Poseidon report passes, again

Jenny Marder

The Planning Commission approved the environmental report for the

proposed Poseidon desalination plant on Tuesday night for the second

time.

The commission first approved the report on July 8 by a 4-3 vote,

but agreed to scrap that vote just two weeks later after learning

that scientists with Poseidon Resources Corp. provided false

information to them.

After clearing up all misunderstandings and rehashing the pros and

cons, commissioners again passed the report with a 4-3 vote.

Commissioners Randy Kokal, Steve Ray and Robert Dingwall again

opposed the report, and Commissioner Ron Davis recast his vote in

favor of the project.

“It was late at night, and they misunderstood my question,” Davis

said Tuesday night. “I am confident now in the remodeling.”

Davis, who could likely sway the final vote, cautioned that his

vote to certify the report doesn’t guarantee that he’ll approve the

remaining permits. The commission still must pass the plant’s

conditional use and coastal development permits.

The desalination plant would pull from the AES Huntington Beach

power plant’s daily intake of seawater and treat it to produce 50

million gallons a day of fresh drinking water.

A California Coastal Commission report on desalination, released

at the state agency’s meeting last week, indicates that the proposed

Huntington Beach facility is the largest of the 18 desalination

plants proposed along the California coast. The five desalination

plants that are operating along the coast are much smaller than the

proposed plant -- producing a combined total of only 2.75 million

gallons a day.

The report was meant to educate commissioners on seawater

desalination, Coastal Commissioner Toni Iseman said.

“It’s part of understanding a little bit about the process and a

little bit about the law,” Iseman said. “There are issues about

whether or not when we capture the salt water, whether we’re doing

damage to sealife ... . The Coastal Commission recognizes that it is

our obligation to protect our coastal resource.”

In its report, the Coastal Commission stopped short of making any

recommendations for desalination plants in general. Each facility

will require a case-by-case review, which will include an examination

of the impact on marine life and the growth inducement impact,

according to the report. It will also study the implications of

privatizing water, a public resource.

The Coastal Commission will review every desalination plant

proposed in California to determine whether it complies with the

California Coastal Act.

Planning commissioners at Tuesday’s meeting raised several issues

of concern before the final vote.

“My sense is we can do better and my sense is maybe we ought to

ask for better,” Davis said.

Mayor Connie Boardman appealed the Planning Commission’s first

approval of the report, which was nullified when the commission

brought it back for further consideration, and said she will appeal

again.

“I’m concerned that it doesn’t fully address the growth inducing

impact and I’m not convinced that it adequately deals with the

cumulative impacts along the coast of California,” Boardman said.

Her appeal means the report will now go to the City Council for

review and approval.

Dingwall begged the commission to withhold the vote, pending

review of a 410-page desalination study released Tuesday morning that

he felt all commissioners should first be required to read.

The lengthy report, done by the California Energy Commission,

examines the relationship between viruses and bacteria collecting in

and around the AES plant.

Elaine Archibald, an environmental scientist for Poseidon, who had

read the report that day, said that nothing in the study contradicts

the facts laid out in the environmental report.

The Planning Commission will discuss and possibly vote on

Poseidon’s conditional use permit and coastal development permit at

its next meeting, at 7 p.m. Aug. 26.

“We’re not perfect, we’re doing the best that we can and we need

water,” Commissioner Jan Shomaker said before casting her vote to

approve the report. “I believe that the EIR has proven itself, and we

need to move on.”