Water Supply Project

There are three proposals that are generally considered the most viable options:

• Cal-Am Water Supply Project
• DeepWater Desal
• Moss Landing/People's Water Project

Water Supply Project

Cal-Am filed an application with the California Public Utilities Commission on April 23, 2012 seeking approval for the Water Supply Project to replace the failed Regional Desalinization Project (RDP). The WSP has a three-pronged approach:

• Desalinization plant 
• Groundwater Replenishment Project (GWR)
• Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project (ASR)

The desalinization plant would be built in Marina and use slant wells to drill into the ocean floor beyond the tide line. The use of slant wells is thought to reduce the impact on marine life that a traditional vertical well would have.
The proposed size of the plant is 9750 acre-feet of water per year. However, if the MPWMD Groundwater Replenishment project (GWR) gets up and running, then Cal-Am will reduce the size of the plant to 6250 acre-feet per year.  (GWR basically involves returning treated, recycled water to the Seaside aquifer, increasing the amount of water available for pumping by Cal-Am.) Reducing the size of the plant would decrease the overall cost of the project.
Demand is estimated at 15,250 acre-feet per year (afy) by Cal-Am (12-14,000 afy is estimated by MPWMD) Once the 70% reduction is implemented, there will be a deficit of roughly 7-9000 acre-feet per year.

• The plant will be owned and operated by Cal-Am. ¹
• A CPUC ruling allowed Cal-Am to bypass a county law requiring public ownership of desalinization plants.
• The brine resulting from the desalination process will be discharged to the ocean through the MRWPCA's existing outfall. 
• A 10-mile pipeline will be built to deliver product water to the peninsula, and additional pipelines for the brackish water discharge.
• Production would be 9.6 million gallons per day (or 6.4 MGD with groundwater replenishment). [I really wish they'd stop switching back-and-forth between MGD and acre-feet.]
• Additional water to meet demand would be purchased from the Groundwater Replenishment (GWR) and Aquifer Storage & Recovery Projects (ASR).  
• GWR aims to return treated, recycled water to the Seaside aquifer via special wells, where it would percolate through the aquifer and become available for pumping. Please see "GWR" for more information. 
• ASR aims to "even out" Carmel River flow by capturing excess water during high-flow periods and storing it for use during low-flow periods. Please see "ASR" for more information. 
• Preliminary design is for seven wells (for the larger project) or 5 wells (for the smaller plant). Either plan would include one additional backup well  in case one is out of service. The wells will have a submersible design, so there will be little visual profile. 
• Power for the plant will come from the existing grid. No new facilities are planned.

¹ A vote is scheduled for June 3, 2014 to decide if a public agency such as MPWMD should buy out Cal-Am.

Budget

$320 to $370 million (depending on whether the smaller or larger plant is built.
Financing would come from a ratepayer surcharge and loans from a state fund designated for water supply/desalinization projects.

Note: Cal-Am believes it is eligible for the state loans. Critics question whether Cal-Am, as a private company, would qualify for loans from this fund.

Public comments (for and against):

• The desal plant should be owned by ratepayers since they are paying for it. Why was Cal-Am allowed to bypass the law requiring public ownership. 
• There is a proposed ballot initiative demanding that the MPWMD or other public agency buy out Cal-Am (essentially buying all Cal-Am assets and infrastructure within the district). We'd still have to pay for it, but at least we'd own it. And property taxes and other costs would probably be lower overall if the plant was owned by a public agency instead of a for-profit corporation. 
• Slant well technology for water drilling is relatively unproven. We have to pay for a test well to see if the whole idea is even going to work. [Note: from what I've been able to determine, some precise hydro-geologic conditions have to exist on the ocean floor for slant wells to be successful. These conditions are found in only a few locations around the globe, which is why it hasn't really been possible to prove the concept of slant wells. Cal-Am wants to drill bore holes to do some testing but as of this writing is still negotiating with Marina over drilling rights.]
• Go big or go home. The proposed plant is too small: if we're going to build it, let's just go for it and do it right to ensure that we have a sufficient water supply over the long term. 
• It's cheaper to treat water than to de-salt it.  Expand the GWR instead. 
• Prunedale Neighbors group argues that it would be harmed by extraction of seawater next to Castroville. 
• Cal-Am is counting on loans from the state fund; there is some question is to whether it is eligible for those funds as a for-profit corporation. 
• On the "for" side, let's get going on something. This plan might not be perfect, but it seems the most viable right now and we're running out of time. A severe water shortage would devastate the hospitality industry.  Economic growth has already taken a hit because of the shortage. 

There's also distrust of Cal-Am itself.  Interest groups such as  WaterPlus, Ratepayers First, and others have made allegations against Cal-Am such as:

• As a for-profit company, Cal-Am puts the interests of shareholders above ratepayers. 
• Cal-Am has abandoned other projects/mismanaged other projects, such as the RDP and the San Clemente Dam, and ratepayers pick up the tab. 
• The fact that Cal-Am was found to be illegally diverting water from the Carmel River and had to be ordered to reduce pumping from the Seaside Aquifer as well proves that it has mismanaged water resources on the peninsula. 
• The RDP failed, after incurring millions of dollars in costs, because of a conflict of interest, disagreements over water rights, and other issues. Many of those issues still remain, so why would this project be any different.

DeepWater Desal

Please see the DeepWater Desal proposal tab.

Moss Landing Water project

....TO COME...