Renewable RFP Questions & Answers
| Question 1: We read an announcement on BusinessWire that SCE is especially interested in solar systems that can connect to the Tehachapi renewable transmission project and Sunrise Powerlink. Do you know if SCE will be assigning priority or additional locational value to projects located in these two areas? | Answer 1: Yes, SCE's evaluation criteria will consider the benefit to projects of locating near approved transmission infrastructure, such as the Sunrise Powerlink Transmission Project and the Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project. |
| Question 2: I have been reading through the proposal documents and wanted to see if there is a bid fee to submit to the 2009 RFP? I did not find any mention of it in the solicitation, only the mention of a short list deposit if the bid submitted is selected. | Answer 2: There is no fee or deposit to submit a proposal in response to SCE's 2009 RFP. The first instance when a potential Seller would be required to post a deposit is within ten (10) Business Days of notification by SCE that Seller's proposal has been selected for SCE's short list. We currently anticipate that this notification will take place in late October or early November of this year. |
| Question 3: I don't understand SCE's requirement for Sellers to communicate their positions with respect to SCE's Pro Forma PPA contract. Are we required to submit a redline to the Pro Forma PPA document? | Answer 3: Contrary to the practice in previous years, SCE is not requiring Sellers to submit redlines to the entire 2009 Pro Forma PPA document posted on SCE's 2009 RFP website with their proposals. Instead, SCE is only requiring a Seller to review the PPA document and then fill out the 2009 RFP Excel-based Term Sheet to communicate any material issues that the Seller has with SCE's Pro Forma. |
| Question 4: SCE has various contracting programs available, such as the 2009 Renewable RFP, the Standard Contracts Programs, and the up-coming solar photovoltaic program (SPVP) for rooftop solar projects. Assuming my project is eligible for more than one of your programs, can I submit a particular project into more than one program? | Answer 4: Yes. But when you are submitting your proposal into a particular SCE program, please clearly describe all SCE programs to which you are or will be submitting your project. Also, explain any limitations for selection by each project, such as mutual exclusivity. For example, ABC Solar Co. hereby submits its 2 MW solar PV project into SCE's 2009 Renewable RFP and intends to submit the same proposal into SCE's SPVP when the respective solicitation is launched. This proposal is mutually exclusive, in that SCE can select this project only once, for 2 MW in its 2009 Renewable RFP or 2 MW in its SPVP. |
| Question 5: Is there a recording of SCE's RFP Proposal & Imperial Valley Bidders' Conferences that was held on July 9th at the Four Points Sheraton (LAX)? | Answer 5: Yes, you may download and replay the audio mp3 file of SCE's RFP Conferences. As a reminder, you can also download the presentation slides (pdf) so that you can more effectively follow along with the audio. |
| Question 6: Should I include the Startup Period (from Initial Synchronization to Initial Operation) in the Revenue Calculator? If so, what price do I use for the build-out period. | Answer 6: SCE prefers that you use the Revenue Calculator to reflect only the commercial production period after Initial Operation. However, if you propose to receive some payment from SCE during the build-out (other than the revenues and charges SCE receives from the CAISO for the energy as provided in the pro forma), please indicate that in your Term Sheet that is due on August 14, 2009. |
| Question 7: Regarding the Revenue Calculator, after I correctly input the values for steps 1-3, I click the "Update Entire Revenue Calculator" button but nothing happens. What am I doing wrong? | Answer 7: Macros must be enabled to run the revenue calculator. Here are steps to enable macros in Excel:
Excel 2003 and Older:
Excel 2007:
|
| Question 8: Would it be possible for you to provide me with an MS Word version of the Non Disclosure Agreement and Seller Acknowledgement Letter? Since SCE is requiring Sellers to redline these, a Word version would be more convenient. | Answer 8: SCE has now replaced the PDF version of Appendix C: Form of Seller's Proposal with the MS Word (DOC) version. You can now obtain the DOC version of the Non Disclosure Agreement and Seller Acknowledgement Letter, since they are contained in Appendix C. |
| Question 9: This is a request for additional information as to the purpose and meaning of the last paragraph of the Non-Disclosure Agreement contained in Appendix C of the 2009 RFO Materials which reads as follows: SCE may also disclose Confidential Information as may be reasonably required to participate in any auction, market or other process pertaining to the allocation of priorities or rights related to the transmission of electrical energy sold or to be sold to SCE under any agreement reached as a result of discussions or negotiations. | Answer 9: This provision allows SCE to disclose confidential information as part of an auction or other process to allocate transmission rights or priorities, as may be required by a governmental body (such as the CPUC) or balancing authority (such as the CAISO). In order to allocate transmission rights, for example, the CAISO may need to know, among other things, where projects are located, the expected capacity of each project, the total anticipated MW of capacity that may be interconnecting at a specific substation or the power expected to be transmitted along a specific line at different times of day. SCE may need to disclose this type of project information in the course of the allocation process in order to obtain needed transmission rights. |
| Question 10: For the purposes of out-of-state renewable resources, does SCE have a preference for certain trading hubs that are not in California? Furthermore, with respect to the definition of liquid trading hubs, we are wondering if SCE could provide a list of such hubs in the WECC, or a more detailed definition of what hubs would qualify as liquid. | Answer 10: SCE currently prefers the following outside-California delivery points as they are, in SCE's current view, liquid' trading hubs: Mid-C, COB, PV, Mead and Four Corners. However, SCE's ultimate appetite to take deliveries at these hubs will be dependent on a variety of factors, including the quantity and MW size of proposals SCE receives at such locations, prospective or enacted legislation which relates to or affects taking power from out-of-state delivery points, and any updates to SCE's view of market liquidity at these hubs. |
| Question 11: There is no mailing address listed for the Hard Copy Submittal that is due on August 21st. Proposal Structure Letter template includes an address in the header; is this where our Hard Copy Submittal should be delivered to? Also, for the Electronic Submittal that is due the week prior, to which email address do we submit the files to? Is it to both the RenewableProposals@SCE.com and Wayne Oliver's email? | Answer 11: Section 3.03 of Appendix C: Seller's Form of Proposal includes the mailing address for the Hard Copy Submittal, and Section 2.03(a) of Appendix C: Seller's Form of Proposal includes the email address where the Electronic Submittal must be sent. |
| Question 12: I am able to download all appendices from SCE's 2009 Renewable RFP website, but I can't seem to find the document explaining SCE's preferred location, time, size, etc, for the renewable sources. Could you please help me? | Answer 12: SCE discloses its commercial (i.e., location, time, size, etc.) requirements and preferences throughout the Procurement Protocol document. |
| Question 13: We will be bidding into the 2009 RFP and would like to know if there is a notice of intent to bid we need to submit as we did not find one online. | Answer 13: Unlike SCE's past Renewable RFPs, there is no notice of intent to bid as part of the 2009 Renewable RFP. |
| Question 14: Could you consider a 10 MW PV solar project in Nevada for delivery on Path #52 (Silver Peak55)? | Answer 14: Yes, but please be advised of our locational preferences as stated in the Proposal Conference Presentation, slide #15 (downloadable from http://www.sce.com/RenewRFP). |
| Question 15: Does pending legislation threaten ability to gain RECs if a solar site is located in CA? | Answer 15: SCE is not aware of any such pending legislation if the resource is either (i) located in California or (ii) located outside California but is directly interconnected with a transmission provider's system that directly serves California load. For resources located outside California which are interconnected to a non-California-serving transmission system, however, there is pending legislation that may dictate how and to what extent SCE may count the energy towards its RPS goal. Regardless, SCE will consider proposals for out-of-state resources and will work with the Seller to better understand the associated risks and, if short-listed, negotiate the applicable contract provisions mutually agreeable to both SCE and Seller. Please note that pending legislation can change dramatically as it moves through the legislative process and should be continually monitored by all interested parties. |
| Question 16: I was looking at this current RFP and I was wondering what constitutes an Eligible Renewable Energy Resource Supplier? | Answer 16: An "Eligible Renewable Energy Resource Supplier" is an entity who is submitting a Proposal to SCE (via its 2009 Renewable RFP) to sell a bundled Product (i.e., electric energy and Green Attributes) from an "Eligible Renewable Resource" as defined in the CEC's RPS Eligibility Guidebook (THIRD Edition) located at http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/documents/. |
| Question 17: Is this RFP only for Imperial Valley participants? | Answer 17: No. This RFP is open to any potential Seller of the full output of an Eligible Renewable Resource (as defined by the CEC) whereby its first point of interconnection is anywhere within the WECC system. SCE does have a preference for projects interconnecting to the Sunrise Powerlink (a portion of which is in the Imperial Valley) or the Tehachapi Transmission project. |
| Question 18: We have a project in Utah. If we can get the power to MDWP, would that meet the interconnection requirement to submit an RFP proposal? | Answer 18: Since Utah is entirely within the WECC, your proposal meets SCE's interconnection requirement regardless of whether or not you deliver the power to MDWP. |
| Question 19: We would like to confirm the portions of the Project Viability Calculator (PVC) that we are expected complete, since much of the template appears to be for the IOU and IE to complete. | Answer 19: As per the instructions set forth in Section 4.19(c) of "Appendix C: Form of Seller's Proposal", you need to input your respective scores in the yellow cells in the Calculator tab, using the guidelines provided in the Criteria Scoring Guidelines tab. For more specificity, these are the yellow cells under the Project Scoring section of the Calculator tab. |
| Question 20: We have an existing power purchase agreement with SCE that is due to expire soon. We are planning to add 20MW of new generation to the existing site. My question is, do we need to complete an Interconnection agreement and obtain a CAISO Queue position since the substation and interconnection to SCE already exist? | Answer 20: Yes, you will need to submit the appropriate (i.e., small generator or large generator) interconnection application with the interconnection provider to get into the queue and eventually enter into a new (or possibly amended) interconnection agreement. The applicable (small generator or large generator) interconnection application is evaluated on the basis of the new total capacity of the generating facility (not just the incremental capacity). For instance, if your new total capacity (not just the incremental capacity) is above 20 MW, you'll need to submit a Large Generator Interconnection Application; if less than 20MW, a Small Generation Interconnection Application. Please refer to http://www.sce.com/wholesale_tariff for interconnection application instructions and forms. |
| Question 21: Are we precluded from submitting one project to two different utilities as part of RFP process? | Answer 21: SCE's procurement protocol does not require exclusive rights to a particular project at time of submission. If you are short listed, you will need to enter into an Exclusivity Agreement with SCE to remain on SCE's shortlist. |
| Question 22: Is there a maximum amount of renewable energy (MWh) that SCE is looking to procure? | Answer 22: SCE has not set a maximum amount of energy to procure in this solicitation. SCE does encourage proposals that may include a number of mutually exclusive combinations such that SCE could select a variety of project sizes that best meet our needs when considered with all the proposals received. |
| Question 23: To meet the historic solar data requirement of Section 3.25 in the Pro Forma agreement, can we rely upon NOAA data recorded near the site, or must we have one-year of recorded data from a meteorological station installed in the exact location? | Answer 23: With regard to Sections 3.24 and 3.25, the historic meteorological data Seller is required to provide (at least 90 days prior to Initial Synchronization) is expected to be from the Site. NOAA data would not typically be acceptable for this purpose. However, SCE will work with the Seller to make a determination given the specific project situation should this be an issue with the timing of the project development. SCE will also work with a Seller to identify the meteorological equipment and communication system that will be used to collect the data. Please note the meteorological station and communication system do not need to be the same equipment that is used throughout the Delivery Term to measure and transmit meteorological data. |
| Question 24: Is SCE interested in proposals for equity participation in projects? | Answer 24: In this RFP, SCE is seeking proposals to purchase the output from CEC certified eligible renewable resources owned and operated by independent power producers. At this time SCE is not seeking proposals for equity participation in projects. |
| Question 25: In conjunction with the 2009 Renewable RFP issued on June 29, will SCE be accepting proposals for forced outage insurance? | Answer 25: At this time SCE is not considering "forced outage insurance" as eligible for consideration on SCE's 2009 RFP short -list if it is proposed as a stand-alone product. However, similar to SCE's treatment of "energy storage" proposals (see Procurement Protocols, Section 2.02), SCE will consider proposals with forced outage insurance if it is proposed along with the underlying "Product" being solicited pursuant to this 2009 RFP (i.e., electric energy, Green Attributes, Capacity Attributes, and Resource Adequacy Benefits), and the corresponding proposal is submitted with an Energy Price including the forced outage insurance and an Energy Price without the insurance component. |
| Question 26: If our bid is at MPR for the first year but escalates over time, how do you evaluate whether or not the bid exceeds MPR? For instance, is there some baseline growth rate at which pricing would be considered "in line" with MPR? | Answer 26: This project would be above MPR because, on a levelized basis over the term of the respective Agreement, a contract price at MPR for the first year with an escalation factor thereafter, would indeed exceed the MPR. But please note: During SCE's Short Listing process, SCE does not make any comparisons to MPR. Moreover, the MPR for the 2009 Solicitation will not be known until after the Short List is determined. |
| Question 27: In the Proposal, how specific should we be with interconnection equipment and generating unit descriptions? Since we cannot predict the exact solar panels / inverters / transformers we will use, are there specific details that you're looking for? | Answer 27: In the Proposal, how specific should we be with interconnection equipment and generating unit descriptions? Since we cannot predict the exact solar panels / inverters / transformers we will use, are there specific details that you're looking for? |
| Question 28: Once power enters the Sunrise Powerlink in the Imperial Valley, and travels all the way to connect to SCE, what would be the loss? I saw nothing in the RFP discussing line loss factors, and I am confused as to how this will be addressed? | Answer 28: SCE preliminarily estimates the losses to be 1.5% to 2.0% depending on system conditions (e.g., on-peak or off-peak, weather, etc.). Regardless of system conditions, please note that since the line is not yet constructed, this is indeed only an estimate. |
| Question 29: The RFP document states that The evaluation criteria will favor Proposals for renewable energy sales from Generating Facilities with near-term deliveries. Can you clarify this? Is there a specific date by which SCE would prefer delivery of renewable energy? | Answer 29: While SCE has needs both near term and further out in time, SCE has a preference for projects in operation or capable of commercial operation in the next five years. |
| Question 30: n the Revenue Calculator, is Non-Standard required for solar projects that are intermittent? | Answer 30: No, the Revenue Calculator (Standard Version) should be used for all renewable technologies (including solar projects that are intermittent) for which the bidder will be incorporating the project's hourly generation profile. The Revenue Calculator (Non-Standard Version) should be used only with offers that include banking, firming and shaping services for otherwise intermittent resources. |
| Question 31: Is the interconnection application vital to the RFP for a project under 20MW? | Answer 31: An application is required for all projects wishing to transmit power over SCE's system. |
| Question 32: Please explain bid conference slide pg 41 (last bullet relative to PPA Section 3.05) in particular the reference to "24 month period." | Answer 32: For non-wind intermittent projects, SCE will measure a Seller for its Performance Obligation over two Term Years, or 24 months. Beginning after the Second Term Year, the Seller has the obligation to deliver one hundred forty percent (140%) of the sum of the Expected Annual Net Energy Production of any two consecutive Term Years. |
| Question 33: Does "Intermittent" when used in the PPA always apply to Solar (PV)? | Answer 33: SCE uses the term "Intermittent" with resources that are intermittent in nature, such as wind and solar. "Non-Wind Intermittent" applies to solar PV. |
| Question 34: We will be connecting to a transmission substation (4-8 MW solar PV), does SCE have any part in the interconnection process other than reviewing the CAISO issued interconnection agreement? | Answer 34: Assuming that your point of interconnection is to transmission, and not distribution, CAISO will coordinate communication between SCE and the interconnection customer during the interconnection process. SCE has a significant role in working with the CAISO to prepare the studies and agreements that are part of the interconnection process. |
| Question 35: The SCE Proposal Conference meeting seems to have focused primarily on large generators. Do small generators (4-8 MW solar PV) have a materially different RFP process? | Answer 35: Small and large generators follow the same "RFP" process (same PPAs, same submittal requirements, etc.). Please note, however, that small generators (less than or equal to 20 MW) do not follow the same "interconnection" process; refer to the "Interconnection Service" section of the Proposal Conference presentation (located at http://www.sce.com/RenewRFP) |
| Question 36: The RFP schedule on page 9 of the 2009 Renewable RFP Procurement Protocol indicates Final agreements will be signed by March 31, 2010, submission of such agreements to the CPUC by April 30, 2010 and final and non-appealable' approval from CPUC within 6-9 months after April 30, 2010 (interpreted to be October 30, 2010 January 30, 2011). Page 14 of Appendix C directs the Seller to construct a bar chart assuming "CPUC Approval will be obtained in first quarter of 2010". Please clarify SCE's expectation regarding the timing of final approval from the CPUC? Please verify the assumption/date Bidders should utilize to construct the one page bar cart schedule required in Tab#8. | Answer 36: Section 4.10 of Appendix C should have read "The schedule must be based upon the assumption that CPUC Approval will be obtained in the first quarter of 2011, not 2010. As such, please construct your chart based on the Q1 2011 date. |
| Question 37: We wanted to confirm which items are required on the physical delivery due date, August 21st. Which documents and attachments does the Complete Proposal Package entail? | Answer 37: Please refer to the "Appendix C: Form of Seller's Proposal" document, particularly Sections 3.01, 3.02, 5.01(b) and Exhibit A. |
| Question 38: I presume when we have Phase I Study Results (equivalent to old System Impact Study results), we choose the box System Impact Study Agreement in-Hand, although we had the Study Agreement in hand in late 2008. Is this correct? | Answer 38: Correct, please select "System Impact Study Agreement in-Hand" on SCE's Seller's Proposal Template if you have received your Phase I Study results. Furthermore, if you have your Phase II Study Results, please select "Facilities Study Agmt In-Hand". |
| Question 39: In the spreadsheet, question on Expected Net Energy, I have entered a number for the initial, but for the final, the document will not allow me to enter a number. Any advice? | Answer 39: These cells don't take NON-numerical values. This includes spaces, decimals, etc. We simply need the rounded Gigawatt number. |
| Question 40: Can we unbundle carbon credits from the bid? | Answer 40: No, We are seeking the full bundled product including any and all attributes that come from a renewable resource's output. |
| Question 41: We have a question on the Bar Chart Schedule requirements as indicated in Section 4.10, Tab #8. The directions say the schedule shall include if applicable, completing the Phase One Study, and the same for a Phase Two Study. I'm wondering what this refers to. | Answer 41: Phase One and Phase Two Studies refer to the new GIPR process for interconnection. Please review our Proposal Conference slides (downloadable from http://www.sce.com/RenewRFP) for more detail. |
| Question 42: If after the submission the project viability improves can we provide an update prior to approval? Better site control etc. | Answer 42: SCE will accommodate, but please try to characterize your viability by the August 14th due date since SCE is dealing with processing 100s of proposals. |
| Question 43: Can you please clarify whether we need to obtain a counter-signature from SCE for the NDA in the protocol before we submit the proposal on 8/21, or after we submit the proposal but before shortlist notification? | Answer 43: You do not need our signature. Please submit a partially executed NDA. SCE will review the redlines and the partially executed copies that you're required to submit and, if we accept, we will counter-sign. If you made redlines that we don't accept, we attempt to reach mutually language agreement. |
| Question 44: We need to know if the price information that is submitted on Friday, August 14 must be the same as the final submittal pricing. We are still working on the models and I believe that our offer price may change | Answer 44: We will accept a revision to the price. However, please do your best to provide an accurate price by August 14th that will not subsequently change. SCE is expecting 100s of proposals, and it is extremely difficult to accommodate any post-August 14th changes. For clarity, we will not accept a revised price after the August 21, 1:00 p.m. due date/time. |
| Question 45: Section 2.09(c) of the SCE RFP Procurement Protocol indicates that projects with a point of delivery outside the CAISO, an energy price must be provided at a liquid trading hub AND a CAISO intertie and accordingly 2 Seller Proposal Templates (SPT) and 2 Revenue Calculators must be completed. However, if a project wheels power to deliver to SCE at Mead or Palo Verde, aren't both of these trading hubs also CAISO intertie points? And if so, isn't it the case that there would be no additional wheel or charge and that there would be just one price. If this is the case, is there a need to complete 2 Seller Proposal Templates and 2 Revenue Calculators? | Answer 45: Mead and PV are both CAISO interties and liquid trading hubs. But, even though you may price delivery to Mead the same as delivery to PV, we still require 1 Revenue Calculator and 1 SPT for Mead, and 1 Revenue Calculator and 1 SPT for PV. In other words, since Mead is both an intertie AND a liquid trading hub, 1 Revenue Calculator and 1 SPT is needed for Mead and then the same with PV (1 and 1). Now, if you had stated that you were delivering to Mona, since Mona is a hub but not an intertie, then you would need: 1 Revenue Calculator and 1 SPT for Mona, and 1 Revenue Calculator and 1 SPT for a CAISO intertie of your choice. |
| Question 46: There are two revenue calculators provided on the SCE RFP website, Standard and Non-Standard Versions. The explanation for the Non-Standard Version makes mention of intermittent resources like wind or solar but appears to limit use of this Non-Standard Version to project proposals involving banking, firming, and shaping. If this is accurate, then would a standard wind project which proposes to sell as-available intermittent energy (without any banking, firming, or shaping services) use the Standard Revenue Calculator? | Answer 46: Yes, if your proposal is to sell SCE intermittent energy output as produced by the facility, then you use the Standard Revenue Calculator |
| Question 47: My company is preparing a site for a SCE RFP project. Regarding the upcoming Proposal Due Date, we are at a stage of development which will make it difficult to provide all information required in the Proposal. Do you recommend we proceed with the current solicitation or wait for a future solicitation? | Answer 47: SCE recommends you wait for a future solicitation |
| Question 48: What circumstance(s) would be grounds for SCE not to refund the full Short List Deposit to a Seller? | Answer 48: Breach of the Exclusivity Agreement |
| Question 49: Other than in electronic format, the financial reports requested for inclusion, per the 2009 RFP, are too large to be submitted . In an effort to save resources and trees, can we submit these documents on our submittal CD/DVD, or alternatively submit the financial info on a separate CD? All of the requested reports are also available on our company's website. In any case we will reference our investor website under Tab#15, "Sellers Financial Information". | Answer 49: Information, files, etc. that are clearly too large to be reasonably included in the Proposal Binder can be provided to SCE in electronic format, with a reference included in the Proposal Binder of its location (e.g., "Our company financial reports are located in the submitted DVD as file xxxxxxxxxxx.pdf). |
| Question 50: Would you please direct me towards language on the different buyout structures we can propose in the upcoming RFP for Renewable Energy Resources? | Answer 50: SCE does not offer any buyout option |
| Question 51: Please advise on the ability to bid contract terms greater than 20-years. In the Seller's Proposal Template, there is the option to bid a contract length of 25 years or Other. Will SCE accept proposals for 25 or 30-year terms? | Answer 51: SCE will consider proposals in excess of 20 years, but we recommend that you also submit a second selection option for a 20 year (or less) term with its own price. (If you choose to submit two alternatives, such as a 30 year and a 20 year), you would then need to submit 2 Seller's Proposal Templates and 2 Revenue Calculators). As for filling out the Seller's Proposal Templates, if your proposed term is not listed on the drop-down menu, select "Other" and include the length of the contract term in the comment box under Section K of the Seller's Proposal Template.Answer 51: SCE will consider proposals in excess of 20 years, but we recommend that you also submit a second selection option for a 20 year (or less) term with its own price. (If you choose to submit two alternatives, such as a 30 year and a 20 year), you would then need to submit 2 Seller's Proposal Templates and 2 Revenue Calculators). As for filling out the Seller's Proposal Templates, if your proposed term is not listed on the drop-down menu, select "Other" and include the length of the contract term in the comment box under Section K of the Seller's Proposal Template. |
| Question 52: Will SCE accept proposal if the Term Sheet is submitted electronically on the 14th and the proposal template is submitted by the 21st? | Answer 52: "No". August 14th at 1:00 p.m. PPT is a firm due date whereby all of the following submittals are due: (1) Proposal Structure Letter (2) Seller's Proposal Template (3) Term Sheet |
| Question 53: Please indicate if a Generator initiating the Small Generator Interconnection Procedures (SGIP) needs to have a Deliverability Assessment performed in the SGIP to comply with SCE RFO. | Answer 53: In order to be compliant with the August 14th and August 21st submission requirements for SCE's 2009 Renewable RFP, we are NOT requiring Generators within either the SGIP or LGIP to have a Deliverability Assessment performed. |
| Question 54: If the Generator in the SGIP requires a Deliverability Assessment, are the Interconnection Studies governed by the Large Generator Interconnection Procedure (LGIP)? | Answer 54: SGIP applicants that require Deliverability Assessments must request them form the ISO. Regardless of whether they request the assessment or not, the SGIP Tariff guidelines will still apply to any generator that is 20 MW or less. |
| Question 55: Will SCE consider taking delivery at Mead, i.e. Eldorado or Marketplace? | Answer 55: Yes, but please refer to Q&A #10 for additional detail. |
Expose as Block
No