it sooner rather than later.

Ginsburg offers a long and complicated friendly amendment that Brand denies.

Kilroy wants to clarify his position again. Didn't he do this earlier? He talks more about the possible moratorium.

12:20 a.m.: Webb is getting red in the face reiterating that nothing in the city will get done if he dedicates all his time to the AES application.

The motion is edited to remove the bit about Workman coming up with a $200,000 budget allocation for the intervenor process.

(My apologies for the lack of updates right now. The city's wifi shuts off at midnight, so I'm dealing with a less-than-ideal connection with my Verizon 3G card.)

Aspel says the council is not wishy-washy; Measure A lost and the candidates—except Brand, though the mayor does not mention him—who opposed AES lost, he says.

"I heard it loud and clear, not to spend any more money opposing AES," Aspel says. "I think we're on the right path; I think we have a resolution against it; and I don't think we need to spend $1 million on lawyers."

Aspel is not in favor of a moratorium.

"The Energy Commission is not going to determine if the power is needed or not—it's not their job," Brand says. The CEC needs a conflict created via zoning. "Without the moratorium, they're just going to look at mitigations and we're going to get a power plant." He calls this an "investment in the city."
Tempers are running short. Ginsburg is talking again. He still hopes that Pendergraft will talk to corporate to see if AES will put a hold on their application.

Kilroy asks to call for the question—acting as an intervenor to oppose the power plant and directing Webb to come up.

Motion passes unanimously.