Barber asks EPA to reconsider new emissions for Benson power plant | Business
The Environmental Protection Agency was urged by U.S. Rep Ron Barber to reconsider its proposed emissions requirements and timelines for the Benson power plant, which have the potential to eliminate jobs in Southern Arizona and raise rates for rural Cochise County customers.
In a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, Barber stated he supported the emission reduction effort, but contends that the EPA proposal ‘ significantly threatens the future energy production, employees and ratepayers.’
“These negative impacts are not in the best interests of my constituents,” Barber wrote in the letter. “I am requesting that EPA reconsider this plan and the short timeline imposed on this facility to install new technology and emission controls. I believe that every effort should be made to allow the facility to act to improve visibility over a period of time that will ensure that it can remain viable well into the future.”
The EPA has proposed an emission limit that will require the installation of additional, more expensive technology at the Apache Generating Station in Benson. The ultimate goal is to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions that cause haze which the agency says is affecting national parks and wilderness areas in the Southwest.
Barber stressed that he supports that goal, but questioned the cost of the technology. The Arizona Power Electric Cooperative, owner of the plant, said the technology would cost more than $160 million, forcing it to increase rates – possibly by 20 percent – and lay off employees.
The Apache plant supports 260 jobs and serves 150,000 customers in rural southeastern Arizona.
Also in his letter to the EPA, Barber noted that one-third of the rural users served by the Apache plant are at or below the federal poverty level. Because of that, the plant is funded by a federal program to provide vital utility services to rural Americans in underserved areas.
Instead of the technological improvements mandated by the EPA, Barber noted that Arizona Electric Power has proposed installing a different type of pollution-control equipment that would cost $21 million and “result in a significant reduction in emissions.”
That “takes into account the unique challenges of this small, rural utility and reflects the true costs of necessary replacement power and power transmission,” Barber wrote.
Barber asked the EPA to reconsider its mandated technology and the installation timelines. He also is seeking a meeting with EPA officials “to discuss these concerns and how we can best work together to protect the Apache Generating Station and its customers.”
A copy of Barber’s entire letter is below:
November 21, 2012
The Honorable Lisa Jackson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Administrator Jackson:
I am writing to express my concerns about the impact the EPA’s decision regarding Arizona’s Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) and emissions limits for nitrogen oxide (NOx) will have on Arizona Electric Power Company’s (AEPCO) Apache Generating Station in Benson and my constituents in Southern Arizona.
While I support efforts by Arizona and EPA to reduce emissions that impair visibility at protected national parks and wilderness areas, EPA’s Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) significantly threatens the future energy production, employees, and ratepayers of the Apache facility.
Apache supports 260 jobs and serves approximately 150,000 customers located throughout rural southeastern Arizona. The plant is funded by the Rural Utility Service Program created under the Department of Agriculture to provide these vital utility services to rural Americans in underserved areas. One-third of the rural users served by Apache are at or below the Federal Poverty Level.
The estimated cost of implementing EPA’s implementation plan for lowering nitrogen oxide emissions would be devastating to the Apache facility and its customers, especially given the relative small size of the utility company. With an estimated cost in excess of $160 million in new technology to the Apache facility and a very short timeline for implementation, the company estimates that ratepayers could see an increase of up to 20 percent. Placing this disproportionate and undue hardship on rural and low-income Arizonans is unacceptable.
AEPCO has proposed a cost-effective plan to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for reducing NOx emissions and its contribution to regional haze by installing upgraded combustion controls. The estimated cost of this technology is $21 million and would result in a significant reduction in emissions. AEPCO’s plan takes into account the unique challenges of this small, rural utility and reflects the true costs of necessary replacement power and power transmission.
Under the FIP, the Apache Station could be forced to both increase rates and eliminate jobs to meet the required emissions limits. These negative impacts are not in the best interests of my constituents. I am requesting that EPA reconsider this plan and the short timeline imposed on this facility to install new technology and emission controls. I believe that every effort should be made to allow the facility to act to improve visibility over a period of time that will ensure that it can remain viable well into the future.
Additionally, I am requesting a meeting to discuss these concerns and how we can best work together to protect the Apache Generating Station and its customers. We appreciate your prompt consideration of this request and look forward to meeting with you at your earliest availability.
Member of Congress