© POSEIDON WATER 2013 1 THESE MATERIALS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION STAFF Huntington Beach Project Coastal Commission Hearing November

© POSEIDON WATER 2013 1THESE MATERIALS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION STAFF

Huntington Beach Project Coastal Commission Hearing

November 13, 2013

© POSEIDON WATER 2013 2

Use proven technology to affordably provide a long-term, local and reliable source of water not subject to the variations of drought or regulatory constraints

Reduce local dependence on imported water and strengthen regional self-reliance

Contribute desalinated water to satisfy regional water supply planning goals

Key Objectives of the Huntington Beach Project


California and Orange County Counting on Seawater Desalination

California Department of Water Resources’ Water Plan Update sets a goal of up to 400,000 acre feet / AF of desalination by 2030

Project would provide 56,000 acre feet per year

Governor Brown’s recently released State Water Strategy identifies desalination as one of the pillars to increase regional water self-reliance

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California is counting on 150,000 acre feet of desalination by 2030

Project identified in Municipal Water District of Orange County’s RUWMP as necessary to reduce demand on imported water

50% of Orange County’s water supply is imported

Without seawater desalination, Orange County’s demand for imported water will increase


Project Permitting History


Proposed Project


Flow Schematic – Reusing Existing Industrial Facilities


RESPONSE TO STAFF REPORT


Applicant’s Request for Commission Approval

The Applicant requests that the Commission: Approve the Project as submitted Adopt the Applicant’s alternative conditions and

findings

Primary differences with Staff recommendation: Elimination of seafloor infiltration gallery

requirement Elimination of conditions that require a new design

and a new entitlement process


STAFF REPORT – KEY ISSUES

Subsurface Intakes

Marine Life Effects

State Water Board’s Proposed Desalination Policy

Wetlands

Sea Level Rise

Special Conditions


ALTERNATIVE SUBSURFACE INTAKE SYSTEM

SEAFLOOR INFILTRATION GALLERY


Subsurface Seafloor Infiltration Gallery


Subsurface Intakes: Site-Specific Project Analyses

The study and analysis of alternative subsurface intakes has been a primary focus throughout the Project’s entitlement process

Hundreds of pages of technical analyses of alternative intakes have been provided to permitting agencies that confirm the infeasibility of a seafloor infiltration gallery

The Regional Board relied on technical reports and site-specific data to reject a seafloor infiltration gallery and approve the Project’s use of the existing intake

Since 2006, the Applicant has provided Commission Staff with nine detailed submittals analyzing alternative subsurface intakes and site-specific conditions

The submittals include site-specific geotechnical reports analyzing offshore subsurface conditions at Huntington Beach


History of Subsurface Intake Analysis

• PSOMAS, 2007, Feasibility of Alternative Seawater Intakes for the Huntington Beach Desal Project

• PSOMAS, 2007, Supplemental Subsurface Intake Feasibility Assessment

• Water Globe Consulting, 2010, Evaluation of Alternative Desalination Plant Subsurface Intake Technologies

• Water Globe Consulting, 2011, Evaluation of Alternative Desalination Plant Subsurface Intake Technologies

• Tetra Tech, 2012, Technical Document Review for Site-Specific Hydraulic Conductivity Values

• Water Globe Consulting, 2012, Well Intake Capacity Updated Based on 2012 Soil Transmissivity Study

• Geosyntec, 2013, Review of Aquifer Properties and Potential Pumping Huntington Beach Desalination Plant

• Geosyntec, 2013, Feasibility Assessment of Shoreline Subsurface Collectors

• Geosyntec, 2013, Response to Requests from California Coastal Commission Staff Regarding Feasibility Assessment of Shoreline Subsurface Collectors

• Water Globe Consulting, 2013, Critical Review of 2013 Desalination Journal Publication on Subsurface Intakes


Subsurface Geotechnical Analysis Conducted

Staff requested that the Applicant conduct an offshore subsurface geotechnical analysis that included:

Seismic testing to determine subsurface characteristics of ocean floor

Assessment of seafloor sediment samples

Geosyntec conducted site-specific analyses, which included: Seismic testing as requested by Staff; and

Analysis of existing site-specific sediment data in Huntington Beach

• Geosyntec Report corroborated earlier analyses and demonstrated:

Huntington Beach seafloor is not suitable for infiltration gallery

Seafloor sediments consist of “muddy sand” of low permeability


Locations of Offshore Sediment Samples


Location of Offshore Geotechnical Analysis


Results: Offshore Consists of “Muddy Sand”


Staff’s Recommendation Conflicts with the Regional Board’s Determination

In approving the Applicant’s NPDES Permit, the Regional Board analyzed a number of subsurface intake alternatives as well as the Project’s use of the existing intake

Subsurface intake alternatives analyzed included a seafloor infiltration gallery

The Regional Board found: The Project’s use of the existing intake constitutes the best available

technology feasible to minimize the intake and mortality of all forms of marine life in compliance with Water Code section 13142.5(b). (Permit, p. F-30)

“A seafloor infiltration gallery sized for the Facility would impact approximately 64 acres of benthic habitat and beachfront.” (Permit, p. F-27)

“The alternative subsurface intakes were determined not to be the environmentally preferred alternatives.” (Permit, p. F-28)

“Taking into account economic, environmental and technological factors, the Regional Water Board finds that the alternative subsurface intakes are not feasible.” (Permit, p. F-28)


A Seafloor Infiltration Gallery is Environmentally Inferior

Excavation of 63.6 acres of seafloor habitat and beachfront

Displacement of plant and animal organisms on the seafloor

Periodic maintenance dredging every 1 to 3 years to remove unsuitable material and sedimentation, resulting in ongoing impacts to benthic communities

Construction of substantial pumping facility(ies), including associated acoustical and visual shielding, security fencing on the shoreline, and access road(s), restricting public access to the beach

Doubles intake-related energy consumption and GHG emissions

Substantial noise and vibration impacts from dredging and sheet pile driving

Removal and disposal of 290,000 to 560,000 cubic yards of seafloor material


Seafloor Infiltration Gallery Conflicts with Coastal Act and LCP Policies

• Marine Environment (Coastal Act Sections 30230, 30231) Excavation of the seafloor would repeatedly and permanently impact the offshore

benthic environment

• Public Access and Recreation (Coastal Act Sections 30211, 30220, 30221)

Public access and recreation impacts from the construction of 33 intake water collection wells and trenches for connector piping along one-mile strip of shoreline, including service roads

• Energy Consumption (Coastal Act Section 30253(d)) Energy to convey source seawater from infiltration gallery to desalination plant

will be approximately 2 times higher than from collecting seawater from existing intake system


Subsurface Intakes Are Infeasible

“Feasible means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.” (Coastal Act § 30108)

Environmental: Staff’s recommendations are more environmentally impactful

Technological: Unproven technology; excessive risk

Economic: Not financeable; capital costs increase at least 50%

Social: Impairs coastal access and public recreation

Time: Would require a new entitlement process; current entitlements have taken 10 years


MARINE LIFE EFFECTS

IMPINGEMENT & ENTRAINMENT


Marine Life Effects

As proposed, Huntington Beach Project’s marine life effects are minimal - smaller than the Commissioned-approved Carlsbad project - and can be mitigated in compliance with Coastal Act.

Intake structure is not within an Area of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) or Marine Life Protected Area (MPA)

No threatened or endangered species; recreational species very uncommon

Estimated daily impingement of 0.78 lbs of fish/shellfish per day

92% reduction in fish impingement compared to HBGS’ impingement losses

Larval entrainment losses projected to affect only a small fraction of larvae

(0.02-0.28%) of the source water populations of 115 billion

Project would not affect the ability of species to sustain their populations


STATE WATER BOARD

SEAWATER DESALINATION POLICY


SWB Proposed Desalination Policy

Acknowledges that seawater desalination is important to meeting State’s potable water demands

Designed to provide permitting guidance to Regional Boards

Draft plan has not been released

Requires public review and comment, CEQA clearance, & State Board and US EPA approval

Policy will be implemented through Regional Board’s NPDES permitting process

Project will have to comply with policy in order to maintain its NPDES permit

Poseidon proposed CDP special condition: Poseidon shall comply with all current and future Ocean Plan requirements applicable to the Project

of the Talbert Aquifer.


WETLANDS


No Wetland Impacts

Staff incorrectly claims that areas within fuel storage tank containment berms were recently wetlands

SEIR Jurisdictional Determination concluded that vegetation, soils and hydrology onsite are not wetlands

No nexus to require wetland restoration

Staff incorrectly claims that adjacent wetlands will be impacted by project construction

Site design complies with LCP wetland setback policy

Only a portion of an access road and parking spaces are within 100 feet of a degraded pickleweed area

14-foot high, 60-foot wide containment berm provides buffer between Project site and pickleweed area

Mitigation measures minimize noise, light and vibration impacts


Pickleweed Area Buffer


SEA LEVEL RISE


No Sea Level Rise Impacts

Project site will not be affected by sea level rise Project site is 9-14 ft above MSL

Worst-case sea level rise is 2 ft MSL by 2050 at Project Site

Project complies with Commission’s draft sea level rise guidance

Therefore, Project not affected by sea level rise

Poseidon proposed special condition: Permit expires 35 years after commercial operation; allows Commission to re-evaluate sea level rise impacts


APPLICANT’S PROPOSED PERMIT CONDITIONS


Applicant’s Proposed Permit Conditions

Poseidon proposing a separate set of Special Conditions to authorize approval of the Project as submitted

Incorporate elements of conditions recommended by Staff related to site-specific conditions in Huntington Beach

Eliminates requirement for a subsurface infiltration gallery

Eliminates requirements to start new entitlement and environmental review process, and to re-analyze issues that already have been thoroughly analyzed


Applicant’s Proposed Permit Conditions – Key Changes

Noise and Avian Protection (Special Condition 10) Requires site-specific nesting surveys during construction

periods

Establishes noise protection at active nest locations rather than site boundary

Utilizes 65 dBA standard consistent with Commission precedent

Seismic and Tsunami Protection (Special Conditions 15 and 16)

Applicant’s Special Condition 16 imposes all necessary structural stability requirements requested by Staff

Applicant’s Special Conditions eliminate duplicative requirement to study tsunami impacts that have already been evaluated and elaborate review and sign-off requirements from entities that do not have review authority

Applicant’s Special Condition 15 requires City approval of tsunami response plan and coordination with adjacent power plant on emergency response


Applicant’s Proposed Permit Conditions – Key Changes

Wetland Protection and Restoration Sufficient buffers exist to avoid wetland impacts, consistent with LCP

policy

Eliminates requirement to redesign Project to increase buffer width

Noise protection condition ensures no impacts to potential sensitive species

Eliminates obligation to create 14 acres of coastal wetland habitat since Jurisdictional Determination confirmed no wetlands on Project site

Marine Life Mitigation Plan & GHG Plan (Special Conditions 13 & 18)

Provides Commission ability to consider MLMP and GHG Plan at future hearing

Neither are deferred mitigation Both must be approved prior to permit issuance & before development

commences

GHG Plan with specific performance standards imposed as City condition

Applicant has already submitted proposed MLMP and GHG Plan, and the Commission has the discretion to approve those today


Conclusion

The Project is needed to meet to local, regional, and state water supply and reliability goals

Reduces Orange County’s need for imported water

The Project uses the best available technology feasible to minimize effects on marine life

The Staff’s recommendation is more environmentally impactful, conflicts with Coastal Act and LCP policies, and is infeasible

The Project as submitted is fully consistent with applicable Coastal Act and LCP policies


Applicant’s Requested Motions

November 11, 2013 Letter provides the following:

Applicant’s Proposed Conditions (Exhibit A – pink)

Applicant’s Suggested Basis for Findings (Exhibit B – yellow)

Motions and Resolutions to approve Applicant’s Proposed Project (Exhibit D – blue; Exhibit E – green)

Documents

© POSEIDON WATER 2013 1 THESE MATERIALS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION STAFF Huntington Beach Project Coastal Commission Hearing November