Monterey Herald story posted on Sat, Aug. 10, 2002 on www.montereyherald.com

Moss Landing desalination plant favored, State issues recommendation for Peninsula's water source
By DENNIS MORAN
dmoran@montereyherald.com
The state's long-awaited study on a new water source for the Monterey Peninsula pushes for a seawater desalination plant at Moss Landing, saying the existing infrastructure at the Duke Energy power plant would help make the expensive desalination process feasible.

The release of the Public Utilities Commission's "Plan B" study should finally put "Plan A" - a proposed dam on the Carmel River - to rest, said state Assemblyman Fred Keeley.

"In my estimation, today the dam is dead," Keeley said Friday after receiving the final Plan B report from PUC President Loretta Lynch. Keeley noted that both state and federal agencies have said they would oppose a dam on environmental grounds.

Desalination has been widely studied as a water-supply option but few desalination plants have been built because of prohibitively high operating costs. Lynch said the process is becoming increasingly viable because of new technologies.

Cost estimates in the Plan B report are lower than the figures in a 1998 study on a similar-sized desalination plant proposed for Marina, but are considerably higher than operating costs projected in 1998 for a Carmel River dam and reservoir.

Keeley said desalination costs could drop even more if arrangements can be made for Duke to sell power to the desal plant at a discount. That's under discussion, Keeley said.

The plant also could benefit by tying into the plumbing of the Duke plant's cooling system, which draws seawater from Moss Landing harbor to cool turbines and then discharges it into the sea. A desalination plant could use some of that water for desalting and some to dilute the brine the plant would be putting back in the sea.

Duke spokesman Patrick Mullen said Friday that the company is open to the concept as long as it wouldn't jeopardize the generating plant's operating permits. He said the issues need more study and discussion.

Another advantage that's been cited for the Moss Landing site is that other water-challenged communities, such as North County, could contribute to the project and tap into it. The Plan B report mentions that as a possibility, but Keeley stressed that he's focusing on the Peninsula's needs, its current needs.

Keeley's legislation calling for the Plan B study specified that it was to recommend new water sources yielding exactly 10,730 acre-feet a year, exactly enough to replace the amount that the California-American Water Co. overdraws from the Carmel River, according to a 1995 state order.

The desalination plant proposed for Moss Landing would provide about 9,000 acre-feet a year. The additional water needed to reduce the amount of Carmel River pumping would come from a groundwater-banking project that would take excess winter flows from the Carmel River and store them in the Seaside aquifer. The Monterey Peninsula Water Management District has already begun operating the first of these so-called "injection wells."

The next step to make the Moss Landing desalination plant a reality, Keeley said, is for someone to actually propose building it. He expects that will be Cal-Am, the water supplier to most of the Peninsula, and he said he hopes to see action from the company in the next few weeks. Keeley's final term as assemblyman runs out in four months, and he said he hopes to see the fruits of his legislation begin to bloom before then.

"I want when I leave that this report has been acted on in a very positive way," said the Boulder Creek Democrat. "... I want to stay on that task in my remaining four months."

Judith Almond, Cal-Am's chief operating officer, wouldn't say if or when the company would act on a desalination plant.

"We're hoping this is a solution," she said. "We're anxious to sit down and take a more thorough look at" the Plan B report. She noted that the desalination plant proposal hasn't gone through environmental impact studies.

According to estimates in the Plan B report, the desalination plant would cost about $106 million to build, including $43 million for a pipeline from Moss Landing to the Peninsula. Adding the costs of land acquisition, construction of the groundwater banking system, and various other expenses would bring the total Plan B construction cost to $176 million.

Operating costs would amount to about $5.97 million a year, the report estimates. The groundwater-banking operations would add $400,000 a year.

In 1998, a study commissioned by the Peninsula's water management district estimated that a dam would cost $107 million to build and $1.64 million a year to operate. That would have resulted in average monthly water-bill increases of $18. That 1998 study estimated that a desalination plan of the size now proposed would cost $115 million to build and $8.8 million a year to operate, resulting in water-bill increases of $41 a month.

If Cal-Am does apply to the PUC for a desalination plant at Moss Landing, the PUC itself could act as the lead agency in coordinating permits and public input, Keeley said. Lynch said the PUC has acted as lead agency on other utility projects in the state.

The Peninsula's water management district, which has also been studying alternatives to the dam, would not act as lead agency because Moss Landing is outside the district's boundaries. District board President Kris Lindstrom said the district would be heavily involved with implementing of Plan B, however, as it would need to approve changes to Cal-Am's infrastructure and regulate the injection wells.

Dennis Moran can be reached at 646-4348.