Energy Panel Broke Law, Groups Say

In legal papers filed with the state Supreme Court, environmentalists have accused California energy regulators of violating state law by approving an expansion of the El Segundo power plant without requiring operators to study the potential harm to marine life.

Santa Monica Baykeeper and Heal the Bay alleged in the filing last week that the California Energy Commission went against state recommendations to study the effects of large water pipes that suck in and destroy trillions of marine organisms every year.

El Segundo plant operators plan to increase the amount of Santa Monica Bay seawater pulled in by 25%, for an annual total of about 127 billion gallons. The water is used to cool the plant’s generators.

Environmentalists don’t oppose the plant’s expansion, and are not trying to put California in another energy crisis, said Mark Gold, executive director of Heal the Bay. “We’re just saying, ‘Look, it’s your responsibility if you’re using the ocean as a resource to make sure you’re not depleting it.’ ”

The commission, which licenses thermal power plants greater than 50 megawatts, has until the end of today to file its response. Legal counsel for the commission was unavailable to comment.

A spokesman for Dynegy Inc., which co-owns the plant with NRG Energy Inc., said the company also planned to file a response. “Our position is that we believe the CEC conducted a thorough review of the application before granting the permit,” said David Byford.

The commission’s decision at El Segundo flies in the face of recent environmentally sensitive approaches to coastal power plant development, environmentalists said. Huntington Beach’s AES power plant was recertified in 2001 during the state’s energy crisis, yet regulators still required the owners to determine the effects of its ocean-intake pipes on marine life.

Calls for such a report at El Segundo by the California Coastal Commission, along with state and federal wildlife agencies, were ignored by the energy commission. A study has never been done at El Segundo since it opened in 1964.

Research at other coastal power plants has shown that animals -- including sea lions, rays, crustaceans and adult fish -- are caught on mesh screens as they are pulled into the large pipes, which are often more than 10 feet in diameter. Organisms too small to be caught on screens -- including fish eggs, larvae and plankton -- are sucked into the plant and killed.

“Our position was, if you don’t know what the impacts are because you’ve never had a decent study, how can you figure out what the next step is? It’s just sort of obvious,” said Mike Foster, a marine biologist hired by the energy commission to make recommendations about El Segundo.

Foster said the ruling hit a sour note with energy commission staff who had strongly recommended that plant operators study the effects on marine life. “I think the gloom is still in the building.”

The petition alleges that the energy commission’s approval of El Segundo’s expansion violates the state’s clean water law, the Coastal Act and the Warren-Alquist Act, which governs the energy commission.

By law, the environmental groups are required to appeal directly to the California Supreme Court. The petition also challenges the constitutionality of that law.

With most other public agencies, appeals can be heard in superior or appellate court before reaching the state Supreme Court, said Tracy Egoscue, executive director of Santa Monica Baykeeper. It is difficult to get a petition heard in the state’s highest court, she said, because of the sheer volume of cases before the judges.

The focal point of the petition remained El Segundo’s effect on Santa Monica Bay.

“I think people should demand to know what’s going on,” Foster said. “In the old days when these plants were originally built, people had this concept that the ocean was an unlimited resource and taking a little water out to cool power plants was just fine. But now we know that’s just not the case.”