County, coal interests, PacifiCorp agree state plan is better than EPA’s for protecting national parks’ air quality
“It doesn’t make sense to invest that kind of money for a negligible effect.” That statement from spokesman Dave Eskelsen summed up PacifiCorp’s position on one option the Environmental Protection Agency is considering to control nitrogen oxides and particulate matter emissions at the Hunter and Huntington coal-fired power plants. The EPA goal is to reduce haze at National Parks and Monuments in Southern Utah.
Eskelsen said the company supports the Utah Plan as proposed because, “The state’s plan is science and result-based, and makes greater progress toward better air quality. The state plan and actions we’ve taken comply with the ‘glide path’ to 2064.” Glide path is a reference to making reasonable progress toward returning air clarity to essentially natural conditions by the year 2064.
The actions PacifiCorp has taken refers to improvements amounting to more than $500 million of capital investment since 2007. Improvements include installing emission controls, such as low NOx burners, sulfur dioxide scrubbers or upgrades, and baghouses at both power plants. And in 2015, PacifiCorp closed the Carbon plant and removed it from service.
The Clean Air Act requires states to prevent any future, and remedy any existing man-made impairment of visibility at specially designated parks and wilderness areas. The EPA notice on the proposed rule states, “Air emissions from the four electric generating units at the two plants affected by this action cause or contribute to visibility impairment at nine Class I areas, including Grand Canyon, Arches, Bryce Canyon and Zion National Parks.”
The issue was the subject of a public hearing last week in Salt Lake City, which was attended by scores of local energy sector workers, industry and SEUEPA representatives, business owners, and local elected officials. Carbon County Commissioner Jae Potter, who spoke at the public hearing, told the Sun Advocate the state plan exceeds what has been required, and the EPA had already approved the state plan, “but they are being driven by the environmental community.” A coalition of environmental groups sued the EPA last year over what they called the agency’s failure to address regional haze in Utah.
Commissioner Potter said these groups are insisting the EPA require the installation of expensive selective catalytic reduction, or SCR controls. But he disputed the claim that emissions from the two power plants affect air quality in the National Parks, due to the prevailing weather patterns. He said, “We really need our people to ask questions, be informed, be involved, and write a letter (to the EPA) in support of the SIP, or State Implementation Plan.”
SEUEPA Director Kara Hillam also urged the public to get involved and submit comments to the EPA in support of the state plan. She encourages people to provide more than just personal opinion and make sure they include “actual facts and numbers.”
The EPA may find the State Implementation Plan to be adequate and take no action over the next two years, or it could require the installation of the SCR controls at the power plants. Eskelsen estimates the controls proposed by the EPA could cost the company as much as $700 million to install.
The State Implementation Plan has been criticized by environmental groups who say it fails to require enough cuts in key pollutants. Amy Hojnowski of the Sierra Club Beyond Coal Campaign said, “The latest regional haze plan put forth by the state doesn’t require Rocky Mountain Power to do its fair share in helping to clean up our air.” Heal Utah’s Matt Pacenza also asserts, “The state has failed to question Rocky Mountain Power’s misleading claims that cutting-edge pollution controls- such as catalytic reduction- cost too much and won’t produce enough benefits.”
But Eskelsen maintains the State Division of Environmental Quality has done its homework in investigating the chemistry involved. He said while nitrogen oxides can contribute to haze, ammonia nitrate must also be present and react with nitrogen oxides to form haze. Utah’s arid deserts produce very little ammonia nitrate, so installing selective catalytic reduction controls would produce only minimal improvement in visibility.
The EPA is evaluating the State Implementation Plan and the public input it receives. According to the EPA website, “EPA wants to ensure that our final decision is based on the best and most currently available data and information, and is taken with the fullest possible consideration of public input.”
Written comments may be submitted to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Written comments must be received on or before March 14, 2016.