The Burlington Free Press is to be congratulated for bringing the Dean administration's petition for a waiver of NOx requirements of the Clean Air Act to the public's attention.

Vermont's suit against mid-west power plants is posted on the State of Vermont's web site [1] but this site includes no material about the NOx waiver effort. Even though the Attorney General's office wrote a letter in January, 1999, threatening to bring a civil action against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) if the waiver was not forthcoming [2], and the Secretary of the Agency of Natural Resources wrote again in November, 1999, demanding action [3], the state has not informed the public about the NOx waiver.

The Burlington Free Press article of February 14, 2000, and editorial of February 20, 2000, say to opponents who believe that this effort is earmarked for the two power plants proposed for southwestern Vermont that "that's not right."

Vermonters for a Clean Environment is aware that these power plants were planned for years prior to their public announcement in 1998. The Vermont Twenty Year Electric Plan [4] written in 1994 says, "before, during and after the Champlain Pipeline proposal, the Rutland area has been the focus of discussions about a large gas-fired generating station." In an interview with the Rutland Herald in October, 1998, power plant developer Tom Macaulay said of the power plant project, "it's been in the works for about nine years" [5].

There is ample evidence that the state's vigorous pursuit of the waiver during the past year is tied to the Dean administration's strong support for these power plants.

In February, 1999, the head of Vermont's Air Pollution Control Division gave a report in a meeting about the power plant project in which he reported on "VT NOx budget effort status", and said that "VT power plants exempt for offset requirements give advantage. $/mwh higher (marginal costs)" [6].

In June, the Commissioner of Public Service, Richard Sedano, appeared on WCAX's "You Can Quote Me" and said "we have to have incentives both regulatory and economic incentives that assure that generators will feel that it's a good idea to build" [7].

Last summer, Tom Macaulay confidently announced in public meetings that he would not have to buy NOx offsets [8].

Both Commissioner Sedano and Secretary of ANR John Kassel state that the power plants will benefit from the NOx waiver if it is approved [9].

It is no secret that the Dean administration wants this power plant project.

The Commissioner of Public Service was out pitching the project in November 1998, saying "We're committed to doing everything we can to make this a positive project...Unless there's a fatal flaw, we've got to be able to make this thing work" [10].

From the beginning, this billion dollar gas project was too big and moving too fast.

Last March, ANR biologists wrote, "The applicants have tight deadlines and apparently the state has committed to trying to work within their time constraints" [11]. The plan was for the power plants to be up and running by November 1, 2001.

Last year and again this year, the Public Service Board and the Department of Public Service have tried to change Act 248 (the industrial equivalent to Act 250) to remove the requirement to show "need" for the power [12]. Testifying before the Vermont House Commerce Committee on February 10, 2000, a representative of the Public Service Board explained that the reason for the proposed change was because they realized last year that these power plants would not be able to receive a Certificate of Public Good the way the law is currently written. Citizens asked about Act 248's requirement to show "need" during public meetings last year, but even when the question was asked in the presence of the Director of Public Advocacy of the Department of Public Service, citizens were not told about the state's legislative efforts to remove "need" from the law [13].

Southwestern Vermonters have learned some surprising lessons about our state government's protections of the environment. The pipeline route was chosen based on a complete lack of information about large and pristine water supplies through which the pipeline is planned to run [14]. Plans for the power plants to evaporate 5 million gallons of water a day [15], compared to Killington Ski Area's use of 7 million gallons of water a year [16], caused us to ask the state for a map of water withdrawals by ski areas throughout the state. We were told that information does not exist [17].

We asked the Air Pollution Control Division for information about how much NOx is currently being produced by stationary sources, compared to the base line of 575 tons in 1990 and the proposed cap of 2300 tons if the waiver is granted. We were informed that that "the Division has not done any calculation to determine what the annual total NOx emissions have been during the years since 1990 for federally defined major sources in Vermont because it has not been something we have needed to track for any reason to date" [18].

Don't you agree that the public will have a difficult time commenting on the proposed waiver without knowing current emissions?

We have recently learned that the Attorney General's office has not been forthcoming with our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the paperwork surrounding the NOx waiver. Under the law, they are required to respond immediately [19]. To date we have received nothing in writing in response to our January 21 request [20]. It will be 7 weeks from the date of our request until they say we will receive the paperwork. And they are withholding most of the file claiming attorney/client privilege. The client is the Agency of Natural Resources.

We thought that state government worked for the people of Vermont. Actions taken regarding this project seem to indicate that we were wrong. Not once has Governor Dean come to Southwestern Vermont, nor has he sent someone, to listen to our concerns. It is time that the rest of Vermont awakens to what is happening to our clean air, our pure water, and our people. We think that once you do, you will be as outraged as we are.

Citations:

[1]  Petition by the State of Vermont to Abate Excessive Emissions by Certain Fossil Fuel Fired Electric Generating Facilities Interfering With Vermont's Maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone.
[2]  Notice of Intent to Commence Civil Action Conceming Failure to Take Final Action on Petition under Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act. Letter dated January 20, 1999.
[3]  Letter from Kassel of VT ANR to Perciasepe of US EPA, November 16, 1999.
[4]  Vermont Twenty Year Electric Plan, December,1994.
[5]  "Talking Business" by Bruce Edwards, Rutland Herald, October 19, 1998.
[6]  Meeting notes, February 24, 1999.
[7]  Transcribed from a video recording of this program segment made by VCE.
[8]  Transcribed from meeting tapes on file at VCE.
[9]  Burlington Free Press, February 14, 2000.
[10] Bennington Banner, November 20, 1998.
[11] Internal ANR email from Hammond to Darling, March 4, 1999.
[12] VCE Weekly Update: "Merchant Power Plants Are Not Approvable Under Vermont Law".
[13] Tinmouth Public Meeting, September 22, 1999.
[14] Minutes of SVNG Pipeline Project Preferred Route Selection Meeting, April 4, 1999.
[15] "State Panel Seeks More Data on Planned Athens, N.Y., Power Plant" Albany Times-Union, December 3, 1999.
[16] Rutland Herald, October 9, 1999.
[17] Snowmaking Water Withdrawals. Letter dated November 1, 1999, on file at VCE.
[18] Memorandum from Wishinski of VT Air Pollution Control Division to Turner of VCE, February 11, 2000.
[19] VERMONT STATUTES, TITLE 01: General Provisions, CHAPTER 005: COMMON LAW; GENERAL RIGHTS, §§315-320
[20] VCE letter requesting Vermont NOX Requirement Waiver Petition materials, January 21, 2000.