Are Monterey Peninsula residents ready to drink toilet water?
That's what one piece of California American Water's three-pronged water supply proposal calls for, in the form of groundwater replenishment.
The Monterey Regional Pollution Control Agency, which already treats wastewater for use in irrigation (piped through the "purple line" in North County), is proposing pumping up to an additional 3,500 acre-feet of water a year into the Seaside Basin.
The agency Friday released a notice of preparation for an environmental impact report on the project, which opens a 30-day public comment period. The public is invited to weigh in on the scope of environmental issues and potential mitigation measures by July 2.
The idea behind groundwater replenishment is that it could shrink the size of Cal Am's proposed desal plant.
The proposal calls for different infrastructure configurations that could transport water from a few different sources. There's a possible new pump station to deliver water from Salinas' Blanco Drain to the treatment plant, plus a 9,000-foot pipeline to transport the agricultural water. There's also a proposed 2,700-foot pipeline to deliver stormwater from Salinas, which for the city, is a liability in terms of meeting state regulations.
The plan also calls for a new advanced water treatment plant. The estimated capital expense would be $75 million.
The agency expects it could produce water for $2,500/acre-foot, about half of the anticipated cost of desalinated water.
Getting to this phase of environmental scoping hasn't been easy for the agency. Its board disagreed over whether the Peninsula should consider using any Salinas Valley water at all, due to water rights that growers lay claim to.
"It’s a tough issue," MRWPCA General Manager Keith Israel says. "We feel confident in our position, the growers feel confident in their position."
After a divided board kicked the project to the curb last year, a working group including representative of the ag industry tried to work out an amendement to the agreement on agricultural water. They failed, but the board decided to proceed pending a resolution.
Peninsula mayors say their cities are entitled to water since Peninsula wastewater supplies the treatment plant. Growers pump from the treatment plant seasonally, but even then aren't at capacity, partly due to declining volumes—a result of Peninsula conservation practices.
Israel expects the amount of water will keep declining, especially at Cal Am ratepayers absorb the cost of the desal project on their water bills.
"Once rates go higher, we’d expect people would do even more conservation," he says. "Everyone’s going to want to have high-efficiency machines."
(3) comments
[scared] I have not yet seen an article in the Weekly regarding the SWRCB hearing of yesterday, and I can not respond to the Herald, something about my browser not being updated enough. I simply draw the nexus to the Cal Am projects, herein.
I read the article this morning with sheer incredulity. The Ag industry has made it crystal clear from Day 1 that no Salinas Valley water is available to the Peninsula, period!!!!!! I was not at the meeting, but the reports indicate the 3 Ag representatives made their points concisely to the SWRCB members. I will not go into their statements, they speak for themselves. Lets tackle the comments made by the supporters of the Peninsula attempting to "take" some of the Salinas Valley's water, Mr. Nava and Mr. Schimek. As an aside, I will paraphrase my understanding of the reporters rendering of the comments. I am taking them from the paper.
NAVA: The Peninsula should get some of our "effluent" returned to us. Lets examine the facts; the effluent is owned by a JPA, the MRWPCA, which you pay fees to every month to deal with your gray water and sewage. It flows to them and is treated to Secondary Effluent stage which renders it able to be discharged into the ocean via an outfall pipe. In 1992 and amended in 2003, the MRWPCA agreed to allow Tertiary Treatment of the water per a $38M treatment facility paid for, and contractually operated by the Salinas Valley. Depending on the time of year, the effluent is either treated by the farmers, or dumped into the ocean. In short, sir, you do not own crap.
The race card, poor minority families of working class origin will be most deeply impacted by the CDO and the Salinas Valley should be a better neighbor. While I have no doubt that there are a fair number of minority working class families in Seaside and elsewhere, how many do you think exist in the communities of Pebble Beach, Carmel, Carmel Valley, Monterey, etc. When was the last time you drove through the East side of Salinas, Chualar, Soledad, Greenfield, etc.? I can not prove this, but I would hazard a guess that the people mowing your lawns, cleaning your house, picking up your trash and serving you in a restaurant do not live on the Peninsula. They will be impacted because we as a community have been unable to solve our Carmel River problem on our own, not because the Salinas Valley decided to preserve its rights.
SCHIMEK: Could the Peninsula have not found a less polarizing individual to render opinions than Mr. Schimek? This is the same guy, who through his Coastkeeper organization has sued the MCWRA, the County of Monterey, etc. to keep the Salinas Valley from cleaning the Salinas River and regulating water in ditches. In short, they can not stand him, and he wants them to be good neighbors and fallow 10% of their ground to preserve water that can then be used to violate State law and ship it to an over-drafted aquifer from another over-drafted aquifer? OMG!!!!!!
By the way, if you look at the base rates communities pay for water, per gallon, the Salinas Valley pays significantly more than the Peninsula. Even with a doubling we are still comparable.
Until such time as the MRWPCA can prove that they have rights to any water from the Salinas Valley, in any form, regardless of source, this is a moot discussion. In the last week the following things have transpired to the detriment of the Cal Am suite of projects:
1. Cal Am's own parent company has rendered an opinion to their shareholders back in Jersey that it is possible the Monterey project will "likely, if ever, be built". This has been filed in a 10-K filing with the Federal government.
2. Cal Am and the County tried to pull a fast one with a "sealed" filing for County reimbursement of selling their ordinance to the Cal Am entity to allow them to build without a public partner.
3. The Ag industry has once again issued a public document saying not only no, but "hell no" to any water source from the Salinas Valley.
And yet blindly, or some other motive Keith Israel, and his "toilet to tap" group insists on spending tax payer dollars for a doomed plan. At the very least the meetings (public) this next week with the SWRCB folks and others should be entertaining. [sad]
Let's face it...the reaction of people who spend mucho bucks at the Inn at Pebble will be as oldguy49 puts it, "WHAT..this is sewer to goblet !!!" How well does one think that will play???
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.