Cal Am files opposition with PUC to public ownership of desal plant
Company tells PUC it could consider sharing oversight
By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 11/10/2012
EXCERPT HIGHLIGHTS:
In a separate filing, Cal Am outlined its contingency plans in case aspects of the desal project need to be changed. The filing includes backup plans for the desal plant's brackish source water, the plant site, plant failure or interruption, brine outfall, reduced demand forecasts and a project delay.
Among the contingency plans, Cal Am suggested the use of shallower slant wells or horizontal Ranney wells extracting from the Sand Dunes aquifer, an open ocean intake nearby, or a slant well or ocean open intake near Moss Landing Harbor using the old Refractories infrastructure owned by Nader Agha. Cal Am also suggested it could consider locating the desal plant in Moss Landing, perhaps at the refractories or Deep Water Desal sites, and that an alternate brine outfall could also be relocated if needed.
The filing did not include any timelines, permitting milestones, cost estimates or any other details originally requested by the judge.
Company tells PUC it could consider sharing oversight
By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 11/10/2012
EXCERPT HIGHLIGHTS:
In a separate filing, Cal Am outlined its contingency plans in case aspects of the desal project need to be changed. The filing includes backup plans for the desal plant's brackish source water, the plant site, plant failure or interruption, brine outfall, reduced demand forecasts and a project delay.
Among the contingency plans, Cal Am suggested the use of shallower slant wells or horizontal Ranney wells extracting from the Sand Dunes aquifer, an open ocean intake nearby, or a slant well or ocean open intake near Moss Landing Harbor using the old Refractories infrastructure owned by Nader Agha. Cal Am also suggested it could consider locating the desal plant in Moss Landing, perhaps at the refractories or Deep Water Desal sites, and that an alternate brine outfall could also be relocated if needed.
The filing did not include any timelines, permitting milestones, cost estimates or any other details originally requested by the judge.
ABSTRACT: Re: In the Matter of the Application of California American Water Company (U 210 W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY CONTINGENCY PLAN COMPLIANCE FILING and Attachment 1 (1 of 4), Attachment 1 (2 of 4), Attachment 1 (3 of 4), Attachment 1 (4 of 4) and Attachment 2, are embedded. CONCLUSION Consistent with the Ruling, California American Water provides the Commission with reasonably detailed contingency plans for the proposed project. As previously discussed, California American Water stresses that these are simply contingency plans and believes that it has selected the appropriate project as part of its application. The Commission should not allow the intervening parties to use these contingency plans as a way to delay approval of the proposed project. Time is of the essence and California American Water asks the Commission to avoid any unnecessary delays to the proposed project’s completion.
Filing Date 11-01-12
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Date: November 1, 2012
To: Richard Svindland, California American Water
From: Paul Findley, RBF Consulting
Subject: Contingency Planning for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project
Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project
Figures 1-7 - Proposed Intake System & Intake Contingency Options 1- 6
Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project
Figures 8 - 9 - Intake Contingency Options 7 & 8; Figures 10 – 13 Discharge Contingency Options 1-4; Figure 14 - Desalination Plant Site Contingency Option 1
Figures 15 - 21 - Desalination Plant Site Contingency Options 2 - 8
Monterey Peninsula Water Management District
No comments:
Post a Comment