![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.billingsgazette.com...t.inc Lawsuit filed over permitting Roundup plant By MIKE STARK Gazette Wyoming Bureau Environmental groups sued the Bush administration on Thursday over its surprise decision earlier this year to withdraw its concerns that a coal-fired power plant near Roundup would adversely affect air quality at Yellowstone National Park. The decision by one of the administration's political appointees reversed an earlier finding that the plant would have an "adverse impact" and ignored the scientific recommendations from the National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "Clearly what happened in this instance was that political decisions and shenanigans have run roughshod over the best decisions of their professionals who are charged with protecting the parks," said Tony Jewett, of the National Parks Conservation Association. On Jan. 10, Craig Manson, the Interior Department's assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks, sent a letter to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality that said the Interior Department did not believe that the proposed Roundup power plant would harm visibility at Yellowstone. The letter stunned federal air-quality staffers, who had been studying the issue and had persuaded top Interior officials to issue the "adverse impact" finding less than a month before. The decision also drew fire from Fran Mainella, head of the Park Service, and Steve Williams, director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, especially because Manson sent the letter without giving the agencies a chance to respond to the basis of his decision. "We are disturbed that your decision to withdraw the adverse impact determination was made without consultation or prior notice to the NPS or FWS," said a draft of a letter to Manson by Mainella and Williams on Jan. 13. They said Manson's decision could set a "potentially harmful precedent" and "may compromise our ability to negotiate solutions to air quality-related issues in parks and wilderness areas," according to documents obtained by environmental groups through the Freedom of Information Act and released on Thursday. The dispute stems from a proposal by a New York firm to build a 780-megawatt power generating plant in the Bull Mountains, 12 miles south of Roundup and 112 miles northeast of Yellowstone. Developers say the $910 million coal-fired plant would provide about 150 jobs and an economic boost for the struggling Roundup community. Federal agencies were consulted about whether the plant would harm Yellowstone or any other areas with pristine Class 1 air sheds. Last year, the Interior Department concluded that the proposed plant would be a "significant contributor" to visibility problems at Yellowstone and UL Bend National Wildlife Refuge. In particular, the Park Service and FWS said they were concerned about emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide, which can contribute to haze and compromise visibility. In December, the department took a rare step in issuing a formal "adverse impact" ruling, which had the potential to make it more difficult for the project to get its permits. Project officials objected to that decision, saying the agencies' analysis was flawed, based on inaccurate computer modeling, and didn't take into account other effects on visibility, including weather. Paul Hoffman, a deputy assistant secretary at Interior, then asked federal staffers to respond to those claims. The government officials put together a response - including a statement that they "strongly disagreed" with the development company's assertions - but Hoffman said it should not be sent to the company, according to Thursday's lawsuit. After a conference call with company officials, Manson sent a letter to the Montana DEQ saying that the Interior Department was withdrawing its earlier finding of "adverse impact." Later that week, Hoffman said project developers have presented compelling information that showed the effects of the plant would not be as bad as federal scientists had predicted, especially when weather was figured into the equation. "Is it fair to punish a power plant applicant for air quality impacts that are caused by nature?" Hoffman said at the time. Hugh Vickery, an Interior spokesman, said Thursday that the department stands by its decision to withdraw its concerns about the project because of information provided by the company. "We did not believe it warranted a determination of adverse impact," Vickery said. Company officials praised the decision but internal e-mails among federal staffers, also obtained through FOIA, showed they were dismayed by Manson's sudden reversal, prompting one to say "the Asst. Secy's office just 'sold us down river.' " In their draft letter to Manson, the heads of NPS and FWS said they were concerned that he made the decision "without first giving us the opportunity to address any outstanding concerns you may have had." They also said Manson's decision could undermine their efforts to work collaboratively with permit applicants in the future and could affect "our credibility and ability to protect Class 1 areas." Thursday's lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., accuses Manson, Hoffman and Interior Secretary Gale Norton of violating the Clean Air Act, which prohibits degradation of air quality by manmade sources in Class 1 air sheds such as Yellowstone's. The suit was filed by National Parks Conservation Association, Greater Yellowstone Coalition, The Wilderness Society and a Denver resident. The environmental groups said the federal agencies made suggestions that would allow the Roundup plant to operate without harming air quality in Yellowstone. But, they said, those suggestions were overridden by the Bush administration. "I think it is an outlandish thing that happened here," said Michael Scott, director of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition. "Rather than ask a company to do something reasonable, find a way to produce electricity and protect the park, they've said you can build your plant and not care about what happens to Yellowstone." The permits issued for the plant by DEQ are also being challenged at the state level. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Outdoorsmen for Bush | Deggie | General Discussion | 6 | April 6th, 2004 01:13 PM |
Senator moves to end Bush privatization plan | Jim | Fly Fishing | 0 | September 23rd, 2003 07:14 AM |