Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Monterey County posts final environmental assessment for Moss Landing Vistra fire; state agencies flag follow‑up questions
Summary
Monterey County released the final preliminary environmental assessment (PEA) for the Moss Landing Vistra thermal‑runaway incident, saying the consultant found off‑site soil, sediment and surface‑water samples did not pose an unacceptable risk but that state reviewers requested clarifications and additional evaluation.
Monterey County’s Environmental Health Bureau announced the release of the final preliminary environmental assessment (PEA) for the Moss Landing Vistra thermal‑runaway incident, and county officials said the document and accompanying state‑agency comments will be available on the county website.
"Based on those samples that were collected, the consultant that wrote the report concluded that the samples did not pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment," said Marnie Flagg, assistant bureau chief, summarizing the consultant’s conclusion while noting state reviewers had raised questions. The county scheduled the report’s public posting at 1:00 p.m. the day of the briefing and provided a public contact email, ehinfo@countyofmonterey.gov, for follow‑up questions.
County and state officials stressed the PEA’s limited scope: it evaluated off‑site soils, sediments and some surface water samples but did not draw conclusions about on‑site contamination, groundwater or broader watershed investigations. Rick Encarnacion, director and bureau chief for the County of Monterey Environmental Health Bureau, said the county’s role was coordination and public transparency and that any decisions about cleanup, monitoring or regulatory action will be taken in coordination with state agencies that have authority and scientific oversight.
Representatives from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and the Central Coast Water Board reviewed the report and provided comments. County officials said none of the agencies rejected the report, but none fully endorsed every conclusion; their letters and suggested clarifications will be posted with the report for transparency. Officials said additional sediment ecological evaluation and biological sampling may be appropriate as the partners review lingering uncertainties tied to sampling timing and scope.
The county urged residents with health concerns to consult a physician and to submit questions to the county’s posted contact so agency staff can route technical questions to the consultant or state partners.
