# APSC Docket 24-072-U — Ironwood / LC5 CECPN (production overview) The CECPN docket for [[Ironwood]] — Entergy Arkansas's natural-gas combustion turbine, formally named **Lake Catherine Unit 5 (LC5)**, in Hot Spring County. The application was filed 2024-11-01 — *before* Act 373 (the [[Generating Arkansas Jobs Act (GAJA) rider|Generating Arkansas Jobs Act]]) was passed; this is the pre-Act 373 timing that [[Palmer Rebuttal on Ironwood|Palmer's rebuttal]] relies on to argue eligibility for GAJA Rider recovery under § 23-4-1304(w). ALJ [[Bridgette M. Frazier]] presiding. ## What's inside (curated subset) Six filings from this 120+ document docket: - [[Ironwood Order No. 1 ALJ Designation]] — Doc. 2, 2024-10-01. Designates ALJ Bridgette Frazier. - [[Ironwood Order No. 2 Interim Protective Order]] — Doc. 4, 2024-10-18. The seal architecture for this docket. - [[Ironwood REDACTED Application]] — Doc. 21, 2024-11-01. **The 1,110-page Application + Exhibits.** Defines LC5: a 446 MW natural-gas combustion turbine replacing the legacy LC4 unit (522 MW, in service since 1970). - [[Ironwood Order No. 3 Sets Hearing]] — Doc. 39, 2024-11-13. Sets initial evidentiary hearing for 2025-03-05. - [[Ironwood Order No. 4 AEEC Intervention]] — Doc. 55, 2024-12-03. Grants intervention to Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. - [[Ironwood Order No. 5 Deposition Ruling]] — Doc. 111, 2025-02-12. Denies AEEC's late-filed notice of deposition. ## Key takeaways ### LC5 / Ironwood specifications - **Capacity: net 446 MW** — natural-gas combustion turbine, simple-cycle, EAL self-build. - **Site: Lake Catherine facility, Hot Spring County** — on EAL-owned property. - **Replaces LC4**: a 522 MW gas-fired unit in service since 1970, **required to deactivate no later than 2027-12-31 under a federal consent decree**. - **Interconnection**: to the existing Arklahoma Substation – LC4 115 kV transmission line; no new ROW acquisition needed. - **Hydrogen co-blending capability**: up to 30% by volume with additional investments. - **Schedule**: 2024 Q1 – 2025 Q4 development; 2025 Q4 – 2028 Q2 construction; **2028 Q4 operation begins**. ### What the Application says about justification The Application's "Purpose and Need" framing (Application Exhibit F, §1.2): "To support continued improvement of the environment in a cost-effective and responsible way, electrical load growth, service reliability, and customer service options, it is necessary to build new generation resources to replace older units and improve existing electrical facilities. **The proposed LC5 will replace the legacy, gas-fired 522 MW LC4 facility that entered service in 1970. LC4 is required to be deactivated no later than December 31, 2027, consistent with a federal consent decree.**" The Application's primary justification for Ironwood is **the federal consent-decree deactivation of LC4** — *not* data-center load growth. The data-center / hyperscale framing is not in the public Application narrative excerpts retrieved. ### The Strategic-Investment dispute, anticipated Because the Application was filed before Act 373, the question of whether LC5 / Ironwood qualifies as a "Strategic Investment" under Act 373's Strategic Investment rider is the heart of the [[psc/docket-24-072-u-ironwood-2026-05-22/_overview|26-008-TF GAJA Rider docket]] dispute. The CECPN docket itself does not contemplate that question (the question post-dates the Application). Per [[Palmer Rebuttal on Ironwood|Palmer's rebuttal]] in the GAJA docket, the Commission's Order No. 9 in this docket (24-072-U Order No. 9 — not retrieved) is cited for findings that LC5 satisfies the Strategic Investment criteria. ### What was NOT retrieved in this 2026-05-22 ingest (since closed) - ~~The Commission's substantive **Order No. 9 (or higher) on the CECPN application itself** — referenced by Palmer's rebuttal at "Order No. 9 at 20, 25-26, 44, 53."~~ **Retrieved 2026-05-24** to close the [[T002 - Ironwood Strategic Investment Designation Requirement|T002]] documentary gap; see [[docket-24-072-u-order-9-2026-05-24/_overview|Ironwood Order No. 9 CECPN Grant]] (Doc. 152, 2025-04-18). - The direct testimony of Cunningham, Fielder, Ruiz, Cullipher, Morris — referenced extensively in the rate-case-side filings. - The substantive rebuttal and surrebuttal testimony filings. - The 2025-03-05 hearing transcript (if it exists in the public docket — not checked). - The HSPI / sealed filings. ## People and orgs mentioned - [[Entergy Arkansas]] — applicant - [[Arkansas Public Service Commission]] — decisional authority - [[Bridgette M. Frazier]] — ALJ Presiding Officer in this docket - Witnesses (not yet anchored as person pages, given limited retrieval): - [[William J. Cunningham]] — Director, Resource Planning & Market Operations - Kandice Fielder — Manager / Senior Manager, Resource Planning - Carlos Ruiz — VP, Power Development New Generation - [[Brad T. Cullipher]] — Manager, Transmission Planning - Amy L. Morris — Director, EAL Finance - [[Bradley J. Phillips]] — Senior Managing Consultant, Alliance Technical Group - Intervenors: AEEC (Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc.), AG (Attorney General Tim Griffin), APSC General Staff - Staff / AG witnesses: Jeffrey D. Bower (Daymark Energy Advisors), Thomas A. Martin (Engineer), Regina L. Butler (Director Electric Section), Scott Norwood (Norwood Energy Consulting, for AG), Billie S. LaConte (for AEEC) ## Concepts invoked - [[Ironwood]] / LC5 - [[Strategic Investment]] — though the Act 373 dispute is in 26-008-TF, not here - [[Generating Arkansas Jobs Act (GAJA) rider]] — pre-Act 373 timing is the key - CECPN (Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need) under Ark. Code Ann. § 23-18-503 et seq. - The federal consent decree on LC4 deactivation ## Cross-references - [[Palmer Rebuttal on Ironwood]] — relies on this docket's record to defend LC5's GAJA Rider inclusion - [[26-001-U Doc 47 Volume 1 Application and Schedules A-B]] — the Ironwood depreciation rate flows from this CECPN to the base rate case ## Open questions / follow-ups - The substantive Commission Order(s) on the CECPN application itself (Order No. 9 per Palmer) is the critical follow-up. May require deeper docket retrieval. - Whether any direct or rebuttal testimony in the public record (Cunningham, Fielder, Ruiz) names data-center load as a driver — not surfaced in the Application Exhibit F narrative; would require ingesting the witness direct testimony filings. - The Commission's "Strategic Investment" finding on LC5 in Order No. 9 — referenced by Palmer.