1. Groundwater rights to the pumping of feedwater for the desalination plant. Exportation of water from the Salinas Valley Groundwater Basin in violation of the state law (the Monterey County Water Resources Agency Act, which is part of the state water code) prohibiting such exportation; and
2. Litigation challenging the Regional Desalination Project raising issues of CEQA violations, illegal and harmful appropriation of groundwater and violation of the prohibition on groundwater export from the Salinas Valley Basin. (Ag Land Trust v. Marina Coast Water District and Ag Land Trust v. Monterey County Water Resources Agency)
require resolution prior to proceeding with California American Water Company’s Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project, including approval of test slant wells, et cetera.
NOTE: Ag Land Trust v. Marina Coast Water District and Does 1-100,
Motion Hearing: 12/14/2012 9:00 A.M. Courtroom 15
EXCERPTS SUMMARY OF UNRESOLVED DESALINATION ISSUES are presented and the Monterey County Water Resources Agency Act document is embedded.
EXCERPTS SUMMARY OF UNRESOLVED DESALINATION ISSUES are presented and the Monterey County Water Resources Agency Act document is embedded.
EXCERPTS SUMMARY OF UNRESOLVED DESALINATION ISSUES
Failure to adequately address groundwater rights for coastal
wells to pump feedwater for the desalination plant.
Exportation of groundwater from the Salinas Valley
Groundwater Basin (SVGB) in violation of state law (the Monterey County Water
Resources Agency Act, which is part of the state water code) that prohibits
such export.
Unanalyzed and unmitigated significant impacts of the
proposed coastal wells on North
County water supplies.
Uncertainty regarding the availability of desalinated water
to meet regulatory requirements because of the need to retain freshwater
extracted from the SVGB within the Salinas
Valley .
Litigation challenging the Regional Desalination Project
raising issues of CEQA violations, illegal and harmful appropriation of
groundwater and violation of the prohibition on groundwater export from the Salinas Valley Basin .
(Ag Land Trust v. Marina Coast Water District (set for trial on September 29,
2011) and Ag Land Trust v. Monterey County Water Resources Agency)
Source:
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 6A - REGIONAL DESALINATION PROJECT, California
Coastal Commission, July 21, 2011, Beverly Bean President, League of Women
Voters of the Monterey
Peninsula
Ag Land
Trust has repeatedly pointed out that the Regional Project did not have groundwater
rights and would harm the groundwater supply in the overdrafted Salinas Basin.
(See Exhibits A and B to this letter.) Despite Ag Land Trust's protests, the Public
Utilities Commission, Marina Coast Water District, and Monterey
County Water Resources
Agency approved the Regional Project that has vertical wells on and around Ag Land
Trust property. (See Exhibit C.) The EIR ignored the fact that Ag Land Trust has a
well on its property, and that Ag Land Trust's groundwater rights and supply would be
harmed by the Regional Project's pumping of groundwater as source water for the
desalination plant.
The
Coastal Commission should not be misled by the claims made by Downey Brand to
RMC, starting with the claim that the project's source water "will"
be 85% seawater
and 15% groundwater. (Downey Brand letter, p. 1.) In fact, the EIR's Appendix
Q predicted percentages of up to 40% groundwater in the source water throughout
the 56-year modeled simulation period, which is two and two-thirds times greater
than Downey Brand admits.
The
Regional Project is proposed as a "solution" to the many years of illegal taking
by Cal Am of water from the Carmel
River . It makes no sense
to exchange that illegal
taking for even greater illegal taking of groundwater from the overdrafted Salinas Valley.
The
Coastal Commission does not have the authority to grant groundwater rights or to
grant approval of any permit or project that relies on or causes the illegal
taking of groundwater
that belongs solely to the overlying landowners of the Salinas Valley .
We urge the
Commission to consult with its own water rights counsel, and to avoid the wrongful
acts that project proponents are soliciting from the Commission.
Source:
LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL W. STAMP, July 26, 2011, Subject: Regional Desalination
Project Water Rights Issues; Rebuttal to Downey Brand letter of May 20, 2011 to
RMC
Litigation
challenging the Regional Desalination project regarding violations of the
California Environmental Quality Act, groundwater rights to the pumping of
feedwater for the desalination plant, and violation of the prohibition on
groundwater export from the Salinas
Valley Groundwater
Basin .
Source:
LandWatch
The
application should be continued until (1) the PUC, Monterey County
and Marina Coast Water District have approved the slant well, (2) the
applicants provide proof of groundwater rights, and (3) Commission staff has
provided a comprehensive analysis of the desalination project application.
6.
“Slant wells are relatively new technology with few known successful uses for
desalination feed water.” (FEIR, p. 7-28.)
Slant wells would not meet the objectives of the Regional Project.
(FEIR, p. 7-29.)
- No operating desalination plant uses slant wells. (FEIR, p. 3-27)
No Water
Rights to Pump Groundwater, Harm to Existing Groundwater Rights, Possible
Takings and Due Process Violations
The
Groundwater Pumping Would Violate North
County LUP Policies
Slant
Wells Result in Brine with Higher Total Dissolved Solids (TDS).
Pumping
Groundwater Along the Coastline Exacerbates Seawater Intrusion
The
Project Would Export Groundwater from the Salinas Valley
Groundwater Basin ,
Which is Prohibited by Law
Pending
Litigation over CEQA, Water Rights, and Exportation of Groundwater.
In 2010,
Ag Land Trust sued the Marina Coast Water District and, in 2011, Ag Land Trust
sued the Monterey County Water Resources Agency over their respective approvals
fo the Regional Project…The lawsuits allege violations of the California
Environmental Quality Act, lack of water rights for the project’s groundwater
pumping, and violation of the Monterey County Water Resources Agency Act’s
prohibition on exportation of groundwater from the Salinas Valley basin.
In 2010,
the superior court overruled Marina
Coast ’s demurrer. The trail court’s actions was supported
unanimously by the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court unanimously refused
to grant Marina Coast ’s petition for review.
Source:
LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL W. STAMP, July 29, 2011
ADDENDUM:
EXCERPTS
Sec.
8. Objects and purposes of act. The objects and purposes of this act are to
provide for the control of the flood and storm waters of the Agency and the
flood and storm waters of streams that have their sources outside the Agency,
but which streams and flood waters flow into the Agency, and to conserve those
waters for beneficial and useful purposes by spreading, storing, retaining, and
causing those waters to percolate into the soil within the Agency, or to save
and conserve in any manner all or any of those waters and to protect from those
flood or storm waters the public highways, life, and property in the Agency,
and the watercourses and watersheds of streams flowing into the Agency, and to
increase, and prevent the waste or diminution of the water supply in the
Agency, including the control of groundwater extractions as required to prevent
or deter the loss of usable groundwater through intrusion of seawater and the
replacement of groundwater so controlled through the development and
distribution of a substitute surface supply and to prohibit groundwater
exportation from the Salinas River Groundwater Basin, and to obtain, retain,
and reclaim drainage, storm, flood, and other waters for beneficial use within
the Agency; and to provide, in the discretion of the Agency in connection with
and as an incident to any works, dam, or reservoir heretofore or hereafter
constructed either within or without the Agency, for the construction,
maintenance, and operation of a minimum or permanent pool and facilities for
swimming, boating, fishing, and recreation in or upon waters stored in any
stream, reservoir, or minimum or permanent pool, and for the acquisition in any
manner provided in this act and for the use by the Agency, in addition or
adjacent to lands that may be used or acquired for flood control or water
conservation purposes or that may be acquired for the maintenance or protection
of any such works, dam, or reservoir or watersheds adjacent thereto, of lands
deemed by the Supervisors of the Agency to be necessary or convenient for the
installation, construction, use, and maintenance of recreational areas or
facilities, including picnic grounds, playgrounds, campgrounds, home sites,
boats and fishing, bathing, or other facilities for use by the public, subject
to such rules and regulations and reasonable charges as may be prescribed by
the Board of Supervisors of the Agency. However, no property situated in
another county, shall be condemned by the Agency for recreational areas or
facilities unless the Board of Supervisors of the County in which the property
is situated agrees to the condemnation thereof.
WATER NEWS
WATERPLUS
Ron Weitzman, President, WaterPlus, November 2012
California American Water Company, Coastal Water Project,
Final Environmental Impact Report, 2009.
No comments:
Post a Comment