Option 2) Assume maintaining Line 1600 at 512 psig (65 MMcfd) and plan available supply pursuant to the Applicants’ forecast and nothing more. No replacement volumes would be needed for the foreseeable future. Based on the Applicants’ most recent demand forecast (Ex. SDGE12 at 85 and 159), peak demand 590 MMcfd by winter 2020/21, and their capacity is 595 MMcfd with Line 1600 at 512 psig. It will take up to four years to pressure test Line 1600 (i.e., conclude by winter 2021/2022 if they initiate hydrotesting in 2018). Therefore, Line 1600 could run at 512 psig until it can be pressure tested. Then, based on results of the hydrotest and/or potential RFO, pressure would then be reduced permanently to 320 psig (or roughly equivalent) and their peak winter capacity reduced to 570 MMcfd. In 2022/23 the Utilities’ forecast anticipates a 1in10 cold day peak of up to 572 MMCfd. Hence, the Applicants would need only 2 MMcfd to ensure reliability for winter 2022/23. Under the above assumptions, at least two options are available to meet the 2 MMcfd deficit. scenario is that 2 MMcfd could be replaced by four years of firm supply from Otay Mesa receipt point (e.g., Costa Azul LNG or El Paso supply or both) he remaining 2 MMcfd be replaced by battery storage. The Applicants’ forecast is for a 563 MMcfd coldday peak in 2023/24, and this drops to 546 MMcfd by 2035/36. Line 3010 can provide 570 MMcfd as a standalone pipeline without Line 1600 in service. Therefore, with the battery storage that SDG&E is already required to procure in large quantity (up to 331 MW procured by 2020 with 96.65 MW procured as of February 2017; D.1704039), we believe that the capacity reduction from derating Line 1600 to 320 psig could, , be accounted for by SDG&E’s battery storage procurements. Either of the two options presented or similar options, would ensure reliability and this could be explored via the results of a RFO as discussed in the following section.
Option 2) Assume maintaining Line 1600 at 512 psig (65 MMcfd) and plan available supply pursuant to the Applicants’ forecast and nothing more. No replacement volumes would be needed for the foreseeable future. Based on the Applicants’ most recent demand forecast (Ex. SDGE12 at 85 and 159), peak demand 590 MMcfd by winter 2020/21, and their capacity is 595 MMcfd with Line 1600 at 512 psig. It will take up to four years to pressure test Line 1600 (i.e., conclude by winter 2021/2022 if they initiate hydrotesting in 2018). Therefore, Line 1600 could run at 512 psig until it can be pressure tested. Then, based on results of the hydrotest and/or potential RFO, pressure would then be reduced permanently to 320 psig (or roughly equivalent) and their peak winter capacity reduced to 570 MMcfd. In 2022/23 the Utilities’ forecast anticipates a 1in10 cold day peak of up to 572 MMCfd. Hence, the Applicants would need only 2 MMcfd to ensure reliability for winter 2022/23. Under the above assumptions, at least two options are available to meet the 2 MMcfd deficit. scenario is that 2 MMcfd could be replaced by four years of firm supply from Otay Mesa receipt point (e.g., Costa Azul LNG or El Paso supply or both) he remaining 2 MMcfd be replaced by battery storage. The Applicants’ forecast is for a 563 MMcfd coldday peak in 2023/24, and this drops to 546 MMcfd by 2035/36. Line 3010 can provide 570 MMcfd as a standalone pipeline without Line 1600 in service. Therefore, with the battery storage that SDG&E is already required to procure in large quantity (up to 331 MW procured by 2020 with 96.65 MW procured as of February 2017; D.1704039), we believe that the capacity reduction from derating Line 1600 to 320 psig could, , be accounted for by SDG&E’s battery storage procurements. Either of the two options presented or similar options, would ensure reliability and this could be explored via the results of a RFO as discussed in the following section.
216389464.docx