DRY LAKE WIND II LLC

Operating

Wind power plant

Capacity
65 MW
Primary fuel
Wind
County
Navajo County
Operator
IBERDROLA RENEWABLES INC
Status
Operating
Commissioned
2010
EIA plant ID
57379
Generators
1
Technology
Onshore Wind Turbine
Net generation (2024)
116 GWh
Capacity factor (2024, EIA nameplate)
20%
Data vintage
EIA-860 2024 final; EIA-923 2022-2024 final
Coordinates
34.6062, -110.1734

See it on the map

DRY LAKE WIND II LLC, a 65 MW Wind power plant in Navajo County, Arizona. Operated by IBERDROLA RENEWABLES INC, commissioned 2010.

How DRY LAKE WIND II LLC compares

With 65 MW of capacity, DRY LAKE WIND II LLC ranks 43rd among the 71 operating power plants Bywatts maps in Arizona and 2nd of the 3 operating Wind plants in the state. It accounts for about 29% of Arizona's operating Wind capacity and 0.2% of all operating capacity in the state. Nationally it is the 339th-largest of the 708 operating Wind plants in the database. Commissioned in 2010, it is newer than 57% of the 69 operating Arizona plants with a recorded commissioning year. Its operator, IBERDROLA RENEWABLES INC, runs 3 operating plants in Arizona totaling 148 MW. It shares Navajo County with 3 other operating plants, including CHOLLA and DRY LAKE WIND LLC.

EIA-860 lists 1 generator at the site with 65 MW of nameplate capacity, all onshore wind turbine technology. Net generation was 116 GWh in 2024 (a 20% capacity factor), up 4% from 2022.

Grid neighborhood

The nearest named substation is SUGARLOAF (500 kV), about 3.0 miles away; the closest transmission line found within 10 miles is a 500 kV line, about 2.0 miles away. Another 3 operating power plants totaling 516 MW sit within 25 miles; the largest is CHOLLA (426 MW, Coal).

Computed by Bywatts from HIFLD power plant, substation and transmission line records and EIA-860/923 survey data; distances are straight-line. Sources and methodology

Weather peril exposure

DRY LAKE WIND II LLC is a 65 MW wind power plant in Navajo County, AZ, operated by IBERDROLA RENEWABLES INC, commissioned in 2010. Navajo County carries low modeled catastrophe exposure in the FEMA National Risk Index, scoring 1.4 of 5 at the 9th national percentile. Wildfire is the leading peril, rated Relatively High by FEMA at the 95th percentile.

The Bywatts loss layer is calibrated to solar PV hardware, so it is not applied to a wind plant. The ratings below are the FEMA National Risk Index county hazard ratings for this location.

1.4 of 5Modeled catastrophe exposure
LowExposure band
WildfireLeading peril
Relatively ModerateFEMA county risk rating

Navajo County hazard ratings

PerilFEMA ratingNational percentilePeril scoreEvents per year
WildfireRelatively High95th4.8 of 5<0.01
Riverine floodingRelatively Moderate62nd3.5 of 54.1
EarthquakeRelatively Low61st3.5 of 5<0.01
Heat waveRelatively Low27th2.1 of 50.77
HailRelatively Low17th1.7 of 50.11
Winter weatherVery High13th1.5 of 55.8
LightningVery High5th1.2 of 547.6
TornadoVery Low2nd1.1 of 50.39
Strong windRelatively Low2nd1.1 of 50.06
Ice stormRelatively Moderate1st1.0 of 50.01

Perils not assessed in Navajo County

These perils carry no usable National Risk Index figure for this county, so they are excluded from the scoring rather than scored zero. A zero would claim the peril was assessed and found benign.

PerilWhy it is not scored
HurricaneFEMA rating is "No Rating" for this county
Coastal floodingFEMA rating is "Not Applicable" for this county

Model hail, wind and flood exposure for Navajo County in the weather risk calculator

Ratings are the FEMA National Risk Index county hazard ratings; the peril score is a Bywatts transform of the FEMA national percentile. Full data sources and the solar vulnerability methodology are in the weather risk calculator.

Modeled estimate for screening and negotiation. Built from FEMA National Risk Index county hazard data and a solar vulnerability layer documented above. Not a quote, a binder, or actuarial advice, and not a substitute for a carrier's own model. Hazard data: FEMA National Risk Index December 2025, synced 2026-07-24. Resolution is county level, not site level.