Report Backs Fast Track for Generators

The California Energy Commission recommended Friday that the hotly debated plan to restart two gas-fired generators in Huntington Beach proceed on a fast track but warned about potential threats to air, water and wildlife.

The commission’s 362-page preliminary report is the first formal assessment since the project’s approval process was accelerated by Gov. Gray Davis in an effort to help ease California’s electricity shortage.

The commission said AES Corp., the power plant owner, must pay for additional in-depth studies and implement a range of safeguards to protect against potential environmental hazards, which are described in detail by the report. Furthermore, the commission concludes that even if the project is given the go-ahead, any license should be limited to five years.

The report serves mainly as a guidepost in advance of a public workshop and hearings next week. A final decision on whether the permitting process can be shortened to 60 days from six months will be made by the commission March 26.

Many Huntington Beach residents oppose plans to restart the generators, which were shut down in 1995. And while the commission’s report does recommend that the project proceed, some officials were heartened by the long list of environmental concerns raised in the study.

“All we’ve asked for is that they do a thorough analysis, and we’re not sure a fast-track will accomplish that,” said City Councilwoman Shirley S. Dettloff, also a member of the California Coastal Commission. “I think what we all hope for is that a major statement is being made in their acknowledgment of the issues the city has brought forward.”

AES officials could not be reached for comment Friday. The company, which paid a record $17-million fine for allowing too much pollution to spew from its Long Beach power plant, has vowed to safeguard against environmental problems in Huntington Beach and remedy any future problems caused by plant operations.

The 50-year-old AES units are among a variety of electric generators the Energy Commission was directed to accelerate into service under executive orders signed last month by Davis.

The generators have a combined output of 450 megawatts, enough to serve 450,000 typical homes, and represent about 10% of the additional energy Davis has promised to have available to the power-starved state by summer, when electricity consumption peaks.

AES, California’s largest private power supplier, has said the mothballed generators could be restarted in 90 days.

*

Community opposition began in December when AES applied for a six-month fast-track permit. That application was rejected before the governor issued his orders. Concerns are further heightened now that the commission is considering approving the project in an even shorter time frame for a process that usually takes a year.

The community’s top concern is whether the AES plant is responsible for the pollution that closed the city’s beaches in 1999. Researchers at UC Irvine theorize that the power plant--which already uses 300 million gallons of ocean water each day as coolant--might be combining with currents to pull in sewage discharged miles offshore by the Orange County Sanitation District.

“We have a layer on top of all the other environmental concerns, which has to do with our ocean pollution problem,” Dettloff said. “Even the thought that we could continue to have closures will be unacceptable.”

In its assessment, a report card of sorts, the commission found that the project should not pose “significant adverse direct, indirect or cumulative impacts” in 18 of 21 categories, including public health, land use, noise and hazardous waste.

However, water quality was identified by the commission as one of the three problem areas that need to be studied further and possibly mitigated. Of these issues, those of greatest concern include how the generators would affect the city’s water supply and whether the plant is a source of ocean pollution.

“At this time, it cannot be determined whether the intake/outfall of the facility contributes to the bacterial problem in the surf zone,” project manager Jack W. Caswell wrote for the energy commission committee assigned to the case. “Until that determination can be made, we must assume for purposes of review of this application that the project would result in a significant environmental impact.”

Air quality issues also worry the commission, which questioned whether a unit currently operating at the AES power plant is meeting state and federal emission standards. Even if it is, the cumulative effects of that generator and the two retooled ones would push the plant over the state’s discharge limits, the report said.

*

According to the commission, AES has not provided enough information to the South County Air Quality Management District and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to allow the agencies to determine whether the project would comply with state and federal regulations.

But the company began submitting the requested data as soon as it learned of the commission’s concern.

Potential wildlife problems were the third area the commission said warranted further examination. Issues include noise levels affecting the Belding savannah sparrow in the Huntington Beach wetlands and fish being trapped or killed by intake pumps.

To address the air, water and wildlife concerns, AES must bear the cost of further studies and monitoring programs to gauge environmental effects, and it will be responsible for mitigating problems proved to be linked to the plant.

Should the project be approved, the permit would expire Sept. 30, 2006, keeping it consistent with AES’ current contract with the Department of Water Resources.