CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION Hearing Procedures & FAQ Agenda Item Th8a & 9a – California-American Water Company Desalination Facility

California Coastal Commission Hearing Procedures
Agenda Item Th8a & 9a – California-American Water Company Desalination Facility
9:00am - Thursday, November 14, 2019
Oceano Hotel & Spa
280 Capistrano Rd., Half Moon Bay
Remote Testimony Available at City of Marina Council Chambers
211 Hillcrest Ave., Marina
Hearing Procedures as of November 6, 2019


FAQ
Agenda Item Th8a & 9a – California-American Water Company
Desalination Facility

NOTEWORTHY EXCERPTS:

4. Why aren’t the Commissioners taking a final vote on this proposal?
It is not unusual for the Commissioners to need more than one hearing to make a final decision on items as complex as the Cal-Am desalination proposal. In this case, Coastal Commission staff met with California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) staff to discuss the posted staff recommendation on the Cal-Am project. The CPUC staff raised new technical questions about water supply and demand, potential ground water impacts, and the Pure Water expansion alternative – all of which require further investigation. Commission staff therefore decided it was important to hear applicant, agency, and public comments in a public hearing and to explore key remaining technical questions before the Commission considers voting on the project proposal.

5. Will there be any voting on this item?
There will not be a Commission vote on whether to approve or deny the Cal-Am project at the November hearing. However, because item 8a is an appeal of a local permit decision, the Commission may vote on whether the appeal raises a “substantial issue.” If the Commission finds that it does, that will allow the hearing on the appeal to move forward. Then the Commission will open the public hearing and take public comment on whether to approve or deny Cal-Am’s project. The hearing will address all aspects of the project proposed in the coastal zone including the portion in the City of Marina that is on appeal (item 8a) and those portions in the County and Seaside and in the Commission’s own permitting jurisdiction (item 9a). The next hearing on this item will likely be scheduled for March in Santa Cruz.

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION: Independent Hydrogeological Review of Recent Data and Studies Related to California American Water’s Proposed Monterey Regional Water Supply Project Weiss Job No. 466-2148, November 1, 2019 (EXHIBIT 7) & Addendum

ABSTRACT:  EXHIBIT 7, the draft report, dated November 1, 2019, to Tom Luster, California Coastal Commission, from William A. McIlvride, PG, CEG, CHG, Senior Project Hydrogeologist, “documents Weiss Associates (Weiss’s) independent hydrogeological review of data and studies related to California American Water’s (Cal-Am) proposed Monterey Regional Water Supply Project (MRWSP).” Selected excerpts, as follows:
The specific study questions the Commission requested technical opinions from Weiss to address are:
1. What were the effects of potential and actual changes in hydraulic gradient since January 2017, and what is the potential for these changes to affect potential seawater intrusion to, and capture of fresh water from, aquifers tapped by the well field?
2. What is the potential for the well field to adversely affect or capture previously unidentified volumes of fresh water? and
3. What are the possible project modifications to avoid or reduce the potential effects?

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Weiss’s findings with respect to the Commission’s study questions are addressed in detail in this report and summarized as follows:

1. A steepening of the hydraulic gradient seaward in the Dune Sand Aquifer in 2017 will likely result in a limited to negligible effect on seawater intrusion, and likely result in an increase in the fresh water percentage (FWP) of the well field flow due to capture of fresh water from the aquifers tapped by the well field. The gradient change appears to result from local and regional aquifer recharge due to increased rainfall in the 2016-2017 and 2018-2019 rain years. This is significant to the evaluation of the FWP percentages resulting from the MRWSP since there are significant data gaps with respect to groundwater flow paths in the Dune Sand Aquifer and the transfer of fresh water (total dissolved solids [TDS] < 3,000 milligrams per liter [mg/L]) from the Sand Dune Aquifer to the 180-foot Aquifer. Therefore, to be able to rely on Cal-Am’s model results to accurately predict FWP, Weiss recommends additional data collection to address these data gaps, development of a consensus conceptual site model (CSM) and modifications of the model assumptions based on the CSM, and then calibration of the model to match the effects of these recent rainfall events.

2. The well field capture analysis presented in the project’s Final EIR/EIS appears to be flawed as it does not account for potential freshwater capture beyond the identified capture zone of the well field due to seaward gradients. If such capture is greater than what is already accounted for, it will decrease the ocean water percentage (OWP) in water extracted by the well field. The uncertainty in the range of OWP depends on how the hydrogeology of the Dune Sand Aquifer and underlying Fort Ord Salinas Valley Aquitard (FO-SVA) is interpreted and modeled. It could be reduced through adjustments to the groundwater model and applying it in non-superposition mode to more accurately reflect the site hydrogeology and implications of the TSW pumping results.

3. Potential project impacts on groundwater quantity and quality can be reduced by extending the planned well field intakes seaward by reducing the angle of slant of the wells or by using horizontal wells to shorten the seawater flow path to the well field intakes, thereby increasing the OWP and decreasing the size of the landward capture zone.

RECOMMENDATION

To obtain a more accurate and definitive groundwater capture zone and OWP estimates due to proposed pumping from the MRWSP well field, it is recommended that additional hydrogeologic data be obtained from the 2 square-mile area east of MW-7S so that a single CSM can be accepted to represent that area. In addition, the area west of MW-7, between MW-4 and MW-7, should be investigated to determine potential aquitards contiguous with those at MW-7, and vertical groundwater gradients between the Dune Sand Aquifer and 180-Foot Aquifer. The new data should be incorporated into NMGWM, 2016 which should be modified as follows:

• Change the thickness of the FO-SVA (Layer 3) inland from MW-7, and configure so that the top and bottom of Layer 3 approximates the configuration depicted in the geologic cross-section, such that the top resembles a “stair-step” surface;

• Potentially divide Layer 2 into two or more layers;

• Increase the HK of the Dune Sand Aquifer (Layer 2) in parameter Zones 16 and 20, currently modeled with HK of 2 and 4 ft/day, respectively, to values in the range of 50 to 200 ft/day, more akin to the actual HK for dune sand, and in the middle of the range in values from other sources (Figure 27); and

• Modify HK and VK as appropriate in Layers 2, 3, and 4 of the model in the vicinity of the well field, such that drawdowns in more distant wells, particularly MW-4 and MW-7, are in accord with those estimated from a conservative extrapolation of the TSW drawdown data.

Along with these changes, the model should be run in non-superposition mode in a range of scenarios, and flow lines plotted to illustrate the revised capture pattern. Mass balance information should be obtained for those portions of the model affected by groundwater flow to the well field, and from the Dune Sand Aquifer to the 180-Foot Aquifer, and used to calculate new fresh water capture and OWP estimates.

CLOSING

Weiss Associates’ work at the California-American Water test slant well site and vicinity was conducted under my supervision. To the best of my knowledge, the data contained herein are true and accurate, based on what can be reasonably understood as a result of this project while satisfying the scope of work prescribed by the client for this project. The data, findings, recommendations, specifications, and/or professional opinions were prepared solely for the use of the California Marine Sanctuary Foundation and the California Coastal Commission in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering and geologic practice. Weiss makes no other warranty, either expressed or implied, and is not responsible for the interpretation by others of the contents herein

EXHIBIT 7 document copy is embedded. 

Independent Hydrogeological Review of Recent Data and Studies Related to California American Water’s Proposed Monterey Regional Water Supply Project Weiss Job No. 466-2148
Weiss Associates

November 1, 2019


Addendum to Staff Report for CDP Application 9-19-0918 and Appeal A-3-MRA-19-0034 (California American Water Company

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 APPLICATION OF THE CITY OF MARINA FOR REHEARING OF DECISION 18-09-017

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the APPLICATION OF THE CITY OF MARINA FOR REHEARING OF DECISION 18-09-017document copy is embedded.  GROUNDS FOR REHEARING Public Utilities (“PU”) Code Section 1732 states that an “application for rehearing shall set forth specifically the ground or grounds on which the applicant considers the decision or order to be unlawful.” Rule 16.1(c) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure requires applications for rehearing to set forth specifically “the grounds on which the applicant considers the order or decision of the Commission to be unlawful or erroneous” and “must make specific references to the record or law.” Rule 16.1(c) further states that the purpose of an application for rehearing “is to alert the Commission to a legal error, so that the Commission may correct it expeditiously.”2
The precise purpose of this application for rehearing is to “alert” the Commission to significant legal errors in D.18-09-017 and permit the Commission to correct those errors by expeditiously granting rehearing of D.18-09-017 and issuing orders that (1) deny a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (“CPCN”) for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (“MPWSP” or “Project”) proposed by California-American Water Company (“CalAm”) in this Application, and (2) determine that the Final Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Impact Statement (“EIR”) for the Project is fatally inadequate and cannot be certified. This outcome is required based on grounds that are detailed herein and summarized as follows:
(1) D.18-09-017 is unlawful in failing to apply and comply with the statutory requirements of PU Code Sections 1001 and 1002 that govern the Commission’s review of an application for a CPCN for a jurisdictional “water corporation” to begin the construction of “a line, plant, or system, or of any extension thereof”;3
(2) D.18-09-071 is unlawful in wrongly certifying an inadequate Final EIR for the Project;
(3) D.18-09-071 is unlawful in failing to comply with the law applicable to Commission decisions; and
(4) D.18-09-017 is unlawful for endorsing and using a process to reach and support its decision to grant a CPCN for the Project that violates applicable law and due process principles to the prejudice of Marina and other parties and is arbitrary and capricious.4
REQUESTED RELIEF
To correct the legal errors in D.18-09-017 identified above, the Commission must grant rehearing of D.18-09-017 to find, conclude, and order that:
1. The Commission did not regularly pursue its authority in D.18-09-017 by failing to apply and comply with the statutory requirements of PU Code Sections 1001 and 1002 that govern the Commission’s review of an application for a CPCN for a jurisdictional “water corporation” to begin the construction of “a line, plant, or system, or of any extension thereof.”560
2. The Commission did not regularly pursue its authority by failing to conduct a comprehensive analysis of “community values” and other Section 1002 factors, with a focus on the disadvantaged City of Marina and other communities that are burdened by the Project.
3. The Commission did not regularly pursue its authority by failing to determine that the Project is not feasible because it lacks the necessary water rights and water supply, violates the export prohibition in the Agency Act, and is not needed when using the true future water demand for the applicable service area.
4. The Commission did not regularly pursue its authority in D.18-09-017 in its erroneous analysis of project “need” where the applicable law and record do not support a finding that the Project is required by the “public convenience and necessity” pursuant to PU Code Sections 1001 and 1002(a).
5. The Commission did not regularly pursue its authority in D.18-09-071 by certifying an inadequate EIR for the Project that fails to comply with CEQA.
6. The Commission prejudicially abused its discretion by failing to proceed in the manner required by CEQA and acting without substantial evidentiary support in adopting and certifying the EIR.
7. The Commission did not regularly pursue its authority in D.18-09-071 in failing to comply with the law applicable to Commission decisions, in part by taking action on the invalid premise that it was required to act quickly to prevent the applicant from suffering consequences caused by the applicant’s own legal violations.
8. The Commission did not regularly pursue its authority, and committed violations of the parties’ constitutional rights, by endorsing and using a process to reach and support its decision to grant a CPCN for the Project that violates applicable law and due process principles to the prejudice of Marina and other parties.
9. Based on the grounds set forth in this Application for Rehearing, the CPCN granted for the Project in D.18-09-017 must be reversed and the CPCN must be denied.
10. Based on the grounds set forth in this Application for Rehearing, the certification of the EIR in D.18-09-017 must be nullified and withdrawn.
11. Upon taking the steps above, the Commission should include an order that does the following: (1) Either (a) directs CalAm to file a new Application by which water supply alternatives based on the expanded PWM project or in response to offers from MCWD are addressed and to submit, for approval, water supply purchase agreements that may result from those alternatives, or (b) grants the Motion for a Phase 3 to consider these “promising” alternatives; and (2) directs the CEQA/NEPA team to revise the EIR to correct for the errors identified in this Application for Rehearing and to include consideration of other Project Alternatives that were not previously studied, including desalination projects smaller than the 6.4 mgd Project originally authorized in D.18-09-017, and alternative sources or offers of water supply, and then recirculate it for public review and comment.

FILED 10/19/18
APPLICATION OF THE CITY OF MARINA FOR REHEARING OF DECISION 18-09-017

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 MARINA COAST WATER DISTRICT’S APPLICATION FOR REHEARING OF DECISION

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the MARINA COAST WATER DISTRICT’S APPLICATION FOR REHEARING OF DECISION document copy is embedded.  SUMMARY OF MCWD’S RECOMMENDATIONS Due to the many serious legal errors presented by D.18-09-017, which granted the instant application of the California-American Water Company (“Cal-Am”) for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (“CPCN”) to construct and operate the desalination component of its Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (“MPWSP”), the Commission should set aside and/or vacate D.18-09-017, so that it may resolve the legal errors raised in this application. Among other things, such resolution requires revision and recirculation of the Commission’s Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR” or “final EIR”) and the conduct of evidentiary hearings on all potentially feasible project alternatives, including in particular the expansion of the existing Pure Water Monterey (“PWM”) project of Monterey One Water (“M1W”), in cooperation with the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (“MPWMD”), and proposed long-term sales of water by MCWD.

CONCLUSION For all the reasons set forth herein, the Commission should promptly grant rehearing, so that it may cure each of the errors set forth above, including the Commission’s prejudicial procedural and due process errors. It should vacate or set aside D.18-09-017, rescind the CPCN, and conduct thorough evidentiary hearings on all potentially feasible project alternatives, including in particular the expansion of PWM as well as proposed long-term sales of water by MCWD. The Commission should also revise and recirculate for public comment a legally sufficient EIR prior to taking any further action on the MPWSP desalination project.
In the alternative, because the MPWSP is plainly not required for the current or future public convenience and necessity even if demand for 14,000 AFY of supply appears likely to materialize within the 30-year lifespan of the project as explained above, upon rehearing and correction of its prejudicial legal errors related to project feasibility, the Commission should deny the application and either open a Phase 3 of this proceeding to examine in thorough evidentiary hearings all potentially feasible project alternatives. Alternatively, the Commission should direct Cal-Am to negotiate new water purchase agreements with M1W and/or MCWD to augment supply for its Monterey District and return to the Commission with such agreements for Commission approval.

FILED 10/19/18
MARINA COAST WATER DISTRICT’S APPLICATION FOR REHEARING OF DECISION 18-09-017 

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT document copy is embedded. Summary This decision certifies and applies the combined Final Environmental Impact Report /Environmental Impact Statement, adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and authorizes a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for California-American Water Company’s (Cal-Am) Modified Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project at a size of 6.4 million gallons per day. It also addresses four proposed settlement agreements. The Commission adopts two of these settlement agreements (Brine Discharge Settlement and Return Water Settlement). This decision declines to adopt the Comprehensive Settlement but does adopt the framework set forth in that agreement based on the proceeding record independent of the proposed settlement. The fourth settlement agreement is rejected (Sizing Settlement).
This decision finds that water rate relief bonds issued by the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District will provide savings to customers on the Monterey Peninsula. It directs Cal-Am to prepare progress reports during construction of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project, and publish them on its website. It discusses the need for water supplies in Cal-Am’s Monterey District, reviewing demand and supply estimates and selecting estimates supported by the best evidence. The decision takes into account and apportions between ratepayers and Cal-Am the risks associated with various water supplies. Compliance conditions are imposed in the decision. The settlement agreements submitted, and other relevant documents are attached as appendices. To the extent they are not otherwise discussed here, any and all outstanding motions are deemed denied. The proceeding is closed.

Date of Issuance 9/20/2018
DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

APPENDIX B
Parties Position on Supply and Demand

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 OPENING COMMENTS OF THE CITY OF MARINA ON THE PROPOSED DECISION OF ALJS HAGA, HOUCK, AND WEATHERFORD

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the OPENING COMMENTS OF THE CITY OF MARINA ON THE PROPOSED DECISION OF ALJS HAGA, HOUCK, AND WEATHERFORD document copy is embedded.

Opening Comments of the City of Marina on the Proposed Decision 09-04-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 09-04-18
OPENING COMMENTS OF THE CITY OF MARINA ON THE PROPOSED DECISION OF ALJS HAGA, HOUCK, AND WEATHERFORD

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION document copy is embedded.

California-American Water Company Comments 09-4-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 09-04-18
CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 Surfrider Foundation and LandWatch Monterey County’s Comments on Proposed Decision

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the Surfrider Foundation and LandWatch Monterey County’s Comments on Proposed Decision document copy is embedded.


FILED 09-04-18
Surfrider Foundation and LandWatch Monterey County’s Comments on Proposed Decision

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 OPENING COMMENTS OF CALIFORNIA UNIONS FOR RELIABLE ENERGY ON THE PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the OPENING COMMENTS OF CALIFORNIA UNIONS FOR RELIABLE ENERGY ON THE PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT document copy is embedded.

Opening Comments of California Unions for Reliable Energy 09-04-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 09-04-18
OPENING COMMENTS OF CALIFORNIA UNIONS FOR RELIABLE ENERGY ON THE PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 COMMENTS OF PLANNING AND CONSERVATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION ON PROPOSED DECISION

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the COMMENTS OF PLANNING AND CONSERVATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION ON PROPOSED DECISION document copy is embedded.

Comments of Planning and Conservation League Foundation on Proposed Decision 09-04-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 09-04-18
COMMENTS OF PLANNING AND CONSERVATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION ON PROPOSED DECISION

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 COMMENTS OF THE PUBLIC ADVOCATES OFFICE ON THE PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the COMMENTS OF THE PUBLIC ADVOCATES OFFICE ON THE PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT document copy is embedded.

Comments of the Public Advocates Office 09-04-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 09-04-18
COMMENTS OF THE PUBLIC ADVOCATES OFFICE ON THE PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

CPUC APPROVES CAL-AM’S MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

Cpuc Approves Cal-Am's Mpwsp 09-13-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

CPUC APPROVES CAL-AM’S MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Ave., San Francisco

PRESS RELEASE

Docket #: A.12-04-019

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 13, 2018

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING document copy is embedded.

FILED 09/07/18
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S RULING

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 COMMENTS OF THE COUNTY OF MONTEREY AND THE MONTEREY COUNTY WATER RESOURCES AGENCY ON PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the COMMENTS OF THE COUNTY OF MONTEREY AND THE MONTEREY COUNTY WATER RESOURCES AGENCY ON PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT document copy is embedded.

Comments of the County of Monterey and the Monterey County Water Resources Agency 09-04-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 09-04-18
COMMENTS OF THE COUNTY OF MONTEREY AND THE MONTEREY COUNTY WATER RESOURCES AGENCY ON PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND CERTIFYING COMBINED ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 COMMENTS OF MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ON THE PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the COMMENTS OF MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ON THE PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT document copy is embedded.

Comments of Monterey Peninsula Water Management District 09-04-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 09-04-18
COMMENTS OF MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ON THE PROPOSED DECISION APPROVING A MODIFIED MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 PUBLIC TRUST ALLIANCE’S COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the PUBLIC TRUST ALLIANCE’S COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION document copy is embedded.

Public Trust Alliance’s Comments on Proposed Decision 09-04-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 09-04-18 

PUBLIC TRUST ALLIANCE’S COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 PUBLIC WATER NOW COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION ON MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the PUBLIC WATER NOW COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION ON MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT document copy is embedded.

Public Water Now Comments on Proposed Decision 09-04-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 09-04-18
PUBLIC WATER NOW COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION ON MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION FOR MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, Monterey County Farm Bureau

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, the COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION FOR MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, Monterey County Farm Bureau, document copy is embedded.

Comments on Proposed Decision, Monterey County Farm Bureau 08-31-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 08-31-18
COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION FOR MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

Proceeding Number A.12-04-019 COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

ABSTRACT: Re: Application of California-American Water Company (U210W) for Approval of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and Authorization to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates, COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, Salinas Valley Water Coalition, document copy is embedded.

Comments on Proposed Decision, Salinas Valley Water Coalition 08-31-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

FILED 08-31-18
COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DECISION MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, Salinas Valley Water Coalition

Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Public Agenda 3423 Thursday, September 13, 2018 : Regular Agenda- Water/Sewer Orders 33 California-American Water Company's Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project

CPUC Public Agenda 3423 09-13-18 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Public Utilities Commission of the State of California

Public Agenda 3423

Thursday, September 13, 2018 9:30 a.m.

505 Van Ness Avenue

San Francisco, California

Commissioners

Michael Picker, President

Martha Guzman Aceves

Carla J. Peterman

Liane M. Randolph

Clifford Rechtschaffen

Regular Agenda- Water/Sewer Orders

33 California-American Water Company's Monterey Peninsula Water

Supply Project

[16767]

A.12-04-019

Application of California-American Water Company for Approval of Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project and to Recover All Present and Future Costs in Rates.

PROPOSED OUTCOME:

• Certifies and applies the combined Final Environmental Impact Report

/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) and authorizes a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for California American Water Company's (Cal-Am) Modified Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project, fed primarily by ocean water.

• Adopts settlement agreements (brine discharge and return water).

• Discusses the need for water supplies in Cal-Am's Monterey District, reviewing

demand and supply estimates and selecting estimates supported by the best evidence.

• The decision takes into account and apportions between ratepayers and Cal-Am the risks associated with various water supplies.

• Compliance conditions are imposed in the decision, and the settlement agreements and other relevant documents are attached as appendices.

• The proceeding is closed.

SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS:

• Provides authorizations to the utility so that it can provide safe and reliable water service to its customers and meet all applicable regulations for the safe operation of its facilities, WR 2016-0016, which amends Orders 95-10 and 2009-0060, set forth by the State Water Resources Control Board.

ESTIMATED COST:

• The $297.5 million cost cap proposed by Settling Parties, and adopted in this decision, represents the estimated upper cost limit for the proposed project.

(Comr Randolph - Judge Haga - Judge Houck - Judge Weatherford)

http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/SearchRes.aspx?docformat=ALL&docid=228081973

Hold List for SEPTEMBER 13, 2018 (Agenda 3423) Final #3.docx
AGENDA CHANGES SEPTEMBER 13 2018 Agenda No. 3423