Welcome to the State Water Resources Control Board Welcome to the California Environmental Protection Agency
Governor's Website Visit the Water Board Members Page
Agendas
My Water Quality
Performance Report

WATER BOARDS PEER REVIEW

PROPOSAL TO ADDRESS DESALINATION FACILITY INTAKES AND BRINE DISCHARGES

Peer Review Request for Reviewers and Approvals

    Peer Reviewers' Curriculum Vitae

    • E. Eric Adams, Ph.D.
      Senior Lecturer & Sr. Research Engineer
      Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, MIT, Room 48-216-B
      15 Vassar Street
      Cambridge, MA 02139
    • Bronwyn Gillanders, Ph.D.
      Professor, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
      University of Adelaide
      SA 5005, Australia
    • Ben R. Hodges, Ph.D.
      Associate Professor, Environmental & Water Resource Engineering
      Department of Civil, Architectural & Environmental Engineering
      University of Texas at Austin ECJ 8.208
      301 E. Dean Keeton Street
      Austin, Texas 78712
    • Robert Howarth, Ph.D.
      Professor of Ecology & Environmental Biology
      College of Agriculture & Life Sciences
      Cornell University E309 Corson Hall Ithica, N.Y. 14853
    • Nathan Knott, Ph.D.
      Research Scientist, Fisheries NSW, NSW Department of Primary Industries
      Senior Fellow, School of Biological Sciences, University of Wollongong
      P.O. Box 89
      Huskisson NSW 2540
    • Lisa A. Levin, Ph.D.
      Distinguished Professor
      Integrative Oceanography Division Scripps Institution of Oceanography University of California San Diego
      9500 Gilman Drive, #0218
      La Jolla, CA 92093-0218
    • Scott A. Socolofsky, Ph.D.
      Associate Professor and Division Head Coastal and Ocean Engineering Division Zachary School of Engineering
      Texas A & M University, CE/TTI 801B
      College Station, TX 77843-313

Documentation


DOCUMENTS FOR PEER REVIEW

  • Desalination Appendix A
    The document titled "Desal Appendix A" (Appendix A of the California Ocean Plan) contains the proposed Desalination Amendment. The proposed new language can be found in Section L (text in blue). Only the new language is relevant for this review. Approximately 30 pages [7.09MB]
  • Desalination Substitute Environmental Document (SED)
    The document provides comprehensive explanation and rational for the conclusions put forth in the proposed amendment. 206 pages [3.65MB]


Scientific Conclusions to be Addessed by Reviewers
Each reference supports one of the five conclusions in the Amendment.

  • CONCLUSION 1: A receiving water salinity limit of two parts per thousand (ppt) above natural background salinity is protective of marine communities and beneficial.
    • Brine - 101 pages [3.18 MB]
      Management of Brine Discharges to Coastal Waters: Recommendations of a Science Advisory Panel. Roberts, P. (Chair), S. Jenkins, J. Paduan, D. Schlenk and J. Weis. 2012. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) Environmental Review Panel (ERP). Report Prepared for the State Water Resources Control Board.
    • Toxicity - 9 pages [193 KB]
      Hyper-Saline Toxicity Thresholds for Nine California Ocean Plan Toxicity Test Protocols. Phillips, B.M., B.S. Anderson, K. Siegler, J.P. Voorhees, S. Katz, L. Jennings and R.S. Tjeerdema. 2012. University of California, Davis, Department of Environmental Toxicology at Grand Canyon. Report prepared for the State Water Resources Control Board; Contract No. 11-133-250.
    • In-Plant Dilution/Diffusion Alternatives 53 pages [6.14 MB]
      Analytic Comparisons of Brine Discharges Strategies Relative to Recommendations of the SWRCB Brine Panel Report: In-Plant Dilution vs. High Velocity Diffuser Alternatives at the Carlsbad Desalination Project.Jenkins, S.A. and J. Wasyl. 2013.
  • CONCLUSION 2: A subsurface seawater intake will minimize impingement and entrainment of marine life.
    • Subsurface Intakes - 15 pages [3.06 MB] Copyright Protected (not available at this location)
      Subsurface intakes for seawater reverse osmosis facilities: Capacity, limitation, water quality improvement, and economics. Missimer, T.M., N. Ghaffour, A.H.A. Dehwah, R. Rachman, R.G. Malvia and G. Amy. 2013. Desalination. Vol. 322: 37-51.
  • CONCLUSION 3: A 0.5 mm, 0.75 mm, 1.0 mm, or other slot size screens installed on surface water intake pipes reduces entrainment.
    • Entrainment 1 - 61 pages [1.31 MB]
      Length-Specific Probabilities of Screen Entrainment of Larval Fishes Based on Head Capsule Measurements (incorporating NFPP Site-Specific Estimates). Tenera Environmental. 2013. Report prepared for Betchel Power Corporation JUOTC Project.
    • Entrainment Supplement - 57 pages [1.04 MB] - Supplement document to the above report.
      Length-Specific Probabilities of Screen Entrainment of Larval Fishes Based on Head Capsule Measurements (incorporating NFPP Site-Specific Estimates). Tenera Environmental. 2013. Report prepared for Betchel Power Corporation JUOTC Project.
    • Entrainment 2 - 44 pages [1.09 MB]
      Variation in Entrainment Impact Based on Different Measures of Acceptable Uncertainty. Raimondi, P. 2011. Report prepared for California Energy Commission, Public Interest and Energy Research Program.
    • Intake Feasibility Study - 264 pages [13.10 MB]
      scwd2 Seawater Desalination Intake Technical Feasibility Study. Kennedy/Jenks Consultants. 2011. Report prepared for the Santa Cruz Water Department (scwd2) Desalination Program.
    • Fine-mesh Screen - 23 pages [499 KB]
      Evaluation of Fine-mesh Intake Screen System for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant. Tenera Environmental. 2013. Report prepared for Betchel Power Corporation JUOTC Project.
    • Wedgewire Screens - 130 pages [3.22 MB]
      Field Evaluation of Wedgewire Screens for Protecting Early Life Stages of Fish at Cooling Water Intakes. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 2005.
  • CONCLUSION 4: Multiport diffusers and commingling brine with other effluents can dilute brine discharge and provide protection to aquatic life.
    • ERP III - 55 pages [591 KB]
      Desalination Plant Entrainment Impacts and Mitigation. Expert Review Panel III. Foster, M.S., G.M. Cailliet, J. Callaway, K.M. Vetter, P. Raimondi and P.J.W. Roberts. 2013. Report prepared for the State Water Resources Control Board; Contract No. 11-074-270.
    • In-Plant Dilution/Diffusion Alternatives - 53 pages [6.14 MB]
      Analytic Comparisons of Brine Discharges Strategies Relative to Recommendations of the SWRCB Brine Panel Report: In-Plant Dilution vs. High Velocity Diffuser Alternatives at the Carlsbad Desalination Project. Jenkins, S.A. and J. Wasyl. 2013.
  • CONCLUSION 5: The Area Production Forgone (APF) method using Empirical Transport Model (ETM) can effectively calculate the mitigation area for a facility’s intakes. Supporting references:
    • ERP III - 55 pages [491 KB]
      Desalination Plant Entrainment Impacts and Mitigation. Expert Review Panel III. Foster, M.S., G.M. Cailliet, J. Callaway, K.M. Vetter, P. Raimondi and P.J.W. Roberts. 2013. Report prepared for the State Water Resources Control Board; Contract No. 11-074-270.
    • Intakes - 254 pages [5.33 MB]
      Mitigation and Fees for the Intake of Seawater by Desalination and Power Plants. Foster, M.S., G.M. Cailliet, J. Callaway, P. Raimondi and J. Steinbeck. 2012. Report prepared for the State Water Resources Control Board; Contract No. 09-052-270-1.
    • Equivalent Adult and Production Foregone - 104 pages [544 KB]
      Extrapolating Impingement and Entrainment Losses to Equivalent Adults and Production Foregone. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 2004.

Peer Reviews and Responses

More Information...