Corps hears residents' water pollution concerns

By Mandy Simpson

June 9, 2010

Environmental group members from across the state filled the Army Corps of Engineers’ public hearing for East Kentucky Power Cooperative’s proposed coal-fired plant Tuesday night, and their message was as clear as their oversized stickers— “Action now, clean energy future.”

More than 115 people attended the hearing at the Clark County Cooperative Extension Office, and only one audience member spoke in favor of the plant during the first two hours.

EKPC spokesperson Nick Comer outlined details of the proposed plant at the J.K. Smith Station in Trapp, specifically addressing how the co-op will store the coal ash produced by the 278-megawatt plant.

The Corps must issue a permit to approve EKPC’s disposal plan, which will store ash in two lined landfills and two lined “beneficial re-use areas,” where the ash will act as structural fill for future construction at the plant, Comer said.

The storage reservoirs will affect 4.8 acres of wetlands less than two miles from the Kentucky River, but Comer said none of the coal ash will enter the water system.

“With a landfill, you have a dry storage situation,” he said. “It’s not an ash pond.”

EKPC also plans to establish 10 acres of new wetlands to mitigate the impact of the storage facilities, Comer said.

Life-long Forrest Grove resident William Quisenberry spoke in favor of the plant. He cited the wildlife habitat these new wetlands and a proposed 139-acre backup water supply reservoir would provide for ducks, muskrats and fish.

He also said he supported the jobs the new plant could provide.

“This county needs jobs, and I think this area needs jobs, and if we run out of electricity, both of those things will be hurt,” Quisenberry said.

But other audience members, many of whom were members of Kentuckians for the Commonwealth, the Kentucky Environmental Foundation or the Sierra Club, voiced concerns about the dangers of coal ash storage so close to the Kentucky River.

Clark County resident Miranda Brown spoke about the harmful effects of coal-ash toxins, particularly mercury, which is already present in Kentucky water and may increase with the Smith 1 plant.

Exposure to mercury can damage the central nervous system, especially in unborn babies and young children, causing cognitive disorders, she said.

Brown said these risks are not worth the cheaper price of a coal-fired plant compared to more sustainable options.

“What is the cost to our health?” she asked before the meeting. “What is the cost to water? What is the cost to our air? What is the cost to our children? Those are costs to be considered too.”

Mark Mudd of Lexington said the lining in EKPC’s storage facilities may not be enough to protect water from coal ash, referencing the devastating TVA coal ash spill in 2008.

“Considering EKPC’s history of mismanagement, I do not trust them not to do the same,” he said.

EKPC also had to submit a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to the Corps to show it had considered other more environmentally sustainable options for the plant and determined they were less viable.

Comer said EKPC explored in depth 17 alternatives for the plant, including solar, wind, natural gas and nuclear power, and determined coal-fired was the most “reliable and affordable” option for the company.

But Elizabeth Crowe and other KFTC members did not feel EKPC adequately reviewed these alternatives, noting the that the company only considered using wind turbines half as tall as possible for energy production, and EKPC has yet to offer a funding source for the $819 million plant.

The Corps will review all recorded comments and accept written comments submitted by June 18 by mail or to: LRl.regulatorypubliccomment@usace.army.mil and make a decision about the permit and SEIS next spring.

Approvals would tackle another hurdle in EKPC’s long effort to build the plant, which environmental groups have intensely opposed since 2008.
• Log in to your account