Indeed it's actually the CEC itself that is removing (most) of the entries. I asked the CEC a while back about it, here's their reply:
> The removal of
equipment is intentional, as California Energy Commission staff reserve the
right to remove equipment from the eligible equipment lists as needed to ensure
the successful implementation of the Solar Equipment List program. For a
complete list of reasons for removal, please refer to Appendix A section B of
the Guidelines for California’s Solar Electric Incentive Programs
(Senate Bill 1), 7th Edition located under the Guidelines section on the
Solar Equipment List website: Solar Equipment Lists. Notice of all
equipment identified for removal will be provided on the CEC Solar Equipment
List webpage in advance of removal on the CEC Equipment Noticed for Removal
webpage linked, here: https://www.energy.ca.gov/files/equipment-noticed-removal.
Note also that the module and manufacturer names can change between versions (e.g. "Canadian
Solar" changed to "CSI Solar Co., Ltd.").
>
If using Sandia's database and subsequent PVlib modelling, would that
reduce the power output of the facility since more losses are taken into
consideration?
It depends. There is no attempt at enforcing consistency between the CEC and Sandia parameters for a given module, meaning even without considering the effect of losses and such, you'll get a different output power just for the PV module model itself. Regarding the extra factors (losses) considered in the Sandia model, you can recreate those separately for use with the CEC module model (e.g. using pvlib.iam.physical for IAM). So conceptually you can model the same thing, but the actual nuts and bolts will be different and whether you get a larger or smaller answer is up to chance.
Kevin