On Friday, December 9, 2011 the California Coastal Commission held a hearing to determine whether the desalination-related testing the Army Corps of Engineers proposed to do on the beach at Shamel Park.
The Commission heard a report from their own staff, followed by testimony from an Army Corps representative, six Cambrians urging they deny the project, one lot owner asking they should allow the project to move forward and Cambria Community Services District Engineer Bob Gresens. (View the hearing online at Cal-Span. The item starts at 2 hours, 21 minutes into the video.)
Some highlights:
CCSD Engineer Bob Gresens referred the project as study to determine how to supplement Cambria’s water supply. “The Army Corps and the Cambria CSD need to do what’s called an EIR/EIS document for a water supply project. We don’t necessarily know what that water supply project is at this point. Whether it’s desal or something else, quite frankly. “
Huh?
The reactions from the Cambrians who were there (and visible on camera) dropped their jaws in reaction to this statement. “They [the Corps] need to gather data to determine the alternatives that will be analyzed. This is just basically scientific data gathering by the Army Corps to help define those alternatives….To characterize the fact that facilities are out there in the future is simply not correct. It’s jumping too far ahead. “
Commission staff’s response to Gresens’ comments: “…regarding the future desal facility, staff fully expect that the commission will see a proposal for a desal facility rather than just water supply options. Last year, in September, the Corps issued two contracts that specifically called for environmental analysis for a desalination facility and design for a desalination facility, so that’s something we expect to see sometime in the next 2 or 3 years. The Corps construction project list for 2013 includes the Cambria desalination project.”
The commissioners seems to be in agreement on a couple of specific concerns:
The commission staff had really tried to accommodate the Corps and yet there is no way around the threat to this environmentally sensitive place.
Nearly all the conditions staff thought should be implemented in order to protect this place were deleted by the Army Corps (as seen in the addendum, released only a day earlier.)
No one wants to get in the way of Cambria getting water it needs, and commissioners were clear that they are not anti-desal as a rule. But it must be done in the right way.
Another concern (one that could have implications for other desal facilities) was the nature of how and when the Army Corp got involved in the project (just after the CCSD had a Coastal Development permit for Desal rejected) and that the Corps’ involvement essentially eliminated any authority or jurisdiction of the Coastal Commission. Commissioner Zimmer said, “If we don’t have permit authority and we don’t even have the most modest conditioning authority, then that’s really worrisome to me. “The Commissioners seemed to generally agree that it seemed like the CCSD/Army Corps were doing a bit of an end run around the process. Perhaps (if it is the case) this is a relic of prior CCSD staff/board plans. If it is not the case, I hope the CCSD can offer a solid explanation.
To go straight to the comments by the commissioners, visit Cal-Span, December 9, 2011, fast forward to 3 hours 16 minutes.
The Bottom Line: The Corps was looking for a consistency determination, the commission said NO, but the Corps could actually go forward – even in the face of a denial by the Commission. The remedies available to the commission if the Corps does go forward are to seek mediation or to file suit in court.
See you at the meeting Thursday.
More valuable than a gallon of gas? Say YES! with a small donation today.
Last 5 posts by Amanda Rice
- Gail Robinette Chosen to Complete DeMicco's Term as CCSD Director on Unanimous Vote
- Cambria CSD Agenda for November 27, 2011 Meeting Includes Water Conservation & New Tank Project
- Sunken Oil Tanker Off Cambria's Coastline Will Be Checked Again Soon
- CCSD Meeting Agenda Includes staffing changes, Veteran's Hall fees, water system upgrades, conservation goals and more
Am I mistaken or are the first words above an incomplete sentence? It reads:
On Friday, December 9, 2011 the California Coastal Commission held a hearing to determine whether the desalination-related testing the Army Corps of Engineers proposed to do on the beach at Shamel Park.
How should this sentence be completed?