My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL35592
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL35592
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:56:30 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 8:23:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982056
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
7/7/1999
Doc Name
NEWSPAPER ARTICLE CRAIG POWER DEBATE HEATS UP
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
iii iuiiiiuiiii iii <br />3' 9 ~ <br />Cral ;t ower~~deba~e heats u <br />g ~ - ~- p <br />~. Marie Spilsbury Staff Writer <br />CRAIG - A decision to force the <br />~raig Power Plant to meet certain feder- <br />ally mandated air quality requirements <br />could be reached this year, according to <br />hate officials. <br />The Craig Power Plant has been <br />operating for nine years without a Title <br />V permit, an operating permit required <br />to meet the federal Clean Air Act of <br />~ 1990. The act calls for state's to setup a <br />system to monitor commercial pollu- <br />tants and requires all smokestacks to <br />i operate with a Title V <br />Craig does not haveF`a Title V . <br />;because there are no air glrality Stan- <br />, dazds for power plants in Colorado, <br />according to Christopher Dann, a <br />spokesman for the Colorado Department <br />of Health Air Pollution Division. <br />"We are still involved With discus- <br />sions with the Colora'r~ti.; 1}iilities <br />Commission for all utility c'dnpanies so <br />they will all be the same," he said. "We <br />want the permits to be cdnsistent." ' <br />He expects a decision to be made <br />sometime this month, and to tie effective <br />next year. <br />Dave Longwell, support services <br />manager for the Craig Power Plant, said <br />the application has been submitted and <br />the power plant is awaiting information <br />from the state. <br />"We have our applicationt• in and <br />every once in a while we call.'to'make <br />sure they aze working on it "lie said. <br />Smoke is still fanning over the pol- <br />lutants emitted at the Craig plant, but the <br />impacts and outcome aze still unknown. <br />The Sierta Club filed suibin October <br />1996 against the Craig plant after'set- <br />tling with the Hayden- Power Plant for <br />$130 million to clean up that plant. <br />Federal court dates aze still, pending on <br />the Craig.plant lawsuit. , <br />"The fact is, Craig is no cleaner than <br />Hayden. Coal can ~be burned clean and <br />we would like to see the same thing <br />done to Craig that was done in Hayden," <br />said Steamboat Springs Sierra Club rep- <br />resentative Joan Hoffman. <br />.The Sierra Club alleges that stacks <br />number one and two at the plant are not <br />burning clean, and omitting salfur diox- <br />ide sand oxides of nitrogen in the aii. <br />Both cause acid rain. <br />A third stack, built in 1980; is bum- . <br />ing clean, Hoffman said. <br />Longwell said all three 'stacks are <br />clean. The technology to bum coal in <br />stacks one .and two is .older .than. #lie, <br />technoiogy'~in~ stack three, btlt`he'insists <br />that all threg: stacks`do the•game job. <br />"We }vere irispeoted by 'state .and <br />federal inspectors last sutnmer and they <br />said we were in compliance with .all . <br />aspects of the law," Longwell said. "We <br />work hazd to maintain that." <br />HoweveY;` Longiv@ll did admit that <br />while stack three rdmoves.99.9 percent <br />of the toxins, stacks one and two only <br />remove 70 percent. <br />The state has been reluot~tit Corstep <br />in and force the Craig plant,to rgmov",e <br />more of its toxins because it?si"hiiti{~;to <br />prove what the impacts wodldkti~~f the <br />toxins were removed, said Dan',Ely with <br />the Colorado Air Quality Division. <br />"The state likes to act if there is real <br />"The state Ilkes~to act as <br />if there is read sinokir~ <br />gun evidence, but Craig is <br />more in the gray areas." <br />Dan Ely <br />Colorado Air`Quality Division <br />smoking-gun evidence, 'but, Craig, is <br />[Wore is the. gray„ areas,". he said. "The <br />evidence:we fiave so.far is controversial <br />and we don't wanf`to;enter into. regula- <br />tory trench warfare," <br />-A'state'stydy.in.;j49S 'showed that <br />the Craig Pbv~eX Plant+~was c~eaniug~65. <br />percent of_ jls;pplluEants from ijie a`tmos-.- <br />befween"f35 anZ7'tl~:;peFCeirf cleanii8; Ely.' <br />said._ :ice " ,~ ,,. <br />~,3arry ~ Svobbda; : a regional <br />;Environmental. Protection Agency'. offi- <br />cial,. said he believes that the Craig <br />Power Plant is only cleaning 40 to. 50 <br />pe~cerit of its pollution. <br />"'fhe state study wasn't well man- <br />aged. IC only lasted a year,, and we. found <br />tharwlienever.we`do°astudy on air pol- <br />lution; the amount of-pollufion drops for <br />a while," he said. <br />For now; the state, the EPA and the <br />power plop[ are awaiting results of an <br />independent engineering study to deter- <br />mine what should be done. <br />Tri-State, the principal owner of the <br />plant; has agreed to pay for retrofit for <br />'cleaner scrubbers as long as the solution <br />is "economical and. reasonable," Ely said. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.