BIOMASS EXAMPLE

WORST CASE IMPACTS

“KLAMATH BIOMASS”

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECITVE

• ROOT PROBLEM CAUSE AND STRATEGY TO MINIMIZE

• Inadequate and misinterpreted state and county laws allows:

• --Conditional site use on private land anywhere • regardless of adverse impacts (citizens/environment)

• --Rulings that there are no significant impacts• No laws requiring evaluation of impacts• Impacts outside the council’s jurisdiction• Agency/DOJ Interpretation of no significant impacts

• Last resort solution: legal mandamus action and injunctions to force agencies to protect citizens/environment

• EXAMPLES OF WORST IMPACTS:

• SITE LOCATION –WORST IMPACTS

• --Upwind—homes/non-attainment area

• --Sandwiched between residential/wildlife area on wetlands

Solution: Elimin. bad sites up front (Gov’s streamlining plan), state laws, country ordinances require protection of citizens and wildlife from adverse impacts

PLANT AND TRUCK POLLUTION WILL ADD TO EXISTING EXTREME HEALTH PROBLEMS

• --Residential area vulnerable

• --Community vulnerable

Solution: State laws/county ordinances require

protection of public health

PLANT/TRUCK POLLUTION WILL ADD TO EXISTING POOR AIR QUALITY CONDITIONS IN BASIN

--Adjacent neighborhood propensity to attract toxic pollution

--Worst air quality in state and nation and recent Clean Air Act violations/ sanctions

Solutions: Sanctions and precedent cases will not allow plant in basin

• AIR QUALITY IMPACTS GREATER THAN PERMIT• CAUSED BY INADEQUATE AND MISINTREPRED STATE AIR QUALITY

LAWS (ACDP)

• --Do not protect public health

• --Allow significant increase in toxic pollution in basin and no offsets

• --Allow underestimated emissions

• --Unaccounted for emissions and no modeling of cumulative emissions

• --Inadequate emission controls and DEQ oversight

• Solution: Enforce Clean Air Act laws, new precedent case

UNACCOUNTED V PERMITTED EMISSIONS

PERMITTEDEMISSIONS

UNACCT'D FOREMISSIONS

PERMITTED EMISSIONS --ACDP Permit (site only)

Source: SORO expert reports

UNACCOUNTED FOR EMISSIONS (Worst conditions) --Excess site (malfunctions/variability's-open loop sys.) (Weak permit—omissions, miscalculations --In Adjacent neighborhood -Diesel and ash trucks -Chip pile fires and odors, etc. -Other truck influxes (log and gravel) -Other plant’s emissions drift

--OTHER IMPACTSImproper interpretation of state and county laws allow:

• --Adverse impacts to fish and wildlife and endangered

species

• --Other impacts and Seismic risks

• --Long run negative benefits

Solution: Mandamus legal action

• STATUS IN SITING PROCESS

• --STATUS • --Contested case—stay• --History--3 years in the siting process

• --RULING • --DOJ findings—state law compliance• --SORO conclusion—inadequate protection of citizens, community, fish and wildlife and environment

FUTURE STRATEGY

• --Subpoena evidence

• --Conditions

• --Litigation and injunctions

Litigation and injunctions:Stay motions and injunctions while agencies rule on SORO petitions:

--Subpoena expert evidence into contested case record --Petitions --Petition to EPA Moratorium for biomass projects --Petitions-EPA not to exempt Clean Air Act violations --Mandamus action-enforcing EFSC responsibilities --EPA oversight requests --EPA petition to have DEQ recall ACDP permit (Evaluate Permit obsolescence and errors and omissions new

precedent cases* and Clean Air Act violations and sanctions, DEQ lack of public participation processes)

--Injunction to stop ground breaking until agencies rule on SORO motions