By Felicia Fonseca The Associated Press
Article Launched: 06/30/2008 12:00:00 AM MDT

SANDERS, Ariz. — Unlike most of the vast, impoverished Navajo Nation, in this town all the roads are paved, schools and clinics are a short drive away, and everyone has electricity and running water in their homes.

Those modern conveniences are what lured hundreds of Navajo families to the "new lands" — ranch land the federal government bought in the early 1980s as part of a massive project to relocate thousands of Navajos from Hopi land and hundreds of Hopis from Navajo land.

Now, a quarter century and $400 million later, the federal Office of Navajo-Hopi Indian Relocation is winding down what has become one of the largest relocation efforts in U.S. history. The office expects to move the last of the group — some 40 families — by next year.

The community of relocated Navajos near Sanders calls itself Nahata' Dziil, or "planning with strength," and to some, the so-called New Lands is a success story. The relocated families, they say, mostly are doing well and the community has a bright future.

But
Advertisement
there are persistent critics, along with some families who have balked at the idea, refusing to move from their land in eastern Arizona that their families inhabited for generations. And the question looms: Can the New Lands remain self-sufficient once the federal program ends?

Disputed land

In 1882, President Chester Arthur designated 2.5 million acres in northern Arizona for the Hopi Tribe and "such other Indians as the secretary of the Interior may see fit to settle thereon."

Prior to that date, Navajos had been herding sheep on the land in the years since they returned from the Long Walk, as the Navajos call their forced relocation and imprisonment in eastern New Mexico in the mid-1860s.

The Hopi Tribe went to court in 1958 seeking return of the land the Hopi tribe claimed as its own, and in 1962, a federal court in Arizona deemed 1.8 million acres a joint use area.

Twelve years later, Congress approved the Navajo-Hopi settlement and ordered the tribes to work out their differences over the land. That never happened, and four years later, Congress divided the 1.8 million acres and ordered members of each tribe to leave the other tribe's land.

When the federal government proposed relocation as the solution to the land dispute it helped create, some Navajos armed themselves and threatened bloodshed if anyone tried to move them. Some allied themselves with the American Indian Movement, vowing to stay on the disputed land and lobby Congress for mercy.

Moving is not a concept widely embraced in the Navajo culture. Navajos often bury their children's umbilical cords in the land to tie them to it.

"We get used to our surrounding so much because we're part of our surrounding," said Peterson Zah, a former Navajo chairman and president, whose tenure was dominated by the relocation project. "You live in the spiritual way, with all the plants and the vegetation, the trees, the animal life, those kind of things people generally don't experience."

But whether they liked it or not, Navajos complied with the law under which they were provided a home and some benefits.

Glenna Thompson said Navajos often asked their creator to allow them to stay on the disputed land.

"We prayed that we wouldn't be forced to move because that's where our hearts are and that's where we wanted to stay," she said.

But as she saw other families near Teesto pick up and go, she and her family also left — first to Winslow and later to Sanders to live with her mother.

Others signed accommodation agreements to remain on Hopi land under that tribe's jurisdiction. Some relocated to much smaller plots across the reservation and in towns that border Navajo land.

While big-city life was an easy transition for some who worked and whose children went to school off the reservation, early studies found others lost their homes because they could not pay water and utility bills — basic amenities they had been living without.

Undecided future

Ram Herder, 89, thought he might enjoy himself in the New Lands — located within the tribe's four sacred mountains and near the railroad and Interstate 40. But he finds himself concerned with the water quality and the soil that he says is sandier here than in Howell Mesa where he grew up. The vegetation, he says, is not as lush and he worries people could be getting sick by eating livestock that must be vaccinated.

"When the sheep eat good grass and that grass became part of our nutrition, we were healthy," he said. "That's how I saw it in my time."

Each day, he walks out to a shed near his house and gathers hay to feed to his sheep in a corral — animals he said used to roam freely before he relocated in 1987.

What the future holds for his children and grandchildren is another concern.

"I enjoyed life. I feel satisfied with my life," he said through an interpreter. "The matter is 20, 30 years into the future, how our grandchildren will feel. Are they going to blame us that we decided to come here?"

Eilene Tsosie, 22, has similar thoughts of how her generation will handle life away from the traditional reservation. At 3 years old, she didn't understand why her family, led by her father's mother — or "nali" as she calls her in Navajo — left eastern Arizona.

What made it successful, though, is that families moved together, she said. Some even named street signs in Nahata Dziil after their hometowns.

Tsosie established a youth organization in Sanders and has been working to create an archive of interviews, documents and photos in hopes of connecting people like her to their past.

"I don't think the answer to it is to erase everything," she said. "If you can show them this community is their own, they'll take more responsibility in development."

Managing the range

About 400 Navajo families — the largest concentration of relocatees — live in Sanders, a suburban-type setting along Interstate 40 near the New Mexico state line.

The land is divided into range management units with pastures where livestock graze as part of the only such management plan on the reservation. Those who didn't have grazing permits had the option of living in the rural part of the Navajo community.

Bringing along their livestock was important for many Navajo families who grew up herding sheep, using the animal's wool to weave blankets and rugs and the meat for mutton dishes popular in the culture.

The Office of Navajo-Hopi Indian Relocation's budget provides for staff in the New Lands who maintain windmills and monitor the forage. The management system is unique on the reservation in that livestock are rotated through the pastures and residents are limited in the number of horses, sheep or cows they can keep on the land. Livestock must be vaccinated and twice-yearly livestock counts keep people from having too many animals on the range lands.

The rules are more restrictive than Navajos were used to. On the rest of the reservation, livestock often roam without boundaries onto customary use areas.

Tim Varner, New Lands manager for the Office Navajo-Hopi Indian Relocation, said the regional U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs office is preparing a budget that would allow the agency to take over the duties handled by his office.

Varner is hopeful Congress will approve it as a special program, though he remains a little concerned about how the livestock will be managed.

Contact:
Virginia Cramer, 804-225-9113 x 102

Court Rules Coal Plant Must Regulate Global Warming Pollution
Case Marks First Time a Court Has Cited Landmark Supreme Court CO2 Ruling

Richmond, VA: In an unprecedented move today, a Georgia state court has ruled that a new coal plant must limit the amount of carbon dioxide it releases. In April 2007 the Supreme Court issued a ruling recognizing that carbon dioxide, the principal source of global warming, is a pollutant under the federal Clean Air Act. This is the first time any court has applied that ruling to an industrial source.

"Coal-fired power plants emit more than 30% of our nation’s global warming pollution," said Bruce Nilles, Director of the Sierra Club’s National Coal Campaign. "Thanks to this decision, coal plants across the country will be forced to live up to their clean coal rhetoric."

Today’s ruling will have far reaching effects and should influence permits for all new coal-fired power plants, not just those in Georgia. The ruling builds on the momentum started last year by Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius’ courageous decision to reject a new coal plant because global warming is a public health threat.

The decision, issued by a Superior Court judge in Fulton County, Georgia, halts the construction of Dynegy’s Longleaf coal-fired power plant. Dynegy is the largest coal plant developer in the country, with more proposed new coal plants than any other company.

As originally permitted the plant would have emitted 9 million tons of carbon dioxide annually. The original permit placed no restrictions on the amount of carbon dioxide the plant could emit.


###

Kansas governor turns away from coal plants

June 27, 2008
By Joe Hanel | Herald Denver Bureau

DENVER - A year ago, Kathleen Sebelius was just a Democratic governor in a small, Midwestern, Republican state.

Today, she's a major enemy of the coal industry, a hero of environmentalists and a possible vice presidential choice for Sen. Barack Obama.

Sebelius visited the Denver Athletic Club on Thursday to talk about the war she started with the coal industry when her administration denied a plan to build two big new power plants in western Kansas. Tri-State Generation and Transmission, which supplies electricity to Southwest Colorado, backed the plants with a local partner, Sunflower Electric Power Corp.

Sebelius told the crowd at an event sponsored by Earthjustice, an environmental law firm, that even conservative Kansans worry about coal power.

"What's happened in Kansas in the last six months is really incredible. Citizens became remarkably engaged in the process," Sebelius said.

More coal power plants are on the drawing board, including Desert Rock southwest of Farmington, but both major presidential candidates want to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions, a step the Bush administration has resisted.

"This is a tipping point for our state and our country," Sebelius said.

Her administration last year denied plans for the coal plants because of their carbon-dioxide emissions. Her opponents in the Kansas Legislature tried three times to overturn the administration's decision, but they couldn't override Sebelius' veto. This fall, she's helping target legislators she thinks are vulnerable because of their support of the coal plants.

Tri-State spokesman Jim Van Someren said the company is still waiting to see what happens with a lawsuit over the Kansas plants. In the meantime, it has bought gas-fired power to meet summer demand and is increasing its conservation programs. Tri-State also is looking to add renewable-energy generation, and its board will meet next month to weigh its options on future power resources, Van Someren said.

Instead of the coal plants, Sebelius is pushing an energy agenda that focuses on wind power and conservation. Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter has made a similar strategy his signature issue.

Still, it's tough to explain to people why their utility bill has to rise, Sebelius said.

Previous Kansas administrations looked at power plants based on their cost to consumers.

"If you interpret cost very narrowly, low cost will always end up with coal in a state like Kansas," she said.

Her administration broadened the definition of cost to include the price paid by the environment and the public's health.

Colorado followed her example this spring, when Ritter and other Democrats passed a bill to allow the Public Utilities Commission to consider the future cost of carbon regulation when approving new power plants. The change should make solar- and wind-power plants compare more favorably to coal generators.

"Every major coal group in the country came to Kansas. They figured this was a battle they could win. This is the Heartland," Sebelius said. "If Big Coal couldn't win in Kansas, where could they win?"

Sebelius didn't have much to say about speculation that Obama will choose her as vice president.

"It's very flattering and a little surreal to have that being tossed about. I think it has more to do with the work we've done in Kansas," she said.

New EPA standards mean cleaner air

The ozone issue in the Four Corners region is a very important issue. As EPA toughens the standards across the country, many areas like the Four Corners will be faced with significant new challenges to meet the new standard, but the result will be cleaner air.

At every opportunity the opponents of the Desert Rock Energy Project criticize the project even though it will be among the cleanest, most advanced plants in the U.S., will result in hundreds of new family wage jobs, be the largest taxpayer in the state and will help meet the region's growing need for power.

The most recent falsehood asserted by critics is that the project will significantly increase ozone and regional haze pollution for the region in light of EPA's tougher standards. Fortunately, the facts present a different case whether critics like it or not.

In fact, due to the extensive array of pollution controls on the expected project, it will be a low emitter of NOx, which is a major ozone-causing emission. Based on information developed by the Four Corners Task Force the 2005 NOx emission in the Four Corners area were approximately 148,507 tons annually Desert Rock would increase this number by less than two percent.

At the same time, developers have agreed to go even further to reduce overall emissions, paying for projects at other facilities in the region that will reduce Desert Rock's impact on regional haze and ozone-causing emissions by 110 percent, assuring an overall reduction in these emissions.

These potential projects may be at existing power plants or they may be at other oil/gas or industrial facilities in the region, but in the end, will mean a real reduction in ozone-causing emissions.

Ozone issues and regional haze pollution are a major concern for all communities, businesses and residents in the Four Corners. That is what we've heard during the four years and hundreds of public meetings that we have participated in within the communities around the Four Corners.

It is also why we've taken painstaking steps to develop Desert Rock to help meet these challenges, while at the same time providing tremendous economic and employment opportunities to Navajos.

Frank Maisano
Desert Rock Energy Company
Washington, D.C.

The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is holding an informal conference for BHP Navajo Coal Company's (BNCC's) proposed revision application to add new mine support facilities and infrastructure, a coal storage and blending facility and overland conveyor system to Area IV North of the BNCC lease.

The conference is scheduled for Wednesday, June 25th, from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. at the Burnham Chapter House. A Navajo translator will be present.

This is a PUBLIC conference and all individuals are welcome and encouraged to express their concerns, comments or ask questions about the application and proposed actions.

** Information about submitting public comments to OSM will be soon be available ***

Thank You.

Sincerely,

Diné Citizens Against Ruining our Environment (Diné CARE)

Carbon sequestration may reduce emissions linked to global warming
June 22, 2008
By Katie Burford | Herald Staff Writer

This month researchers will begin pumping carbon dioxide deep into the ground in a test that could yield a valuable new method for keeping the greenhouse gas out of the atmosphere while also increasing methane production.

The Pump Canyon test pilot, located near Navajo Dam in New Mexico, is part of nationwide, public-private push to advance a technology known as carbon sequestration, which aims to lock the gas away where it can't contribute to global warming.

And the Four Corners has plenty of emissions it could stand to get rid of.

Recently, San Juan County, N.M., with two large coal-fired power plants, was listed as the sixth-worst carbon-dioxide emitter in the country by a major university study. Southwest Colorado, in the same airshed, could exceed federal air-quality standards this summer.

If the results from the test are positive, the San Juan Basin, which stretches into Southwest Colorado, could be among the first places in the world where the process is put into widespread use.

But many questions have to be answered first. Is sequestration feasible, both technically and economically, on a large scale? Will the gas, once it has been injected into a geologic formation, stay where it is put?

And the biggest unknown - will the technology have any real impact on reducing emissions?

Some environmental groups fear it will serve only as a crutch, keeping us dependent on dirty fuels. But researchers hope it will be a bridge, ferrying us between the fossil-fuel present and the renewable-energy future.

Big potential, with a catch

One thing is clear: The federal government sees considerable potential in carbon sequestration.

Currently, there are 26 field tests going on around the country, all funded by the Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory. Three of these, including the Pump Canyon test, are in the Southwest.

The test near Navajo Dam will inject 20,000 tons of carbon dioxide into the Fruitland coal layer. Because coal has a strong affinity for carbon dioxide, the two are expected to bond, pushing the methane out. Just as the coal held the methane for millennia, it is predicted to hold the carbon dioxide.

Coal beds are just one of the potential options for storing carbon dioxide; others include depleted or marginal oil fields and deep saline aquifers. The gas can also be stored in surface vegetation and in a solid, mineralized form. All of these methods are being tested.

Under the DOE's initiative, each region is assessing its emissions and storage capacity.

A 490-page report on Colorado's carbon-sequestration potential estimated the state's storage capacity at more than 700 billion tons, providing several hundred years of carbon storage. Of this, an estimated 19 billion tons could be stored in coal-bed methane reservoirs and 668 billion tons could be stored in deep saline aquifers.

The state's emissions, meanwhile, were more than 92 million tons, of which 46 percent was from power plants. These emissions, which are from 2000 estimates, are projected to increase 2.4 percent per year through 2025.

The potential to capture and store carbon in the San Juan Basin is especially appealing because the area has two large carbon-dioxide producing sources: The San Juan power plant, which produced 14.5 million tons of carbon dioxide in 2000, and the Four Corners power plant, which produced 17 million tons.

Plans for a third coal-fired plant, Desert Rock, are on hold pending permit approval by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which expects to make a decision by the end of July.

The catch to capturing and storing the plants' carbon dioxide is the cost.

Brian McPherson, associate professor in civil and environmental engineering at the University of Utah and principal investigator for Southwest's three projects, said that separating the plants' carbon dioxide from its other emissions, including mercury, is an expensive process - around $40 per ton. For the Fours Corners plant, this would mean around $680 million a year.

"That must wait necessarily until the cost comes down," he said.

Frank Maisano, spokesman for the Desert Rock project, said the technology could eventually be integrated into the proposed plant.

"They're building the project so that it can be retrofitted for carbon-sequestration technologies should they become affordable and available," he said.


Academics and DOE experts don't expect that to happen for another 10 years or more.

"Right now, it does look rather far off," Maisano said.

He added that the plant would use other, currently available technologies that would reduce its emissions by 20 percent compared with other plants its size.

Many believe it will take government-mandated emissions caps to move the technology along. Such a system was part of a sweeping climate bill debated earlier this month by the U.S. Senate.

The legislation, the most ambitious response to global warming ever taken up in Congress, garnered a majority of votes but not the 60 necessary to avoid a Republican filibuster. Supporters have vowed to revisit the topic next year in what they hope will be a more favorable political environment after November elections.

Maisano disputed that regulation is the best impetus for advancing the technology.

"What regulations tend to do is push too fast, so that people will just switch fuels," he said. "There can be a regulatory push, but if the regulation is, for instance, what environmentalists want, there wouldn't be a technology, there would be just a full switch away from using coal."

Burying the problem - or our heads?

A switch away from coal is exactly what some environmental groups are saying needs to happen. They say carbon sequestration will only delay the process.

"Despite being unproven and expensive, coal and power companies are advertising the scheme as a solution to global warming in order to justify building new coal-fired power plants," Greenpeace said in a new release last month.

Gwen Lachelt, director of the Durango-based Oil and Gas Accountability Project, had similar concerns.

"We need to proceed really cautiously and not look at it as a fix-all for just being able to use dirty energy like coal," she said.

McPherson and other researchers on the Pump Canyon pilot say sequestration isn't intended to reverse human-made emissions, but rather temper them while sustainable alternatives are developed.

"I very much think of it as a potential bridge technology," he said. "Sequestration is something that we can do right now."

But Lachelt said it is that kind of reasoning that has kept us hooked on fossil fuels for far too long.

"We've been talking about using natural gas and all as a bridge fuel for over 30 years. I just think we keep burying our heads in the sand," she said.

Show features artwork opposing Desert Rock project
June 20, 2008By Karin L. Becker | Special to the Herald

_____________________________
If you go
The opening reception for "Connections: Earth + Artist = A Tribute Art Show in Resistance to Desert Rock" will be held at the Center of Southwest Studies from 1 to 4 p.m. Sunday at Fort Lewis College. The show will run through Sept. 28.
_____________________________
** Flier Attached

With titles like "Downward Spiral," "Short-term Gain" and "Do Not Build on the Sunflowers," the hostile sentiments of artists are obvious.

Their voices are expressed in "Connections: Earth + Artist = A Tribute Art Show in Resistance to Desert Rock," which will open Sunday at Center of Southwest Studies.

"It's a reaction to the power plant," said Julie Tapley-Booth, event coordinator/office manager for Center of Southwest Studies.

Desert Rock Energy Co., a subsidiary of Sithe Global Power, has proposed to build a coal-fired electric power plant south of Farmington on the Navajo Nation. Opposition to the power plant runs high, and this art show grew out of the need to voice this defiance.

As artist Gloria Emerson from Waterflow, N.M., writes, "It's a reminder to pay attention to these forces, which intend ill fortune, and to counteract them with positive actions."

Starting in January, curator Venaya Yazzie solicited submissions. To reach the younger generation, she created a MySpace page and posted the call for submissions on the Center of Southwest Studies homepage. From these efforts, she attracted more than 60 entries, with artists submitting from as far north as Minneapolis to as far south as Tucson, Ariz. Because of limited wall space, five jurors selected about half of the entries.

The artwork is diverse, varying from fiber sculpture and color and black-and-white photography to a sculpture made from juniper bark, gas pipe and a ski edge. A compelling mixed-media installation made of manila envelopes, photo transparencies and a large oil on canvas commands the center of the room.

The artwork is not for sale. Yazzie said the purpose is "not about selling work but about making a voice." She admitted that she lost some artists because of this philosophy.

Additionally, there is poetry, printed on translucent material and hanging from the ceiling.

Poet Christy Fenato won the third-place award for her poem "Dooda Desert Rock Triptych," which is written on vibrant blue paper to represent Father Sky. In her artist statement, she explains that she writes "to give voice to the tragedies and beauty of the Diné people and their land."

Cash prizes and ribbon awards will be given for best of show; first, second and third places; and honorable mention.

The best-of-show award went James Joe's oil on canvas, "Bleeding Sky," and can be seen on the promotional material for the show's opening. His painting features a Navajo family with backs against two metal monsters (electrical towers), standing alone against change. Joe, a Navajo from Shiprock, said in his artist statement that his piece is a depiction of the worst-case scenario if the coal plant were built.

Other artists share similar attitudes in their statements. Sonja Horoshko of Cortez calls our attention to the wise grandmothers resisting Desert Rock because they understand how to make up a future by desiring to dream. Her "Media-Land-Scape" won first place for a montage of laminated help-wanted ads with a typed poem inserted, representing the consequences of a barren dream.

Initially, Yazzie wanted to make this exhibit a traveling show on the Navajo Reservation, but she was daunted by the size and scope of such an ambitious plan. She has been approached by other artists to transform this show into a book.

"Maybe that will be the form that it travels in," she said.

Several events are scheduled during Sunday's opening at Center of Southwest Studies: a poetry reading from 2:30 to 3 p.m.; a multimedia show from 3:25 to 4 p.m., which will feature "This Beautiful World, a four-minute photo/video montage by Duran Washburn; and a 37-minute documentary titled "Poison Wind," produced by Jenny Pond and Norman Brown.

becker_k@fortlewis.eduKarin L. Becker teaches in the writing program at Fort Lewis College.

EPA asked to consider proposed coal plant's technology

By FELICIA FONSECA Associated Press Writer
Article Launched: 06/19/2008 06:35:27 PM MDT

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M.—Gov. Bill Richardson and Attorney General Gary King want the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to ensure that a proposed coal-fired power plant in northwestern New Mexico has the best technology to deal with hazardous pollutants before construction on the plant can begin.
Under the federal Clean Air Act, the EPA has to review the Desert Rock Energy Project's maximum achievable control technology, or MACT, before work can start on 1,500-megawatt plant.

Richardson and King, however, are asking the EPA to make that determination as part of the air permitting process, though the agency is not legally required to.

"Doing so provides for enforceability of the MACT requirements while ensuring the compatibility of those requirements with the design parameters specified in the PSD (air) permit," they wrote in a joint letter to the EPA on Thursday.

The air permit would set limits for emissions such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, particulates and lead emissions. The MACT determination would look at pollutants such as lead, arsenic and mercury.

Mary Uhl, bureau chief of the state Environment Department's Air Quality Bureau, said some hazardous pollutants, such as mercury, contain particulates that are covered under the air permit.
"If you don't tie the two together, you're getting an inaccurate or incomplete picture of the control technologies that will be put on the plant," she said.

An EPA spokeswoman in San Francisco, Margot Perez-Sullivan, said the agency has received the letter and will formally respond in a timely manner.

She said distinguishing the air permit and MACT processes "is the right way to do it." She declined to comment further.

Houston-based Sithe Global Power and the Dine Power Authority, an enterprise of the Navajo Nation, are partnering on the $3 billion Desert Rock plant to be built on tribal land south of Farmington.

The EPA has said it will issue a decision on the air permit by July 31 as part of a settlement of a lawsuit developers brought against the agency for delaying action on the permit.

Desert Rock proponents say the plant's technology would be cleaner and more efficient than that used in current coal-fired power plants.

"The reality is this power plant has the most advanced technology that you can have for a power plant," said Sithe spokesman Frank Maisano.

While the developers are touting the technology, the state said Sithe refuses to consider real advances that would combat global warming.

"It's premature to say this is the best technology out there because that is a determination EPA has to make," said Phil Sisneros, a spokesman for King.

Richardson and King are asking that the EPA acknowledge its obligation to make the MACT determination and identify the procedure it will follow.

If EPA does not complete the MACT determination before it acts on the air permit, the New Mexico officials want the EPA to reconsider the permit to incorporate any modifications that might be brought up in the MACT determination.

Source: http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_9639617

June 19, 2008
For Immediate Release
Office of Governor Contact: Allan Oliver 505-476-2214
Office of Attorney General Contact: Phil Sisneros 505-827-6792
____
Governor Richardson, Attorney General King Blast EPA for Violating Clean Air Act in Fast Tracking Desert Rock Permit

Governor and Attorney General Issue Letter to EPA Criticizing the Agency’s Failure to Provide Environmental Analyses regarding Harmful Pollutants from the Proposed Plant
____

(SANTA FE) New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and Attorney General Gary King today criticized the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for violating the federal Clean Air Act by fast tracking a permit for the proposed Desert Rock coal fired-power plant without completing the proper reviews on important air pollution issues.

Governor Richardson and Attorney General King assert in their letter that EPA’s recent proposal to expedite the permitting decision for the proposed plant without conducting required environmental analyses of hazardous air pollutants could have severe negative impacts on air quality for New Mexicans and others in the region. The proposed plant, under the jurisdiction of the Navajo Nation, would be in northwest New Mexico.

"EPA is overlooking air quality protections in federal law by fast tracking this permit,” Governor Richardson said. “This is a grave mistake. The children of northwestern New Mexico should not have to be exposed to higher levels of mercury and lead in the air they breathe. New Mexico and the nation must be making advances toward new clean technologies for electricity rather than continuing to build the dirty coal plants of yesterday.”

Governor Richardson has been vocal in his opposition to the proposed plant because of well-documented detrimental impacts from coal fired power plants on human health, especially on children.

“The Clean Air Act is very clear in spelling out what the EPA must do to protect people from hazardous power plant emissions,” said Attorney General King. “Because EPA listed coal-fired power plants as a major source of hazardous air pollutants, we are on solid legal ground to request that the EPA do what the law says.”

The EPA must do a complete and thorough analysis before reaching any conclusions on this air permit, the joint letter states. They also criticize EPA for failing to abide by the Clean Air Act, which prohibits the construction of new power plants without a prior EPA maximum achievable control technology determination for the emission of hazardous air pollutants. In addition to providing that determination, EPA is also required by law to identify a procedure it will follow related to that process.

EPA, which has not made a MACT determination in this case, previously issued a rule that sought to avoid that requirement for power plants altogether. However, New Mexico along with other states recently prevailed in overturning EPA’s attempted roll back in a federal lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

The letter also expresses “serious concerns about the environmental impacts of constructing Desert Rock in a region already impaired by other large coal-fired power plants.”

Mercury contamination from Desert Rock poses great threats to the health of New Mexico’s children and to local waterways. Mercury, a known neurotoxin which contributes to learning disabilities in children, also pollutes nearly every reservoir in New Mexico with high levels of contamination.

Desert Rock is expected to emit substantial amounts of mercury, arsenic, lead, dioxins, and other hazardous air pollutants, including approximately 166 tons per year of hydrogen chloride and 13.3 tons per year of hydrogen fluoride.

Governor Richardson in recent months directed New Mexico Environment Secretary Ron Curry to meet with the Navajo Nation related to the state’s issues with the plant.

The Environment Department determined the proposed facility will adversely impact air quality, exacerbate existing environmental problems and negatively impact scarce surface and ground water resources. Also, the technology as proposed by Sithe Global refuses to consider real technological advances in the area of combating global climate change. The Environment Department has concerns that Sithe's investment in plant planning is outdated without taking into account the needs of climate change policy.

The estimated 12 million tons of carbon dioxide emitted each year from the Desert Rock Energy Facility would increase New Mexico’s greenhouse gas emissions by about 15 percent.

** Original Letter Attached ***

Center of Southwest Studies opens “Connections: Earth + Artist” exhibiton

by Jules Masterjohn

Pick up any magazine and one will find that the topic of the environment is hot. The recent issue of ARTnews lists nine exhibitions around the U.S. that address today’s conservation concerns.

Earlier this month, on the other side of our blue planet in New Zealand, the Natural World Museum opened its annual exhibition as part of the United Nations “Art for the Environment” initiative. “Moving Toward a Balanced Earth: Kick the Carbon Habit,” is “designed to utilize the universal language of art as a catalyst to unite people in action and thought.”

The exhibition’s curator wrote, “Artists are often described as prophetic visionaries and poetic shapers of the world – one step ahead of humanity.” This sentiment underscores the important role that artists have in offering new ways to understand ourselves and the world we share.

Thankfully, there’s no need to increase our carbon footprints and travel to San Francisco, New York or New Zealand to see art that will inspire us to action on behalf of the environment. The exhibition, “Connections: Earth + Artist = A Tribute Art Show in Resistance to Desert Rock” will open this Sun., June 22, at Fort Lewis College’s Center of Southwest Studies.
Navajo artist Gloria Emerson's "Desert Rock.”/Photo by David Halterman

The exhibit is a tribute to the Navajo elders who are standing vigilantly against the proposed building of Desert Rock Power Plant. Desert Rock would be the third coal-burning facility located on or near the Navajo Reservation in northern New Mexico. Exhibition organizers, artist Venaya Yazzie and writer Esther Belin, were inspired by the elders’ resolve and certitude to protect the Earth. Dooda’ Desert Rock is a resistance group and camp where the Navajos are holding a vigil, using “their prayers as weapons against disharmony.”

It was just after Yazzie visited the Dooda’ Desert Rock encampment that she knew she wanted to bring artists together. “We are doing this exhibit for all the elders, because the elders are resisting Desert Rock for future generations.” Raised by her grandparents, Yazzie grew up speaking Navajo and listening to Diné stories. “I have a heart for them and I have been saddened by seeing them not being listened to by our tribal government,” she said as she toured the exhibit.

Viewing “Connections: Earth + Artist” is a powerful experience. Artists in the exhibition share diverse voices in solidarity with the environment and its inhabitants. Walking into 4 the gallery, one encounters many unique and thought-provoking works in the form of painting, mixed-media collage, photography, quilts, film, poetry and sculpture. There is wide representation in the exhibit: male and female artists, fine arts and traditional arts, and writing and the visual arts. The works by native and nonnative artists from as far as Minnesota were chosen for the exhibit. However, the majority of the work is from artists living in the Four Corners, the airshed for the proposed power plant. Of the nearly 60 entries submitted, the five-person jury selected 35 pieces, all of which reflect the theme of Desert Rock resistance or the broader concept of humankind’s compromising presence in the natural world.

The gallery is spacious and inviting. A thoughtful installation choice, for much of the work reverberates beyond the materials that comprise them: compelling ideas and strong emotions push past the boundaries of the physical artwork to inhabit the space with us.

Many of the works are persuasive, and some are haunting. Octogenarian Navajo artist Gloria Emerson’s painting “Desert Rock” stays with the viewer for a long time. It is a portrayal of the Diné cultural belief that there are “otherworldly beings who lurk around us with dire intentions,” and it serves as a reminder to be prepared for “those forces that intend ill fortune and to counteract them with positive action.” Chills run down the spine after contemplating the strange figure pictured in her ominous landscape.

The phrases in Christy Ferrato’s poem, “A Wrong Turn in the Desert,” elicit similarly uneasy feelings, as she gives us a tour of towns across the Navajo reservation. One stanza reads:

Shiprock/ Skeletal dogs wait outside the Chat-n-Chew/ A guy in a camouflage t-shirt and an American flag headband try to/ Sell me a dream catcher.

Pagosa Springs artist Kathleen Steventon goes beyond the borders of the reservation to the land of ideology with a two-faced symbol of America, “Short Term Gain.” Steventon divides her canvas with half of the face of Lady Liberty on one side uncomfortably pairing her facial features with that of a skull on the other side, the boney face smothered in columns of thick smoke. Her appealing palette and lusciously applied thick oil paint are seductive while her message is distressing.

Cultural icons are also used as expressive forms by artists Jeff Madeen and Ricardo Moreno. Madeen’s intriguing found-object wall sculpture “Downward Spiral” is exactly that: a spiraling form that falls downward off the gallery wall, crafted from the metal edge of a downhill ski with tree bark from a beetle-killed Juniper affixed to its surface. He states, “This sculpture signifies the impact we as a race have had on the planet.”

Moreno uses the Chinese symbol for harmony between opposites, the Yin-Yang, as the visual and conceptual foundation for his computer-generated archival print, “Transcend Dualism.” Language is an integral part of this work, with pairs of words indicating polemic ideas placed around the symbol’s edges. “Affluence-Poverty, Society-Environment, Us-Them, Mountain-Desert, and Here-There” are offered for our consideration. Moreno intends to “remind us of the multiple perspectives to the issues” and that it is important to hear and integrate all points of view before taking action.

Works by visual artists Sonja Horoshko, Thaddine Swift Eagle, James Joe, Denna Carney, Sharon Abshagon, Mary Ellen Long, Tirzah Camacho, Ed Singer and filmmaker Duran Washburn as well as writings by Ann Smith, Darsi Olsen and Esther Belin offer insight into our relationship to the environment.

Yazzie’s hope is that “Connections” will educate and get people thinking outside their comfort zones, that we will each deeply consider our roles as inhabitants of the planet, and make our choices accordingly.

“Connections: Earth + Artist = A Tribute Art Show in Resistance to Desert Rock” opens with a reception from 1-4 p.m. on Sun., June 22, at the Center of Southwest Studies at Fort Lewis College, 1000 Rim Drive. Additional events include a Summer Solstice Sighting and Sunday breakfast from 6-8 a.m., a 2:30 p.m. poetry reading, and a 3:15 p.m. showing of “This Beautiful World” by Duran Washburn and Poison Wind, a documentary film produced by Jenny Pond and Norman Brown. •

Four Corners smog exceeds standard

It’s official. Four Corners smog levels exceeded federal health standards for ozone air pollution last week. A monitor near Navajo Reservoir registered another high reading on June 11, which triggered federal action for New Mexico’s San Juan County.

The region’s two coal-fired power plants, tens of thousands of oil and gas compressors, motor vehicle exhaust, industrial facilities, and gas and chemical vapors are major contributors to the worsening air quality. When these nitrogen oxide emissions combine with volatile organic compounds and cook in the sun, a substance called ozone forms. Ozone, or smog, is particularly toxic for children and those who are active outdoors. When inhaled, ozone triggers respiratory ailments, including reduced lung capacity, bronchitis and aggravation of asthma. Repeated exposure over only a few months can cause permanent lung damage.

Recognizing these health hazards, the Environmental Protection Agency significantly strengthened its air quality standards for ground-level ozone in early March. By signing its most stringent ozone standards ever, the agency took steps to improve public health and protect sensitive trees and plants.

Two years ago, the New Mexico Environmental Department installed an ozone monitor at Navajo Reservoir. In that time, the monitor has registered an average ozone reading of 79 parts per billion, well above the new standard.

“We would need to see a reading of 64 this year at that station to stay in compliance,” explained Mary Uhl, of the New Mexico Air Quality Bureau.

The June 11 reading registered 70 ppb and officially put San Juan County over the edge. The violation will require the most substantial cuts in ozone-forming pollution ever in the Four Corners region. Action will likely be taken against the Four Corners Power Plant and San Juan Generating Station, in addition to the region’s oil and gas wells, natural gas processing plants, and oil refineries.

“The Four Corners Region is in the midst of a health crisis,” said Mike Eisenfeld, of the San Juan Citizens Alliance. “Ozone air pollution is adversely affecting children and families in San Juan County and the surrounding region. We need relief.”

Opponents of the Desert Rock Power Plant added that the violation should challenge the future of the proposed coal-burning facility. They cited the EPA’s assertion that the proposed power plant would not contribute to a violation of ozone health standards, a point that is now moot.

“While this violation is a wake-up call, it’s also an opportunity to develop a strong, lasting clean-up plan,” said Jeremy Nichols, of Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action. “We need to cut smog-forming pollution more than ever to keep us safe and healthy. We need to start by denying the permit for the Desert Rock Power Plant.”

However, Desert Rock is proposed on Navajo land, and the plant can only be regulated by the Navajo Nation EPA.

“We have jurisdiction to control the power plant and oil and gas emissions only in New Mexico,” Uhl said. “We don’t have control over Colorado or the Navajo Nation. We’ll have to work with those entities to bring the area into compliance.”

– Will Sands

Source: http://www.durangotelegraph.com/telegraph.php?inc=/08-06-19/quick.htm

June 18, 2008
By Chuck Slothower | Herald Staff Writer

Coal must be part of the energy mix in the United States as demand for electricity grows, an industry representative said during a visit to Durango on Tuesday.

Brad S. Jones, regional communications director for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, said wind and other renewable sources should play a part in meeting Americans' electricity needs. But coal is needed to provide reliable power.

Coal produces 72 percent of the electricity generated in Colorado, and about 50 percent of U.S. electricity, Jones said.

Electricity demand is expected to grow 30 percent in La Plata County in five years, said Pam Patton, chairwoman of the La Plata Electric Association board.

Coal has generated headlines in the Four Corners as regulators study the Desert Rock Energy Project. A proposed $3 billion, 1,500-megawatt coal-fired power plant that would be built on Navajo land about 30 miles southwest of Farmington, Desert Rock would consume an estimated 6.2 million tons of coal per year, according to a federal study.

Environmental groups have raised concerns about the plant's emissions of carbon dioxide, a gas that has been linked to global warming. Desert Rock would emit an estimated 12.7 million tons of carbon dioxide annually. A car would have to burn 1.3 billion gallons of gas to reach the same level of emissions.

Jones said the coal industry is working to tackle carbon-dioxide emissions - with the help of technology.

"The technology is there," Jones said. "What's missing is incentives and funding to make it commercially viable."

Companies are experimenting with injecting carbon dioxide into saline aquifers and underground coal seams, Jones said.

"There's never been a challenge the industry has faced where technology has not been the answer," Jones said.

Andrew Gulliford, a Fort Lewis College professor of Southwest studies, expressed skepticism that technology will solve all the problems associated with coal.

But Jones pointed to the precedent set by acid rain, an environmental problem that he said was largely solved with technology.

Jones indicated the coal industry has come to grips with the likelihood of additional federal regulations.

"The industry is now recognizing that reducing emissions is a good thing and that it's a moral issue for the American people," he said. "We've all come to the realization that federal regulations are going to occur in the next couple of years."

By Dutch Salmon/ For the Sun-News
Article Launched: 06/17/2008 09:44:13 AM MDT

The San Juan River, particularly the tailwater fishery in the first 15 miles or so below Navajo Dam in extreme northwestern New Mexico, would by most accounts make the top ten of "destination" fly fishing locales nationwide. Even today, when its fishery is, by common opinion, not what it was a few short years ago, and its management beset by controversy. I got a taste of the fishing possibilities, and an earful on the management debates, on a recent trip to Farmington.

First, the State Game Commission at the Farmington meeting May 29 prohibited the use of more than two flies in the "quality waters" of the San Juan - the first four miles below the dam where bait is already prohibited and single, barbless hooks are the rule. Some anglers, and guides, had taken to stringing out two or three or more dropper flies and the result, many felt, was the unnecessary snagging and injury of trophy trout almost all of which are scheduled for release in that section.

That was the easy part. I got the bigger picture of management debate the next day when Oscar Simpson of the National Wildlife Federation and I went fishing with guides Larry Johnson and T.J. Massey of Soaring Eagle Lodge, plus Marc Wethington.of New Mexico Game & Fish.
Advertisement
We put in near "Texas Hole" dispersed between two drift boats and began to drift, fish, and talk our way downstream.

The main issues, I learned from Johnson, are flow rates and erosion leading to sediment loading of the riverbed.

"The Bureau of Reclamation (BoR)," Johnson said, "manages the release from Navajo Lake to satisfy water users downstream — the Navajo, irrigators and others. We (fishermen) aren't water rights holders so we're at the bottom of the list....we don't get much attention."

Wethington said releases were also timed and controlled by requirements of two endangered fish in waters downstream too warm for trout - the Colorado pikeminnnow and the razorback sucker. Their requirements, at least as the BoR interprets them, can also lead to low flows.

"When they (BoR) raises or lowers the release from one extreme to the other, that's bad for the (trout) fishery," Johnson said.

The low extreme, a 250 cfs minimum, depletes habitat and kills fish though Johnson said that in his opinion such low flows "have not been prolonged."

Erosion into the stream, all agreed, has multiplied with the increase in oil and gas development in the nearby uplands, mostly on BLM land. At Simon Canyon, where we stopped for lunch, I was told of one recent storm event "that sent a load of run-off down the wash where it ended up a wall of silt that went clear across the river."

Heavy siltation affects the river's insect population. A 2002 Game & Fish study said, "There are approximately 100,000 bugs per square meter on the river, " the main reason the San Juan's browns and rainbows average about 16 inches per catch, are thick-bodied and muscular, and not uncommonly reach 20-inches-plus. One indication of the fishery decline due to siltation problems, loss of bugs, and effects of ill-timed water releases was offered by Wethington.

"At the peak (about 2002)," Wethington said, "there were 70 to 80 guides working this section of the San Juan. Now there are 30 to 40."

Stronger comments regarding BoR priorities and BLM oil and gas management came from Andreas Novak, a Farmington angler who has fly fished from the river's bank two or three times a week since 1983. Novak said he has been "stunned" by the number of oil and gas developments, and attendant roads, that have been put in over recent years.

"It's led to erosion like never before," he said. "Most of the fish now are above Rex Smith Wash (the first major drainage below the dam), and where I used to fish the whole four miles of the quality waters, now I just fish the first mile and a half."

Novak has seen far too much of 250 cfs minimum flows to suit him.

"A flow rate of 250 to 350 cfs for six months in the middle of the winter equals a fish kill," he said. "Similar flow rates have been documented from 2002 through 2006. The BoR program is "horde and dump'; they manage the water for what they call "present and future projects', like the (proposed) Navajo Project and Desert Rock coal fired plant which include provisions for water out of Navajo Lake. Yet air quality in San Juan County is already 6th worst in the nation, right up there with big cities like L.A. (Los Angeles). I'd like to see a minimal flow of at least 750 cfs, 1000 cfs would be better, with a 5000 cfs maximum in the spring which I believe is a good thing for the fishery."

Is the glass half full (Johnson) or half empty (Novak)? Regardless, 5000 cfs is just what Oscar and I contended with that day. "Tough fishing," Johnson said, as he tied on a #18 San Juan worm and even smaller #24 midge dropper, tiny flies in my experience that imitate some of the San Juan's food base.

"Why would a trophy trout bother?" I thought. Yet our strike indicators kept dipping under. Oscar, who claims he is no fly fisherman, landed two rainbows and a brown in the 15 to 16 inch range. I hooked three myself, lost two (one at the net) before finally landing a roughly 16-inch rainbow that was easily the heaviest trout at that length I've ever seen. T.J. handled the net quite nicely.

A few days after we left, Johnson reported a client had just caught a 27-inch brown that went 9 lbs. Since the browns in the San Juan, unlike the rainbows, are naturally reproducing, this was a special catch.

"The San Juan is still good," Johnson said. "It could be better. I'd like to get a small group together, including guides, local anglers, Game & Fish, State Parks and a few others. If we could come to agreement on what the San Juan needs, we could then go to BoR and BLM as a unified force and maybe influence some changes for the better."

"Good idea," I said, though fundamental change for wildlife and recreation will always be tough so long as the water rights are reserved for the consumptive users. I'd say the trout of the San Juan are worth more than a new power plant any day. But we have a hundred years of law and tradition to overcome before instream flows equal consumptive uses of our rivers. A new paradigm is needed in western states water management.

For more information on fishing the San Juan, have a look at Larry Johnson's website at: www.soaringeaglelodge.net.

By Cornelia de Bruin
The Daily Times
Article Launched: 06/14/2008 12:00:00 AM MDT

FARMINGTON — San Juan County's air quality monitors registered ozone readings Wednesday right at the 75 parts per billion mark, which is the new federal standard for maximum ozone levels.

"Ozone is the key ingredient of smog," said Mike Eisenfeld, San Juan County Citizens Alliance New Mexico staff organizer. "It's a corrosive gas that forms when air pollution ... reacts with sunlight."

"We are at 75 (ppb) now. We are watching it, too," added Mary Uhl, director of the state Environment Department's Air Quality Bureau. "We have to go over it before we are in non-attainment."

Uhl said when an area goes into the non-attainment category, the state has the responsibility to develop a plan to reduce emissions, then prove that plan will work — or suffer the consequences.

"The federal government can withhold highway funds if corrective action is not taken," Uhl said. "We are just in the beginning of constructing a plan. We had an early action compact to talk about a plan because we had known the San Juan County area is on the cusp of non-attainment."

Uhl expects San Juan County to cross the line within the next two weeks. The ozone levels typically increase during the hotter summer months.

Uhl's boss, Environment Department Secretary Ron Curry, is in touch with the Navajo Nation regarding Sithe Global and Diné Power Authority's plans to construct Desert Rock Power Plant, a pulverized coal-burning facility in the Burnham area of the Nation.

"The New Mexico Environment Department has engaged in discussions about Desert Rock with the Nation through the president's office," she said.

President Joe Shirley Jr. did not return calls from The Daily Times requesting comment on issues under public scrutiny.

The state's position, publicized Tuesday by Gov. Bill Richardson's office, is that recent action taken by the EPA could affect the health of New Mexicans.

A decree filed by the EPA in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas was a response to a lawsuit filed against the federal agency by Bracewell and Giuliani of Washington, D.C., and the Navajo Nation to prod the EPA to issue an air permit for Desert Rock.

The EPA is required to act within one year of a permit seeker's request. In the case of Desert Rock, the timeline passed the four-year mark earlier this year. The consent decree states the EPA will act on the permit by July 31.

"Every indication is that this is an agreement being pushed by the Bush White House to the detriment of air quality in the Four Corners region," Richardson said. "I urge EPA to delay issuance of the permit pending full consultation with New Mexico regarding the far-reaching environmental impacts — including asthma-causing ozone, mercury and greenhouse gas emissions — that will be caused by this plant."

Frank Maisano, spokes-man for Sithe Global, countered, "It will be the cleanest coal plant in the United States with the most strict air permit ever."

"Additional requirements will reduce mercury by 90 percent and lower overall regional haze emissions by 10 percent, even with the new plant because of our plan to work with other projects in the region to reduce emissions at their sites," Maisano said.

It also will reduce global warming emissions by 20 percent, Maisano claimed, because of its efficiency.

Eisenfeld said the high levels recorded this week at Navajo Lake call into question the future of the proposed coal-burning Desert Rock Power Plant. San Juan County also is home to Four Corners Power Plant and San Juan Generating Station, two of the larger power plants in the West.

"The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 in San Francisco, has asserted that the proposed Desert Rock Power Plant would not contribute to a violation of ozone health standards," Eisenfeld said. "(That is) an assertion that is now contradicted by monitoring data."

Added Jeremy Nichols of Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action, "(This is) a wakeup call , it's also an opportunity to develop a strong, lasting cleanup plan."

"We need to cut smog-forming pollution more than ever before to keep us safe and healthy," Nichols said. "We need to start by denying the permit for the Desert Rock Power Plant to be built."

Cornelia de Bruin:

cdebruin@daily-times.com

Staff Writer
Article Launched: 06/13/2008 12:00:00 AM MDT

No matter if you're for or against the proposed Desert Rock Power Plant, the time is past for the Environmental Protection Agency to act on an air permit.

Diné Power Authority and Houston-based Sithe Global Power applied for the air permit that is required to operate the plant way back in early 2004. Under federal law, the EPA has one year to make a determination and issue a decision.

It's more than four years later — and still no decision.

That all looks to change this summer, though. The EPA filed a consent decree last week in U.S. District Court in Houston, agreeing to act on the permit by July 31. Before the decree is final, however, the EPA has to publish it in the Federal Register and allow public comment on the document.

An EPA spokeswoman said unless the Department of Justice discovers facts that disclose problems with the consent decree, the federal agency will make a decision by the end of July.

Along with an air permit, Desert Rock must also obtain an environmental impact statement through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. That final approval may also happen later this year.

The EPA already is way behind on the air permit decision and must act either way. The agency claims responding to about 1,000 mostly negative comments on the draft air permit in the past year, and climate modeling uncertainties, have delayed the process.

The Desert Rock project, which would be located near Burnham on the Navajo Nation, is clouded by controversy.

Supporters say the coal-fired plant will add hundreds of permanent jobs and pump in

$50 million annually to a poverty-stricken Navajo reservation.

Detractors, including New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, oppose building a new plant in an area that already is home to two major coal-fired operations. They say another large power plant would further harm the environment and put residents' health in further jeopardy.

Richardson, a former presidential candidate who is being mentioned as a vice president possibility for Barack Obama, urges the EPA to again delay a decision until New Mexico can be consulted more on the overall impact of another coal-fired plant.

Just what new concerns will be brought up following what's already been a four-year process? Most of those 1,000 comments in EPA's hands no doubt are similar issues that run the gamut between environmental protection, global warming concerns and other matters. Countless regional public hearings have been held in the past several years on the air permit and environmental impact statement.

Again, the time has come to act. If the project meets all of the necessary federal requirements, it should move forward. If it does not, Desert Rock can't be built in its present form. The waiting game on the air permit, frankly, has to end — one way or another.

Keep in mind that many unknown variables still exist for Desert Rock. Potential litigation, looming EPA smog standards that would push San Juan County over the legal limit and the ever-increasing climate change debate may keep Desert Rock on the back burner for the foreseeable future.

The cash-in-on-Bush rush is literally gathering steam — and New Mexico is right in the way:

The Navajo Nation's Diné Power Authority and its partner, Texas-based Sithe Global Power, have been doing their darnedest to add another coal-fired steam-electric plant to the Four Corners collection of air-polluters.

To its credit, and to the astonishment of Big Business, the Environmental Protection Agency has balked at the idea.

So the power company and its tribal front sued. We've waited four years, and that's long enough, said the plaintiffs. What they meant was, if we wait any longer, there's going to be a new president — one bound to be tougher on polluters than George W. Bush is. Let's get a federal commitment to construction while we can.

And this week, the EPA caved in, filing a consent decree saying it will act by the end of July on the company's request for an air-quality permit to build a 1,500-megawatt generator south of Farmington — a plant dedicated to keeping Arizona's urban hordes supplied with electricity.

Don't do it, said Gov. Bill Richardson to the feds; it'll keep you from carrying out the "full and thorough analysis of the far-reaching impacts this plant will have on the health of New Mexicans."

Oh, bother, comes the response from Sithe; this'll be the cleanest coal plant the country has ever seen. Let EPA issue us the strictest permit it can — and we'll comply with it.

And if the company can't, what'll happen? Will it have to shut down the plant, leaving Phoenicians with only their swimming pools for staying cool? Fat chance.

"Every indication is," says Richardson, "that this is an agreement being pushed by the Bush White House to the detriment of air quality in the Four Corners region." He's urging EPA to delay issuing the permit pending full consultation with New Mexico regarding the far-reaching environmental impacts — which, he says, include asthma-causing ozone, mercury and greenhouse gas emissions.

Either the governor hasn't seen, or properly rejects as propaganda, the advertisements and commercials conning America toward a grand new era of "clean coal" — the kind that emits clover instead of smudged air.

After all, says the company, there'll be Clean Air Act limits on the stuff wafting from our 'stacks: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and, yes, lead. So you're not likely to notice much pollution. And carbon-dioxide sequestration? No can do.

But when Desert Rock's emissions are compounded by those from the two older generators, what kind of mess will that make for the New Mexicans downwind of coal-burning country? Shouldn't there be a look at existing air-quality conditions before throwing another power plant into the mix?

Oh, don't worry your heads about that, comes the response — and besides, we're beyond the jurisdiction of your environment department, so what can New Mexico do about it?

Maybe more than Sithe thinks: Legal remedies remain. And New Mexico isn't alone. Colorado shares our state's concerns about air pollution, and could give weight to a Four Corners coalition for cleaner air. Meanwhile, New Mexico Environment Secretary Ron Curry and Attorney General Gary King are keeping communications open with the company and with the Navajo Nation.

As for EPA, it should anticipate the cumulative effects of the region's smokestacks, and make its air-quality requirements really tough ones. That might send the project's lawyers back to their war rooms — unless the big bosses figure they should start building now, and work out the details of public health later.

New Mexicans should give the governor, Attorney General King and Secretary Curry credit for a good fight — and hope EPA careerists can hold Sithe and company to tough and effective air-quality rules.

The spokesman for the company working with a Navajo utility authority on a proposed coal-fired power plant near Farmington said Wednesday that an air permit for the plant is three years overdue.

Sithe Global Power spokesman Frank Maisano also said the Desert Rock plant will be the cleanest coal plant in the United States.

Gov. Bill Richardson on Tuesday complained that a consent decree to make a decision on the permit by the end of July is tying federal regulators' hands.

The governor wants the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to delay issuing an air permit until New Mexico can be consulted about the plant's impact.

Maisano said, however, that Desert Rock ``will be the cleanest coal plant in the United States with the most strict air permit ever.''

The EPA filed the consent decree last week in U.S. District Court in Houston, agreeing to act on the permit for the plant by July 31.

The Navajos' Dine Power Authority and Sithe applied for the air permit in early 2004. Under federal law, the EPA has a year to make a determination and issue a decision. The developers sued the EPA in March, accusing the federal agency of dragging its feet on the permit.

``It is hard to imagine that Governor Richardson could ask for more delays,'' Maisano said.

The Dine Power Authority is in partnership with Houston-based Sithe for the planned $3 billion, 1,500-megawatt Desert Rock project.

SANTA FE (AP) - Governor Richardson wants the Environmental Protection Agency to delay issuing an air quality permit for a proposal coal-fired power plant near Farmington until the state of New Mexico can be consulted.

He says a consent decree over the Desert Rock plant ties the EPA�s hands.

Richardson says the consent decree will prevent a thorough analysis of the plant�s impact on the health of New Mexicans.

He says environmental impacts include asthma-causing ozone, mercury and greenhouse gases.

The EPA filed the consent decree last week in federal court in Houston, agreeing to act on the permit by July 31th.

The Dine Power Authority is in partnership with Houston-based Sithe Global Power for the planned $3 billion, 1,500-megawatt project.

(Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

For More Immediate Release:
June 11, 2008


For More Information Contact:
Jeremy Nichols, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action, (303) 454-3370 or 437-7663
Mike Eisenfeld, San Juan Citizens Alliance, (505) 360-8994


San Juan County, New Mexico—Smog levels in San Juan County broke federal health standards for ozone air pollution yesterday, putting the health of children, seniors, and active adults at serious risk.

"The Four Corners Region is in the midst of a health crisis," said Mike Eisenfeld with the San Juan Citizens Alliance. "Ozone air pollution is adversely affecting children and families in San Juan County and the surrounding region—we need relief."

Ozone is the key ingredient of smog. It’s a corrosive gas that forms when air pollution from smokestacks, oil and gas operations, and tailpipes reacts with sunlight. It is linked to a number of adverse health effects. Most recently, a 2007 study in San Juan County by the New Mexico Department of Health found that increasing ozone levels increased the number of asthma-related hospital visits.

Federal health standards limit ozone to no more than 75 parts per billion (or 0.075 parts per million) over an eight-hour period to safeguard public health (standards effective May 28, 2008). These standards are violated when the three-year average of the fourth highest ozone readings is higher than 75 parts per billion.

Based on monitoring data from the State of New Mexico, the fourth highest ozone reading for 2008 reached 70 parts per billion yesterday at the Navajo Lake monitor in San Juan County. In both 2006 and 2007, the fourth highest readings at the Navajo Lake monitor measured 79 parts per billion. That puts the average of the fourth highest readings for 2006-2008 at 76 parts per billion, in violation of federal health standards.

To safeguard public health, the violation will require the most substantial cuts in ozone forming pollution ever called for in the Four Corners region. These cuts will likely come from the region’s coal burning power plants (including Four Corners Power Plant and San Juan Generating Station), in addition to the region’s oil and gas wells, natural gas processing plants, and oil refineries. These cuts will help keep children, seniors, and active adults safe.

The violation also calls into question the future of the proposed coal burning Desert Rock Power Plant. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 in San Francisco, has asserted that the proposed Desert Rock Power Plant would not contribute to a violation of ozone health standards, an assertion that is now contradicted by monitoring data.

"While this violation is a wakeup call, it’s also an opportunity to develop a strong, lasting clean up plan," said Jeremy Nichols of Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action, a regional clean air advocacy organization. "We need to cut smog forming pollution more than ever before to keep us safe and healthy. We need to start by denying the permit for the Desert Rock Power Plant to be built."

More Details on San Juan County Violating Ozone Standards:

* State of New Mexico ozone monitoring data can be accessed at http://air.state.nm.us/. 2008 data from the Navajo Lake monitor can be accessed at http://air.state.nm.us/getParameters.php?stationNo=81. The data is presented as hourly readings, from which daily eight-hour averages were calculated.

* According to data from the Navajo Lake monitor, the fourth highest ozone reading so far in 2008 is 70 parts per billion, which occurred on June 10th. The highest reading so far in 2008 was 76 parts per billion, which occurred on June 4, 2008.

* Data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency shows that in 2006 and 2007, the fourth highest ozone readings at the Navajo Lake monitor were 79 parts per billion. That data can be accessed at http://iaspub.epa.gov/airsdata/adaqs.monvals?geotype=co&geocode=35045&geoinfo=co%7E35045%7ESan+Juan+Co%2C+New+Mexico&pol=O3&year=2007+2006&fld=monid&fld=siteid&fld=address&fld=city&fld=county&fld=stabbr&fld=regn&rpp=25.

* A spreadsheet documenting the ozone levels in 2008 at the Navajo Lake monitor, and calculating the three year average of the fourth highest readings, is available at http://ourcleanair.org/uploads/2008_san_juan_county_ozone.xls.

* A 2007 study by the State of New Mexico Department of Health (Myers, et al) found increasing ozone was linked to increased hospital visits. That study can be downloaded at http://ourcleanair.org/uploads/SanJuanAsthmaDoc.doc.

* Under the Clean Air Act, the violation means that San Juan County, and likely neighboring Rio Arriba County in New Mexico, and La Plata and Montezuma counties in Colorado, will be designated as “dirty air” areas, or “nonattainment.” Such a designation will trigger stringent clean air safeguards.

###

For Immediate Release Contact: Allan Oliver
June 10, 2008 505-476-2214

Governor Richardson Issues Statement on Desert Rock

SANTA FE - Governor Bill Richardson issued the following statement following the
Environmental Protection Agency’s consent decree Desert Rock.

"This consent decree will only serve to tie EPA's hands while preventing a full and
thorough analysis of the far reaching impacts this plant will have on the health of New
Mexicans,” said Governor Richardson. “Every indication is that this is an agreement
being pushed by the Bush White House to the detriment of air quality in the Four Corners
region. I urge EPA to delay issuance of the permit pending full consultation with New
Mexico regarding the far-reaching environmental impacts -- including asthma-causing
ozone, mercury and greenhouse gas emissions -- that will be caused by this plant.”

A decision must be made on EPA’s consent decree by July 31, 2008

###

By Cornelia de Bruin The Daily Times
Article Launched: 06/10/2008 12:00:00 AM MDT

Proponents of the proposed Desert Rock Power Plant marked a significant milestone Monday.

The milestone is the promise from the Environmental Protection Agency that it will rule by the end of July regarding a Prevention of Significant Deterioration air permit Desert Rock Power Plant needs in order to operate.

Desert Rock spokesman Frank Maisano announced the EPA plans to issue a final decision on the permit application by July 31. The announcement was part of a consent decree filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.

Maisano is the spokesman for the Bracewell and Giuliani LLP law firm in Washington, D.C., that represents Sithe Global. Sithe is the company partnering with the Navajo Nation's Diné Power Authority, which would run the 1,500 megawatt pulverized coal-burning plant near Burnham.

The decree comes because EPA, Sithe Global and the Department of Justice settled litigation filed against them in February by Desert Rock Power Company and Diné Power Authority after EPA did not issue a permit in the required timely manner.

"We will publish the decree in the Federal Register in about two weeks," said Colleen McKaughan, assistant director of EPA's Bureau of Air Quality. "We are required to take public comment on the consent decree before it becomes effective."

The public comment time would only be for several days, McKaughan said.

Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley Jr., a strong supporter of the project, did not respond to calls requesting his comments.

On May 21, supporters of the plant marked the four-year anniversary of the plant's construction being kept in limbo by the lack of an air permit.

Sithe Global and Diné Power Authority submitted their initial permit application in February 2004. EPA notified the permit applicants by letter dated May 21, 2004, that the permit application was complete.

The federal Clean Air Act requires a decision within one year of an applicant's initial submission.

"We have a date certain," Maisano said. "That's a good thing for the Navajo Nation, who's been waiting for four years."

Maisano points to the Navajo Nation's overwhelming support of the proposed plant, "as evidenced by its 66-7 Tribal Council vote in favor" of the project.

He also notes "there remain small pockets of local opposition" to the project that's anticipated to provide more than $50 million in annual revenue to the Nation and will create thousands of construction jobs and 400 permanent jobs.

"We are wondering what the terms of the agreement are, and we're opposed to EPA's issuance of it," said Dailan Long, community organizer for the group Diné Citizens Against Ruining the Environment.

Diné CARE is one of the pockets of local opposition to which Maisano referred.

"Our air is already of bad quality and the EPA should consider the cumulative effects of another power plant," Long said.

San Juan County is also home to Four Corners Power Plant and San Juan Generating Station, two of the larger coal-fired plants in the West.

Also in opposition to the addition of another coal-burning power plant is Mike Eisenfeld, New Mexico staff organizer of San Juan Citizens Alliance.

"We believe every reason we have for the permit's denial has been justified," Eisenfeld said. "The political reality is that EPA will approve it, but it seems that the grave deficiencies of the plan that have been there all along have not changed — they've gotten worse."

As examples, Eisenfeld listed San Juan County's Top Ten listing among the nation's worst carbon dioxide-polluting counties. Ranked No. 7, the county is also soon to be out of attainment for ozone pollution, he said.

EPA ruled in March that air must contain no more than 75 units of ozone (smog) for every billion units of air to be considered healthy. The new regulation is a reduction from the current maximum concentration of 80 to 84 parts per billion.

"We project that San Juan County won't attain the new standards," said New Mexico Environment Department Air Quality Division Bureau Chief Mary Uhl in Santa Fe. "A classification of non-attainment will curb new developments and possibly require vehicle emission testing."

Added Eisenfeld, "This is not the time for another power plant."

"Although it doesn't bode well for the public, we will be there for the proper response when the July 31 deadline passes," Eisenfeld said.

Cornelia de Bruin:

cdebruin@daily-times.com

By FELICIA FONSECA Associated Press Writer
Article Launched: 06/09/2008 03:43:19 PM MDT

http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_9532021&ct=ga&cd=W_u9qqMuNFs&usg=AFQjCNEEJ70XONTp-yHrSfvd_pOqDRCVAw

ALBUQUERQUE—The Navajo Nation could soon learn whether it has secured an air permit for a proposed controversial coal-fired power plant on reservation land in northern New Mexico.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency filed a consent decree last week in U.S. District Court in Houston, agreeing to act on the permit by July 31. Before the decree is finalized, the EPA must publish it in the Federal Register and allow the public to comment on it.

"We'll take in the comments and review them," said Niloufar Glosson, a spokeswoman for the EPA's Air Division in San Francisco. "Unless the Department of Justice decides that the comments disclose facts that (find) this action is inappropriate, we'll make a decision on the 31st."

Construction on the plant south of Farmington can't start until the air permit and an environmental impact statement are approved.

The Dine Power Authority, which is partnering with Houston-based Sithe Global Power on the $3 billion, 1,500-megawatt Desert Rock project, sued the EPA in March, accusing the federal agency of dragging its feet on the permit.

The DPA and Sithe applied for the air permit in early 2004. Under federal law, the EPA has a year to make a determination
Advertisement
and issue a decision.

"We feel strongly that we've met the conditions that are outlined, and we've got a strong permit that reduces emissions dramatically," Frank Maisano, a spokesman for Sithe, said Monday. "We're hopeful that having a date certain will be our next step forward (in) getting that permit out."

Steve Begay, DPA general manager, said he believes that if the EPA intended to deny the permit, it would have done so by now.

"Absent any new earth-shattering thing that the opposition could bring out, I think the permit will go forward by the 31st," he said.

The EPA has received more than 1,000 mostly negative comments on the air permit, each of which the agency has had to respond to. The agency has said those comments and climate-modeling uncertainties for a region that includes several national parks have delayed the permit decision.

"We firmly believe there's every reason to deny based on the EPA's responsibility to regulate greenhouse gases, mercury, the ozone problem up here," said Mike Eisenfeld of the San Juan Citizens Alliance, which has fought the plant.

A denial of the permit would be a huge blow to the project that tribal officials say would bring in $50 million annually to the tribe, create thousands of construction jobs and help the poverty stricken reservation.

However, if the air permit is granted, critics of the project vow to appeal. The Four Corners region already is home to two other coal-fired power plants, and environmentalists argue that Desert Rock would further harm the environment and residents' health.

The air permit would set limits for emissions covered under the federal Clean Air Act, such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, particulates and lead emissions. Both federal officials and Desert Rock developers have said the draft permit contains some of the strictest controls ever set for a coal-fired power plant in the United States.

Source: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_9397195?source=email

By Mark Jaffe
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 05/28/2008 09:45:12 AM MDT

Some of the most dramatic — and negative — effects from climate change will take place in the American West, according to a new federal study. While the East will become wetter and Midwest grain crops may benefit from longer growing seasons, the West will be drier and rangeland livestock production could decline because of stress from hotter summers.

The study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture — a survey and synthesis of existing research — paints a picture of sweeping changes in the next 30 to 50 years. The analysis is based on an assumed rise in the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide — the main greenhouse gas — from the current 380 parts per million to 440 ppm and a 2.16 degree Fahrenheit increase in average temperature.

According to the report, Western states will face substantial challenges because of growing demand for water and big projected drops in supplies.

From 2040 to 2060, anticipated water flows from rainfall in much of the West are likely to approach a 20 percent decrease in the average from 1901 to 1970, and are likely to be much lower in places like the fast-growing Southwest. In contrast, runoff in much of the Midwest and East is expected to increase that much or more.

"Some of the really marked impacts are happening in the West," said Peter Backlund, a lead author and researcher at the Boulder-based National Center for Atmospheric Research. "It is really daunting." The West may face changes in the following areas:

Arid lands

Juniper trees, forbs and woody plants may expand their range, taking advantage of the carbon dioxide in the air. Species such as saguaro cactus and Joshua trees may be threatened by increased fire risks. Drought and severe rainstorms also could lead to erosion.

Livestock production

Because livestock eat less in hot weather, there are projected increases in days to market in the West by 2040: 2.2 percent for cattle and 3.3 percent for pigs. A 2.3 percent delay — equal to 1.5 days — in the central U.S. would cost swine producers there $5 million a year.

Forest fires

The size and number of fires in the West have increased since 1985. The trend is linked to lower snowmelt and higher spring and summer air temperatures. In 2007, almost seven times as much forest acreage burned as in 1987, with many more high-elevation fires.

Insects and invasives

A warmer climate will spread the range of pests, such as the pine bark beetle and the spruce beetle, as well as expand the range of invasive, non- native grasses in the Southwestern deserts. This will increase fire risks in the areas.

Water

There has been a downward trend in snowpack water over the past 80 years because of changes in temperature and precipitation. Snow is melting an average 10 to 20 days earlier in Colorado, and by 2050 runoff could be reduced by 20 percent, according to one projection.

Denver Post news services contributed to this report

Source: http://www.summitdaily.com/article/20080531/NEWS/720008903

DURANGO — Coal-fired power plants and other pollution sources in the Four Corners area could boost smog levels past federal limits in New Mexico and southwest Colorado this summer, government officials and environment and health care managers warn.

Mesa Verde National Park near Cortez could exceed federal air-quality standards, said participants at an air-quality forum at Fort Lewis College last week.

“Very serious air-quality issues need to be addressed, particularly ozone,” said Mary Uhl, air quality division bureau chief at the New Mexico Environment Department.
She said San Juan County in northwest New Mexico may violate federal standards this summer, and southwest Colorado might, too. Uhl added that Mesa Verde might also be out of compliance if it’s a bad summer.

Ground-level ozone, a key component of smog, is created when the sun bakes pollutants such as vehicle exhaust, wildfire smoke and vapors from everything from paint cans to oil and gas wells. The Environmental Protection Agency in March tightened the ozone limit to 75 parts per billion, down from the maximum concentration of 80 to 84 parts per billion.

Even before the new standard, a nine-county area along Colorado’s Front Range, including the Denver area, was declared in violation of the ozone standard. State regulators have imposed more stringent rules on the oil and gas industry to help cut pollution.

Uhl noted that the Four Corners area is home to two coal-fired power plants, with another one proposed, and 19,000 oil and gas wells, with 12,000 more projected over the next 20 years.

Other air-quality problems in the area are haze, mercury and nitrate pollution, Uhl said.

She said the region contains seven Class 1 sites, generally national parks or wilderness areas, where the air quality is supposed to be better than in other areas.

May 30, 2008
By Dale Rodebaugh | Herald Staff Writer

Southwest Colorado, given