EPA hurt our ability to stop gas-fired engines. Tell the EPA don't restrict the use of science.

I finally received a response from the Pima Department of Environmental Quality regarding the public comments (including my own) submitted on TEP's permit to install the 10 RICE gas-fired engines in Tucson.  I want to thank the members of Sustainable Tucson (especially Duane Ediger for taking the lead), the Sierra Club, and other community members who took the time to go on record regarding this important issue. While our letters didn't result in PDEQ rejecting TEP's permit, we did slow down the process. (It took five months for them to review the comments and approve it.) And they did revise a number of permit conditions including:  annual monitoring and reporting to provide reasonable assurance of compliance with the carbon monoxide emission limits for the RICE, and a condition that they would decommission the old generators before the new engines are installed. 

Summary of their decision.

It's not over until it's over!  Within 30 days after service of this notice announcing the final permit decision, any person who filed comments on the proposed permit for the TEP Irvington Generating Station or participated in any of the public hearings for the TEP Irvington Generating Station may petition EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) to review any condition of the final permit.

One of the problems the community faced in responding to how TEP's permit complied with PDEQ's code was the absence of cardon dioxide standards.  That's right! The code doesn't include carbon dioxide standards because Scott Pruitt put a hold on the Clean Power Plan. 

I believe that the EPA's refusal to accept the latest science regarding carbon dioxide greatly hampered our efforts to fight the RICE gas-fired engines!  See how important it is that the EPA rely on the best available science when making decisions!  

It's about to get worse, unless we speak out! 

Now the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed a rule that would restrict the agency's ability to rely on the best available science to ensure that we have clean air and clean water. This is nothing more than an attempt to undermine the EPA's mission to protect public health and the environment. Our air, water, and health all rely on the EPA using the best available science in decision making.

Please, send an individual letter to the EPA. (Find the link below the sample letter.)

To: Andrew Wheeler, acting administrator, Environmental Protection Agency

I am writing to express my objection to and concern about the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) "Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science" proposal (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OA-2018-0259). I believe that science plays a pivotal role in ensuring our health and safety, preserving our environment, and informing evidence-based policy. This new proposal would undermine the EPA's mission of preserving public health and the environment.

For the EPA to utilize the best available science to shape public health and environmental safeguards, the agency needs to have the ability to use the best research and information. While this proposed rule promises "transparency," it reduces confidentiality and privacy protections by requiring the raw data from these studies to be made public. Consequently, the best available scientific studies in numerous public health fields, where patient privacy prohibits sharing the raw data, would be sidelined. This arbitrary rejection of data from research on air quality, public health, drinking water, hazardous waste, and so many other fields would inhibit the EPA's ability to implement science-based protections.

When policies play a role in our health, safety, and environment, the EPA needs to use the best available evidence and research when finalizing safeguards. This ill-advised proposal would significantly limit the EPA's ability to make the informed policy decisions that the agency is required to under landmark public health and environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Toxic Substances Control Act.

I urge you to reconsider this proposed rule and withdraw it immediately.

You are encouraged to file an individual comment to the EPA and share your story about how restrictions on science would harm your health and the environment. The more people who file comments, the less the EPA can ignore the weight of the evidence.

Go to the public comment page to submit your individual comment.

Be sure to submit your comment by August 16 at 11:59 p.m., and check your email for a receipt confirmation.

The Union of Concerned Scientists put together a few resources to assist you in writing your comment:
• Check out our helpful guide for writing a public comment.
• Watch our Public Comments 101 webinar on making effective public comments to the EPA.

More on the RICE Generators:

Friday, 10 August 2018, Arizona Daily Star article: Go-ahead for TEP generators dismays environmentalists

Ask The AZ Corporation Commission To Support Energy Efficiency

Sandy speaking up at the first PDEQ hering. We saved a seat for you!  

I want to thank all of you who took action to stop new natural gas investments in Tucson!

With your help, we made a compelling case to the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality to deny Tucson Electric Power (TEP) the air quality permit they need to move forward with their proposed investment in new gas-fired engines at the Sundt Generating Station. We are awaiting a response and decision, but will be sure to keep you updated.

(Jana's note: Our public letter to the president of TEP will be delivered soon.)

While the fight continues to stop natural gas expansion, there is still lots of other work to be done!

You can take action now by signing a petition telling Arizona Corporation Commission to require energy efficiency for TEP!

Energy efficiency is Arizona's cheapest, cleanest energy resource but a plan filed earlier this year by TEP fails to take full advantage of it. The energy we save means less water use, less pollution, and more dollars in our pockets.

Sign our petition to the Arizona Corporation Commission to require TEP to do more to promote energy efficiency.

Each year, Tucson Electric Power (TEP) and Arizona Public Service (APS) file efficiency plans to show how they will meet Arizona's Energy Efficiency Standards. This year, both utilities have filed plans that are inadequate and that fail to take full advantage of our cheapest cleanest energy resource -- energy efficiency.

The energy we save means less water use, less pollution, and more dollars in our pockets.

Please sign our petition to the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) to require TEP and APS to do more to promote energy efficiency in their plans.

Ask the ACC to require that the plans focus on real energy savings. We need to continue to invest in consumer programs that help reduce energy use in homes and businesses, saving money and reducing pollution and water use.

Please sign the Sierra Club's petition. We will deliver it to the ACC and have it entered into the docket.

- Sandy Bahr, Grand Canyon Chapter Director of the Sierra Club 

My letter to the City Council urging them to fight against TEP's gas-fired generators

I want to thank everyone who took a stand against TEP's proposed RICE gas-fired generators. You were amazing!  Sustainable Tucson's advocacy group is awaiting responses from the Pima Department of Environmental Quality regarding our individual comments. I'm afraid this is just the beginning.... Meanwhile, I would like to share the letter I just e-mailed to Mayor Rothschild and the Tucson City Council members detailing some of our efforts and asking for them to join the good fight.  I hope this inspires you to write a letter to your council member (maybe not so long...lol)

Find your City Council Member here.

Find which ward you are in here.

Dear City Council Member_____,

The city council committed to support the Paris Climate Agreement and take steps to combat climate change. But it will take a more proactive approach than adding some solar panels on city property or installing a few water recharge basins.

With some strong leadership, Tucson could become a model for sustainable practices. An oasis in the desert. A destination for ecological tourism. But none of this will be possible if we continue to accelerate climate change by allowing TEP to install 10 gas-fired RICE generators, encouraging our car culture by widening roads, and approving perpetual development (beyond what our annual rains can sustain.)

First things first. As you know, TEP is proposing modernizing the Sundt Generating Station by replacing two 1950's era steam units with ten natural gas fired combustion engines. The purpose of the new generators is to ramp up more quickly and to balance the variability associated with solar and wind energy generation. TEP claims that these units are part of a larger goal for 30% renewable energy by 2030. But gas fired engines should not be equated with clean, renewable power from wind and solar. The RICE units are fossil-fuel based generating units that would create significant greenhouse gas emissions. According to the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality, the project expects to cause an increase in emissions of carbon monoxide, particulate matter (fine particles PM_2.5 and coarse particles PM₁₀) and volatile organic compounds.

As a member of Sustainable Tucson, I am concerned about TEP’s unambitious goal of transitioning to 30% clean energy by 2030. The negative impacts of climate change are progressing much faster than that – even faster than scientists first predicted. We are already witnessing its devastating effects.  If TEP is truly dedicated to transitioning to clean energy, why would they be installing 10 new pollution spewing gas-fired generators that last 30 years?  

Members of Sustainable Tucson’s Advocacy team have been actively fighting the permit process for installation. First, we submitted comments to the Corporation Commission. I wrote the following comment: 

In Commissioner Tobin’s Arizona’s Energy Modernization Plan, he outlined steps for Affordability and Reliability. The first recommendation is “Thoughtful planning so the transition to clean energy is gradual and considers the useful life of existing facilities while not locking into new non-clean energy investments that may be stranded in the near future.” Aren’t the RICE Generators locking us into non-clean energy investments that may be stranded in the future?

My engineer husband, Dan Stormont, and I have been following the rapid innovations happening in solar storage and believe that they will be an economically feasible option in the near future. Battery storage has already resulted in the cancellation of proposed gas peaker plants in California. Regulators there are even requiring utilities to open competitive solicitations for solar + battery storage that are likely to supplant three existing gas peaker plants. 

Our team celebrated when the Arizona Corporation Commission refused to consider Tucson Electric Power’s Integrated Resource Plan – indicating that it would issue a moratorium on new natural gas-fired energy production projects. But we were appalled to learn that the ACC approved TEP’s underhanded plan to meet the imposed moratorium (not to exceed 175 megawatts) by phasing the construction into two 100 megawatt installations. There appears to be some shady dealings going on here. (This should not be a big surprise since some commissioners were under investigation for accepting dark money campaign donations.)

Our team's next step was contacting a member of the Board of Supervisors. When asked what he could do to deny TEP’s permit for the RICE generators, the supervisor claimed that their hands were tied - that it’s up to the EPA to set the laws about climate change. But, really, what are the chances of that happening with climate change denier Scott Pruitt at the helm of the EPA?

Our team met with a similar challenge when we submitted comments to the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality on how TEP’s permit doesn't meet the criteria for issuance prescribed in the Pima County Code. We couldn’t even argue that TEP didn’t meet the standards for carbon dioxide emissions since there was nothing in Pima’s code regarding carbon dioxide emissions. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt had delayed implementing the Clean Power Plan which places first-ever limits on the huge quantities of carbon pollution emitted by our country’s electric power plants. 

Three of our members spoke up at the public hearing held by the zoning examiner. We asked that the City of Tucson deny TEP’s request for a special zoning designation (Planned Area Development – “PAD”) because TEP’s request for rezoning contradicts Plan Tucson’s call for: (a) Increased renewable energy sources; (b) Recruiting, retaining and expanding Tucson’s key economic sectors in renewable energy; c) Increasing or promoting environmentally sensitive industry; and (d) “. . .[N]o compromise on principles of equity, fairness, justice, prosperity, livability, and environmental integrity.”

The Tucson zoning official explained that Plan Tucson’s provisions are not grounds to deny the TEP’s zoning request. He approved the zoning permit claiming it didn’t break any zoning codes. But when those zoning codes were written, we weren’t staring in the face of climate change!

Sustainable Tucson's advocacy team has done everything we can think of to stop the installation of TEP’s dirty generators. But we’ve been stopped by unethical roadblocks from the EPA.   Now we need your help.  It is time for bold action - to think outside of the box. It’s time to create new codes and ordinances that protect Tucson from the devastation of climate change and delay any permits until those codes and ordinances are put into effect.

The Tucson City Council committed to support the Paris Climate Agreement and take vital steps to combat climate change. It’s time to ask yourself some hard questions. Was that pledge just words or are you committed to doing everything you can to combat climate change to protect our children and the future of Tucson? If the answer to that question is yes, you need to ask yourself one more question, “Am I doing everything I can?” 

Sustainable Tucson is here to support your efforts to uphold the Paris Climate Agreement and protect our beloved town. Feel free to contact me if there is anything we can do to help.  

Sincerely,

Jana Segal
Sustainable Tucson Environmental Advocacy Group 

Keep up the good fight! 

Speaking Up Against TEP's Proposed Gas-fired Generators

As I mentioned in a previous blog, TEP is proposing modernizing the Sundt Generating Station by replacing two 1950's era steam units with ten natural gas fired combustion engines. The RICE units are fossil-fuel based generating units that would create significant greenhouse gas emissions. According to the Pima Department of Environmental Quality, the project expects to cause an increase in emissions of carbon monoxide, particulate matter and volatile organic compounds.

Last night 30 people from the Irvington neighborhood and our Tucson community attended the march to protest the gas-fired engines being installed in their neck of the woods. 50 people showed up to show support at PDEQ's public hearing. 30 of those, myself included, spoke up.

Some people explained how carbon dioxide from the engines would accelerate climate change and how that would devastate our city. But I'm afraid those comments about green house emissions won't have any impact. We were limited to commenting on how TEP's permit meets the criteria for issuance prescribed in the Arizona Revised Statutes, Section § 49-481 of the Pima County Code.  All of those important comments about climate change were disregarded because CO₂ isn't included in Pima's code. (I know! I couldn't believe it either!)

A few of us from Sustainable Tucson's advocacy group and the Sierra Club have been combing through Pima's code - trying to find some inconsistencies or ANYTHING we can use stop the PDEQ from issuing a permit for the RICE engines.  The deadline for comments to the PDEQ was Thursday, March 29th.  Here are some angles that our team member uncovered. 

But what I found to be really powerful was how the people from the neighborhood spoke their truth to power. They bravely told stories about how TEP's environmental racism had impacted the health of their loved ones. I think that might just be the angle we need for our comments to the PDEQ. On their letter announcing this hearing,  they wrote:

Pima County has completed an extensive review of the permit application, examined the air quality impact analysis of the project and considered environmental justice to protect the health and environment of minority, low-income, tribal and indigenous populations.

After hearing the heartfelt comments from people in the neighborhood, something occurred to me.  I believe that PDEQ did not take into account the special circumstances of how the pollutants from the new gas-fired engines would impact the vulnerable population that is already suffering from cancer, lupus, asthma, heart valve defects, birth defects, arthritis, and central nervous system disorders from decades of dioxane in  their water and the pollution from Sundt's coal-fired plants. 

A 2010 study by the Clean Air Task Force showed the burning of coal at Sundt causes approximately 68 asthma attacks, 6 heart attacks and 4 deaths every year. Built in 1967, the Sundt plant ranked 13th worst in the NAACP’s environmental justice performance ranking.

https://www.sierraclub.org/planet/2015/09/h-wilson-sundt-generating-station-stops-burning-coal

If you're a member of one of the families who suffered from any of these diseases, you might want to use this angle and share your story for the record.  I encourage you to back it up with data (included on this blog and the links provided). (The deadline  has expired. It was Thursday, March 29th.)  Here are the directions. 

TEP’s environmental justice argument leaves things to argue with:

TEP’s Environmental Justice Analysis duly notes the goal of Executive Order 12898, that “each Federal agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations.”

TEP notes the stark socioeconomic divide between the population in its 38 square-mile Impact Area – a full 18% of our City’s population – and the 82% of Tucsonans who live outside the plant’s shadow. “Minority” (i.e. global majority) 85% (Tucson 56%); Low income 63% (Tucson 51%); Linguistically isolated: 15% (Tucson 6%); % w/o HS diploma 32% (Tucson 17%). Although asthma rates are not broken down to a small scale, TEP noted that between 2012 and 2014, CDC recorded a nationwide increase from 7.0% to 8.4% while Arizona’s statewide number climbed from 8.9% to 9.6%.

For inconsistencies in TEP's Environmental Justice Analysis, scroll down to:

TEP’s environmental justice argument leaves things to argue with with on this page:

I will leave you with Oscar Medina's speech for inspiration:

"My name is Oscar Medina. I am a father, an educator, member of Sierra Club, and a community organizer with Tierra y Libertad Organization. I am here today to express my concern and opposition to TEP’s proposal for 10 new Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine (RICE) natural gas units at the Sundt Plant location.

I live less than 2 miles away from the TEP’s Sundt Plant location. I have three children: One who attends the Tucson Gymnastics center located near the intersection of Irvington and Alvernon Way. We drive by the plant at least three times a week and the facility does not appear to look the healthiest. My daughter’s school is located just one mile from the intersections of Drexel and Alvernon Way. This is only a few hundred feet from location of the proposed RICE units.

I attended the neighborhood meetings that were hosted by TEP and gave my testimony in opposition to their application at the Arizona Corporation Commission hearing. TEP is framing this project as a campus modernization project. This is deceiving to our community. This expansion project is not about people or the environment, this is about cutting cost and putting profit into the pockets of the TEP investors. At the open house meeting Feb. 15th, I learned from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality that in the past, TEP has not always complied with the air quality regulations, and that air monitoring reports demonstrated excessive carbon monoxide emission. This demonstrates that TEP is not afraid the break the rules again and pollute our neighborhoods.

The open houses that were held before this hearing were not only missing people from the surrounding neighborhoods but they were missing the pictures of children suffering from respiratory illness in parts of south Tucson. The open house was missing pictures of the effects that emissions of carbon monoxide have on people's health. Let's put the bar graphs and data to the side and paint a clear picture. Our children can see right through TEP’s dirty data. This is another clear example of the ongoing environmental racism still occurring in 2018. This fight against pollution that goes years back to the San Juan and Navajo generating stations. Where are the reparations for harming our Dine* brothers and sisters? That is a dark history that TEP does not wish remember. TEP’s plans and their time frame to expand renewable energy resources to 30 percent by 2030 has expired for our neighborhoods. The stakes are too high. TEP’s polluting practices are not welcome in our backyards. Remember that we are the people that breath this dirty air. Let's keep it clean and simple, divest from coal and gas, keep it renewable and let the future be wind and solar energy."

*The word Dine' is from their own language and means "the people." 

The time for action is NOW - while we still have this little window of opportunity. This is something concrete we can do to leave a better life for our children in Tucson. Let's make those brave speeches count!