A five-year discharge permit has finally been granted to Duke Energy's power plant on San Diego Bay, after three years of environmental studies, arguments and delays.
Neither the energy company nor the environmentalists who opposed it got everything they wanted with the permit, issued yesterday by the state Regional Water Quality Control Board.
But at least it's done.
The 44-year-old power plant in Chula Vista uses outdated technology, daily circulating up to 601 million gallons of sea water throughout its system for cooling.
The water is discharged back into the bay, at temperatures much higher than the surrounding water. It is the discharge that was the subject of the permit debate.
The controversy involved such issues as the small sea creatures that are sucked into the intake pipes and the impact of the heated water and the turbidity it causes when discharged back into the bay.
Whether the marine environment is being harmed, and whether any damage could be rectified without shutting down the plant, was much debated.
"There are very conflicting views on the data," said John Phillips, an engineer for the water quality control board. "If you believe the (company), everything's fine. "If you believe the environmentalists, everything is dying."
Phillips said the staff's recommendation to approve the permit, which was endorsed by the board, was the most appropriate course.
The permit requires much more monitoring of the discharge – for heat, copper and other metals and toxicity – and it establishes a shorter timeline for compliance than previously suggested.
Duke Energy has three years to comply with new limitations on discharges through the plant's corroding copper pipes.
The company also will be required to propose measures to restore and repair any damage caused to the biological resources in the bay by the heated water and to pay for the implementation of those measures.
The permit becomes effective Nov. 20 – 10 days from the date of approval. The board agreed to give Duke Energy until Jan. 1 to begin the monthly water monitoring program.
The board approved the permit 5-1, with member Terese Ghio opposed.
Ghio attempted several times to get her colleagues to lower the monitoring requirements for toxicity and metals other than copper after a year, as long as no violations occurred during that time.
She said there has not been a significant level of lead or other metals, or any problems with toxicity at the plant. It would be a waste of money, she said, to continue testing for them monthly if a year of monitoring showed nothing was amiss.
Board member Richard Wright noted that monthly testing would only provide data from 12 days out of 365. He said he could not support a reduction in the monitoring.
Duke Energy has three years to move its testing location from its current position 1,000 feet from the power plant to a spot much closer to the discharge pipes, at the plant's property line.
The original permit proposal would have allowed five years.
Additionally, the new permit includes a provision that allows the plant to increase its energy production, even if it violates the permit, if an energy shortage creates a "state of emergency." That would have to be declared by the governor or the state's Independent Systems Operator, or ISO, which oversees the local energy grid.
The ISO and San Diego Gas & Electric warned that the costs of additional monitoring would inevitably be borne by the ratepayers.
That prompted Bruce Reznik of San Diego Baykeeper to tell the board: "I greatly appreciate Duke's newfound concern for the ratepayers of San Diego. I wish they had those concerns back when they were bilking us out of millions of dollars."
A spokesman for SDG&E, Ed Van Herik, said afterward that many factors go into determining the rates paid by the company's 1.3 million customers.
It isn't possible to know whether rates will go up, he said, but the added costs of monitoring will put "upward pressure" on them.
About 60 percent of San Diego's power is imported, but SDG&E considers the Duke power plant crucial to the region's power supply.
Two power plants are scheduled to be built in the county in the next few years, but it is unknown whether they will lessen the need for the Duke power plant, especially since the county's population continues to increase.
Following yesterday's hearing, a spokesman for Duke Energy, James White, said it's not known what impact the new permit will have.
White, the company's environmental health and safety manager, said the power will not be operated out of compliance.
"We certainly will follow the permit," he said. "We just need a chance to dissect it, to evaluate it and sit down with staff and see what precisely is required of us."
White didn't know whether Duke Energy will challenge or appeal the permit, but environmental groups predicted the permit will be challenged.
"Overall, we're happy" with the permit, said attorney Marco Gonzalez, speaking for the San Diego Bay Council, which includes the Environmental Health Coalition, San Diego Baykeeper, San Diego Audubon, the Surfrider Foundation and the Sierra Club.
"It's better than what we had before, and it ends a long overdue process," Gonzalez said. "We didn't get everything we want, but we recognize it's more important to move forward with the permit implementation than with further challenges."
Leslie Branscomb: (619) 498-6630; leslie.branscomb@uniontrib.com
Copyright 2004 Union-Tribune Publishing
Company. Used by Permission
Return to Top | Return Home | Contact EHC | Action Alerts | Join Us | Search