$400,000,000 total cost privately owned 800 MegaWatt combined cycle natural gas-fired power plant that generates the electricity to now serve 500,000 Los Angeles residents.

1. C
alifornia—best known for Hollywood, Disneyland, and hard-
ball politics—took energy planning to a new low with its
unique interpretation of deregulation five years ago. The result
took the state’s ratepayers on a roller-coaster ride of rolling black-
outs, skyrocketing rates, energy trading scandals, and utility bank-
ruptcies. It may even lead to the first recall of a governor in 82 years.
The rolling blackouts of 2000 and 2001 were only symptoms of
California’s underlying energy problem: too many people and not
enough power plants. With more than 36 million people, California
is the most populous state in the nation. Before the ongoing eco-
nomic downturn and the dot-com meltdown sent real estate prices
and immigration rates tumbling, the num-
ber of California citizens grew at a 17%
annual clip for a decade. Even at today’s
lower growth rate, more than a half a mil-
lion transplants arrive each year.
While its population was exploding,
California did virtually nothing to ensure
that Californians would have enough elec-
tricity. Between 1994 and 2000, only 924
MW of new capacity were commissioned,
creating a big gap between supply and
demand. The uncertainty produced by the
state’s bold 1998 proposal to make its
electric power sector competitive only
served to widen the gap. During the four
years leading up to the issuance of the
proposal, the state received zero applica-
tions to build a power plant.
After the new millennium arrived with
blackouts in tow, Governor Gray Davis
promised to cut through the red tape and
foster the building of new plants at a record
pace. For developers, famine quickly
turned to feast. From 2000 through July
2003, nearly 7,000 MW were brought on-
line. Today, another 18 projects totaling 8,500 MW are awaiting
approval. But despite the construction boom and its usual opti-
mism, the California Energy Commission projects that on a hot
summer day in 2008, the state’s reserve margin will be a danger-
ously low 5.1%. Clearly, energy planning still has a long way to go
in California.
California’s projected reserve margin would be even lower had a
number of new projects not been built. In fact, one plant did such a
good job of meeting the needs of the state and the local community
and minimizing its environmental impact that POWER has desig-
nated it the 2003 Plant of the Year.
2003 PLANT OF THE YEAR
High Desert Power Plant earns
POWER’s highest accolade for
innovative partnering, emissions
offsetting, and water management
Mix one part power plant with one part city seeking to grow its industrial base
and you have a recipe for a public-private partnership that developed
one sweet project. Constellation Energy Group’s High Desert plant
proves that a desperately needed power plant can meet strict environ-
mental standards while priming the pump of local development efforts.
In recognition of its innovative approaches to project partnering, air
emissions offsetting, and water management, High Desert Power Plant is
POWER magazine’s 2003 Plant of theYear.
By Dr. Robert Peltier, PE
2 www.powermag.platts.com POWER | September 2003
1. Victor Valley powerhouse. The High Desert Power Plant is the centerpiece of
the Victor Valley’s economic redevelopment efforts. It is located on the old George Air Force
Base, now the Southern California Logistics Airport. The plant site is in the lower right.
Courtesy: Constellation Energy Group

2. And the winner is . . .
That plant is Constellation Energy Group’s High Desert Power
Plant (HDPP). It sits just outside the city of Victorville, 120 miles
northeast of Los Angeles, on a 25-acre parcel leased from the Vic-
tor Valley Economic Development Agency. The parcel (Figure 1)
is located on the old George Air Force Base, which is now called
the Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA).
HDPP is a 3 x 1 combined-cycle plant with a generating capacity
of 830 MW and is built for cycling (Table 1). Its three combustion
turbines, individually rated at 177 MW, are Siemens Westinghouse
501Fs (Figure 2). Each is equipped with a three-pressure-level
Alstom Power heat-recovery steam generator (HRSG) with reheat
(Figure 3). Plant steam conditions are 1,760 psia and 1,050F HP,
380 psia and 1,050F RH, and 100 psia and 630F LP. HDPP’s steam
turbine (Figure 4) is from Toshiba, and its distribution control sys-
tem (DCS) is an Ovation from Westinghouse (Figure 5).
HDPP’s entire output is dispatched by the California Department
of Water Resources (CDWR). When the power-purchase contract
was signed, the state was jubilant. At the time, Governor Davis
said, “The High Desert Project adds important new capacity to Cal-
ifornia’s energy infrastructure and shows the value of working
together toward reasonable negotiated agreements with energy
providers. This new capacity in the state’s control enhances our
flexibility for meeting California’s future energy needs.”
A public-private partnership
These days, the toughest part of building a new power plant any-
where in developed countries has nothing to do with designing it or
assembling its pieces. More often than not, at permitting hearings,
the developer must convince local residents that the plant will do
more good than harm. For Constellation Energy, those hearings
were much less contentious than usual. Victorville actually wanted
2003 PLANT OF THE YEAR
September 2003 | POWER 3
Net plant output 830 MW
Gas turbine 3 @ 177 MW each
Steam turbine 1 @ 323 MW
Net plant heat rate 6,582 Btu/kWh (LHV)
Fuel Natural gas
Emissions
Plant NOx 2.5 ppm
GT NOx 25 ppm
SCR 90% reduction, using 25% aqueous ammonia
Plant CO 0 ppm at full load
Operating mode On call by California Department of Water Resources
Operating hours Dispatched by CDWR; estimated 3,500/year
Contract structure Flat energy sale
Term July 1, 2003 to September 30, 2011
Cost $375 million
Table 1. A profile of High Desert Power Plant
Source: Constellation Energy Group
2. Powered by Siemens Westinghouse. The plant’s
three combustion turbines are Siemens Westinghouse W501FD2s; each
is nominally rated at 177 MW. Courtesy: Constellation Energy Group
3. HRSG. Alstom supplied the triple-
pressure HRSGs, which were integrated
with a Coen duct burner, a Babcock-Hitachi
selective catalytic reduction system, and a
CO catalyst from Goal Line Environmental
Technologies. Courtesy: Constellation
Energy Group
4. Steam turbine. The Toshiba reheat
steam turbine, rated at 323 MW, is enclosed
in a separate turbine building. Its condenser
is installed at grade level below the turbine.
Courtesy: Constellation Energy Group
5. Control panel. The plant’s digital
control system is a Westinghouse Ovation.
It allows a single operator to start up and
shut down HDPP. Courtesy: Constellation
Energy Group

3. the plant to be built in its backyard because the city fathers knew it
could be a catalyst for SCLA redevelopment.
Because HDPP is sited within the boundaries of the SCLA, Vic-
torville’s Economic Development Agency can use 1% of the prop-
erty taxes paid by the plant to back bonds earmarked for developing
the infrastructure of the airport and its environs. One percent does-
n’t sound like much, but in this case it amounts to an estimated $4
million a year for priming the SCLA development pump. So it’s no
wonder that the entire Victor Valley—including various school
boards, the Victorville Chamber of Commerce, and virtually all city
and county officials—publicly supported the project and went to
extraordinary lengths to help make it a reality.
Victorville Mayor Terry Caldwell (Figure 6) explains why the
city welcomed HDPP and bonded with its original developer and
current owner. The project “complemented our plans to turn SCLA
into a world-class air cargo airport and business park. From devel-
opment through construction and now operation, the people associ-
ated with Inland, Constellation, and HDPP worked closely with
community representatives to make sure that our concerns were
addressed. We look forward to a long, mutually beneficial relation-
ship with HDPP. We are proud to have the plant as a member of
our city family.”
The project’s history
Inland Energy Inc.’s founder, Buck Johns, conceived HDPP in the
early ’90s. He envisioned it as a response to three trends in California:
the state’s exploding population and demand for electricity, then-gov-
ernor Pete Wilson’s stated desire to overhaul California’s power sec-
tor, and the maturation of clean and efficient combined-cycle power
generation technology. “The opportunity to put HDPP in Victorville
was an entrepreneur’s dream. All the elements were in place: a stag-
gering demand for power, a highly efficient and environmentally
friendly technology, the advent of a receptive regulatory/permitting
structure, and one of California’s most pro-business communities,”
Johns says. “Now all I needed was half a billion dollars. I know it
sounds strange, but people like me actually think like that!”
To gain access to the resources needed and to add stability and
credibility to the development process, Johns brought in Constella-
tion Energy Group as a partner in 1997. Constellation Energy Group
is a holding company with energy-related businesses. Among them
is the nation’s oldest utility, Baltimore Gas and Electric Co., which
traces its history back to 1816. HDPP is Constellation Energy
Group’s eighth merchant power plant to begin commercial operation
in the past two years and is the star of the firm’s 12,300-MW mer-
chant energy business.
In 1996, Johns’ and Wilson’s visions were reinforced when Cali-
fornia legislators passed A.B. 1190, which allowed private
investors to build “merchant” plants and sell their output directly
into California’s power grid. At that point, Constellation formed a
subsidiary (HDPP LLC) to manage the project; it bought the rights
to the project from Inland Energy in 1999 and began taking the
steps needed to bring it to fruition.
The first step HDPP LLC took was to make Kiewit Industrial
Co. High Desert’s engineering, procurement, and construction
(EPC) contractor and Bibb and Associates Inc. its provider of
design engineering, construction and commissioning support, and
performance testing for the entire project. At the same time,
HDPP LLC lined up USFilter to engineer, build, and install the
plant’s crucial water intake, treatment, and discharge systems.
The responsibilities of High Desert’s five key players are delin-
eated in Table 2.
Having had its “data adequacy” confirmed by the California
Energy Commission (CEC) in 1997, High Desert received its notice
2003 PLANT OF THE YEAR
4 POWER | September 2003
6. Economic developer. Victorville Mayor Terry Caldwell
says that the High Desert Power Plant “complemented our plans to
turn the Southern California Logistics Airport into a world-class air
cargo airport and business park. We’re proud to have it as a member
of our city family.” Courtesy: Constellation Energy Group
Constellation Energy Group • Overall project and construction management
• Funding ($550 million)
• Environmental permitting
Inland Energy Inc. • Original project developer
• Teamed with Constellation in 1997
• Sold project to Constellation in 1999
Kiewit Industrial Co. • Responsible for engineering, procurement, and
construction of the plant
Bibb Engineering
USFilter
• Provided design engineering, construction and
commissioning support, and performance testing
services.
• Provided state-of-the-art water-treatment
engineering, equipment, and startup services
for the plant’s aquifer reinjection, makeup water,
and zero liquids discharge systems.
Table 2. Project participants and responsibilities
Source: Constellation Energy Group
Combustion turbine Operating hours Equivalent starts
1 1,010 168
2 965 108
3 916 59
1 633 123
2 648 58
3 593 29
Hours of operation (through June 17, 2003)
Precommissioning history (through April 21, 2003)
Table 4. High Desert Power Plant operating statistics
Source: Constellation Energy Group
Month Availability (%)
May 2003
a
94.8
June 97.3
July 98.8
Table 3. High Desert Power Plant availability (%)
Note: a. First month, by contract
Source: Constellation Energy Group

4. to proceed from the agency in February 2001. The reason for the
delay was that financing took time to confirm. Once it was in place,
Kiewit broke ground on April 5, 2001. HDPP began commercial
operation on April 22, 2003, ahead of its July 1 target completion
date. During its first two months on-line, all systems performed
according to spec (Tables 3 and 4).
Bringing in other partners
As the first major power plant constructed in Southern California
in over a decade, HDPP faced a number of significant hurdles.
One of the first was to find a customer for its output. HDPP
snagged a big one: CDWR, which signed an eight-year contract
for dispatchable power. However, the contract was renegotiated
in the wake of California’s energy trading debacle.
The startup of High Desert concluded an eight-year development
and construction process during which Constellation worked close-
ly with state and local officials to bring a valuable and environmen-
tally benign asset to Southern California. In fact, Constellation
worked for over three years on the permitting process alone. During
that period, it sat across the table from representatives of the CEC,
the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD),
the U.S. EPA, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the Army Corps of
Engineers, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and the Califor-
nia Department of Fish & Game.
Constellation and Kiewit also worked closely with the Mojave
Water Agency (MWA) and the Victor Valley Water District
(VVWD) to protect the Southern California desert’s most precious
commodity: water. High Desert uses no local water for its process
systems. The primary makeup supply comes from the State Water
Project (SWP) via the California Aqueduct through MWA. The
plant gets its backup water supply by injecting and withdrawing
SWP water into and out of a local aquifer via a well system owned
and operated by VVWD.
Transporting emission offsets
Building a major power plant in California without emissions off-
sets just isn’t possible—especially when the prevailing winds
bring plenty of Los Angeles NOx into the Victor Valley. Here’s the
Catch-22: If you need NOx offsets because of ambient air condi-
tions, and those conditions are caused by “imported” pollution,
how can you get the required offsets if there are few local NOx
generators?
Constellation Energy took a pioneering approach to solving this
problem: It uses offsets from Los Angeles through a conversion
factor that credits them to the project in Victorville. Although it is
scientifically sound, this approach pushed the regulators way out-
side their comfort zone, even though the concept was strongly sup-
ported by the MDAQMD. After several consultant reports and
innumerable meetings, the concept was agreed to, although the
actual conversion factors were ultimately negotiated. For example,
the final permit defines a 1.3:1 pollutant/interbasin offset ratio. In
combination with an interpollutant offset ratio for volatile organic
compounds of 1.6:1, the plant’s total offset ratio is 2.1:1.
According to Tom Barnett, who at the time was Constellation’s
VP of project development, “The permitting process for a major
power plant in California is the most rigorous in the nation. We
were forced to break new ground in a number of areas, including
the transfer of emission reduction credits from one air district to
another.” The final agreement not only paved the way for High
Desert; it set a precedent for other projects to follow. Barnett is
now with the San Diego–based power consultancy Astrum Utility
Services LLC.
More precious than power
California’s shrinking supply of water all but required that High
Desert’s water permit specify the use of a zero liquids discharge
(ZLD) system. In such systems, wastewater is recovered and
reused rather than returned to the environment—which usually
requires a time-consuming, albeit essential, environmental permit-
ting process. As mentioned, High Desert’s primary supply of
makeup water comes from the State Water Project; it is delivered
via the California Aqueduct by the Mojave Water Agency. The
plant’s backup water supply relies on Constellation’s ability to
replenish ground water via an “aquifer banking” system.
Barnett emphasizes the important of having “devised a water
supply plan that protects the most precious of commodities in a
desert community. Fortunately, the host community could not have
2003 PLANT OF THE YEAR
September 2003 | POWER 5
7. Concentrator. High Desert’s zero liquids discharge (ZLD) sys-
tem evaporates the reverse osmosis reject into dry, crystalline solids,
which are then landfilled. Courtesy: Constellation Energy Group
Constellation Energy . . . uses
offsets from Los Angeles through a
conversion factor that credits them
to the project in Victorville.

5. been more supportive. All of the elected officials in the Victor Val-
ley, as well as representatives of the local regulatory agencies, were
very pro-business. The project simply would have been impossible
without their cooperation.”
High Desert’s ZLD water treatment system uses
microfiltration/reverse osmosis (MF/RO) technology designed and
provided by USFilter. A brine concentrator and crystallizer reduce
the plant wastewater to an easily disposed, nontoxic material with
the consistency of wet sand (Figure 7). What makes the system
unique is that it takes water from the California Aqueduct, clarifies
it for cooling, and filters a portion of it—making it suitable for
groundwater injection. (See the January/February 2002 issue of
POWER, page 20, for more details on HDPP’s ZLD system.)
To meet High Desert’s water requirements, the aquifer banking
objectives, and the ZLD mandate, the plant’s water permit calls for
the use of a water management system with five subsystems:
s A water pretreatment system (WPS). After clarifying and filter-
ing the plant’s 5,800 gpm of intake water to remove suspended
solids and potential pathogens, the WPS pretreats the water to
make it suitable for cooling-tower makeup, steam-cycle makeup,
and use by the gas-turbine evaporative cooler and the aquifer
banking system. The water for steam-cycle makeup and the
aquifer banking system requires additional treatment for process
and public health reasons, respectively.
s An aquifer banking system. HDPP uses an ultra-filtration system
to treat all the water from the WPS that is used to replenish the
local water table. The system now takes in 2,200 gpm, and will
continue to do so until 13,000 acre-feet of water are injected.
About 2,600 acre-feet are expected to be reinjected each year.
s A blowdown treatment system. It uses lime softening and filtra-
tion, followed by RO. The RO permeate is returned to the cool-
ing tower, and the reject stream is fed back into the ZLD system
(Figure 8).
s A ZLD system. It is a two-stage thermal system that evaporates
the RO reject into dry, crystalline solids. The solids are land-
filled, the distillate is used as makeup water for the HRSGs, and
the balance is returned to the cooling tower, which has an evapo-
ration rate of 3,600 gpm.
s A demineralized water system. It provides makeup water for the
plant’s three HRSGs.
High Desert’s output and input
HDPP is built “within the fence” of Southern California’s load and
connects at 230 kV through the Victor substation to the 500-kV
Lugo substation. Lugo is the primary hub feeding power into
Southern California Edison’s LA Basin service territory; typically,
more than 5,000 MW flow through it. SCE furthered the project by
building a 7-mile, 230-kV transmission line from HDPP to the
Victor substation.
For its fuel, HDPP could have chosen from among three major
natural gas–supply basins: the Canadian, Rocky Mountains, and San
Juan. To gain a new customer, and because the Rockies’ gas fields
are projected to continue expanding, Kern River Gas Transmission
Co. decided last year to build a 32-mile, 24-inch lateral to connect
with its interstate pipeline and Pacific Gas & Electric’s intrastate
pipeline. It now supplies up to 282 million cubic feet per day of nat-
ural gas to High Desert. “This [pipeline] will go a long way toward
enhancing California’s energy supply,” says Robert Sluder, presi-
dent of Kern River.
2003 PLANT OF THE YEAR
6 POWER | September 2003
8. RO units. The distillate from the ZLD system is used as makeup water for the plant’s three HRSGs. The balance is returned to the
cooling tower through the RO system. Courtesy: Constellation Energy Group

6. Focusing on safety and
teamwork
One measure of Kiewit Industrial Co.’s
outstanding performance as High Desert’s
EPC contractor is that its employees
worked more than 1,200,000 hours and reg-
istered only two recordable injuries and no
lost-time accidents. Such an exceptional
safety record on a project of this size didn’t
just happen. It was the direct result of a
diligent program of site organization and
housekeeping and a continuous focus on
personnel safety.
Bruce Gewcock, president and COO of
Peter Kiewit Sons’ Inc., puts the compa-
ny’s safety philosophy in perspective by
noting that “safety is thoroughly embedded
in the Kiewit culture. New employees
quickly sense from the actions and attitudes
of their supervisors and coworkers that
safety is genuinely important to us.”
On any project, safety may come first,
but meeting deadlines is a close second. At
High Desert, the entire project team—engi-
neering, construction, and startup—set the
“real” schedule at its kickoff meeting by
making the completion date 30 days ahead
of the bonus completion date. This aggres-
sive schedule wasn’t just a “target” date; it
became “the schedule.” The results were
undeniable: The project was completed 55
days early without any safety losses and in
conformance with all the project environ-
mental requirements.
Neal Parece, project director for Con-
stellation’s Engineering and Construction
group, attributes the early completion date
and successful startup of HDPP to the
establishment of project goals and values.
“This was an extremely challenging pro-
ject in terms of technology, schedule, and
the regulatory environment. Constellation
and Kiewit set out specific goals and val-
ues for the project team at the onset of the
project. We consistently kept those goals
and values in mind as we executed the
job, and they formed the basis of a strong
project partnership. The success we’ve
achieved is a direct result of the commitment
to our goals and values, and to each other as
partners.”
Steven Gross, Constellation’s VP for the
Western Region, sums up the performance
of the project’s two key players by noting
that “the construction/operations team of
Kiewit and Constellation were the best
I’ve ever seen. Issues were resolved quick-
ly, and changes were made as required to
meet tight schedules without compromis-
ing safety or housekeeping in the least. I
have never seen a project as organized, as
clean, as safe, or as well managed as the
High Desert Power Plant.” s
2003 PLANT OF THE YEAR
September 2003 | POWER 7
Siemens Westinghouse 501FD2s
Siemens Westinghouse Aero Pac II
Alstom Power
Coen Co.
Babcock-Hitachi
Goal Line Environmental Technologies
Toshiba Corp.
Toshiba Corp.
Thermal Engineering International
NITECH Engineered Vacuum Systems
Fisher Controls
NJEX-YZ Industries
Perry Equipment Corp.
NITRAM Energy Inc.
ABB
Fortune Electric Co.
Fortune Electric Co.
Square D
Square D
Caterpillar Electric Power
Flowserve Pump Division
KSB Pumps
Flowserve Pump Division
GEA Integrated Cooling Technologies
Flowserve Pump Division
USFilter Actiflo
USFilter Centrol
USFilter Ultra Filter
USFilter
USFilter Microfilter System
USFilter FlowMax
Vivendi Water-Bekox Desalator
USFilter
Dresser Rand
USFilter
USFilter
Westinghouse Ovation
Siemens TXP/Teleperm
Toshiba Controls
Invensys Wonderware
Forney Corp./Thermal Environmental Instruments
A-C Fire Pump Systems
A-C Fire Pump Systems
Atlas Copco
Combustion turbines
CT generators (totally enclosed, water-/air-cooled [TEWAC], 197 MVA)
Triple-pressure HRSGs
Duct burners
Selective catalytic reduction system
CO catalyst
Steam turbine
ST generator (360 MVA, hydrogen-cooled)
Deaerating condenser
Condenser vacuum skid
Steam bypass control valves
Mercaptin injection
Fuel gas filter separator
Fuel gas heater
Generator breakers (230 kV, SF6)
GSU transformers (15 kV to 230 kV)
230 kV to 4,160 V auxiliary transformer
4,160-V breakers
5-kV and 480-V switchgear
Essential services generator (2-MW diesel engine)
Condensate pumps
Boiler feedwater pumps
Circulating water pumps
Cooling tower
Auxiliary cooling water pumps
Clarifier
Media filter
Biological/microorganism control
Cold lime softening
Sludge removal
1st-stage brine concentrator
2nd-stage brine concentrator
Falling film crystallizer
Vapor compressor/crystallizer blower
Distillate chiller
Continuous deionization system
Plant distributed control system
Combustion turbine-generator control systems
Steam turbine-generator control system
Water-treatment control system
Continuous emissions monitoring system
Electric fire pump
Diesel fire pump
Service/instrument air compressor
Miscellaneous equipment
Water treatment system—cooling tower blowdown system
Crystallizer
Deionization system
Instrumentation and controls
Electrical equipment
Condensate and feedwater systems
Water treatment system—Pretreatment
Water treatment system—aquifer banking system
Combustion turbine generator and auxiliaries
Heat-recovery steam generators
Steam turbine generator/condenser/air ejection
Fuel gas system
Table 5. High Desert Power Plant’s major equipment suppliers
Source: Constellation Energy Group