Foes blast Desert Rock

Public forum in Durango draws opponents in force

By Chuck Slothower, Durango Herald , 07/19/2007

The Bureau of Indian Affairs got an earful from Durango residents Wednesday as one person after another streamed to the microphone to speak out against the proposed Desert Rock Energy Project.

The federal agency hosted a public hearing to gather comments about the power plant. It followed on the May release of a draft Environmental Impact Statement, a key step toward construction.

The EIS said the power plant would have several environmental impacts on the surrounding area in northern New Mexico, but nothing significant enough to stop the project.

Speakers at the hearing Wednesday were having none of that.

"Nobody wants a power plant," said Nathan Caceres, who lives in Burnham, N.M.

Forty-nine people signed to speak. Of the first 39, only one voiced support. The hearing drew a crowd of about 150.

Desert Rock would generate 1,500 megawatts of electricity from a site on Navajo land about 30 miles southwest of Farmington. Sithe Global Power, a New York-based international corporation, and Diné Power Authority, a Navajo company, are pushing the $2.5 billion coal-fired power plant.

Environmentalists fiercely oppose the project, saying it will worsen pollution emitted by two older power plants in northern New Mexico. Desert Rock representatives say it will provide much-needed jobs and tax revenue to the Navajo Nation while generating electricity for booming Southwest cities such as Phoenix and Las Vegas.

The mountain of negative comments offered Wednesday added to opposition expressed by local governments. La Plata County commissioners, Durango city councilors, Cortez city councilors and the Vallecito Community Council all have passed resolutions opposing construction.

Speakers voiced concern about haze, mercury pollution, global warming and a litany of other feared effects of the power plant.

While Desert Rock representatives have repeatedly emphasized the economic benefits of the plant to the impoverished reservation - including 420 permanent jobs and $43 million a year in tax and royalty payments to tribal government - several Navajos said they didn't want the power plant.

"Who's asking for jobs?" said Victoria Alba, part of a Navajo family that lives near the proposed site. "People on the reservation all have jobs. We're ranchers."

The lone person to voice support for the project, Herbert Pioche, also a Navajo, said he wanted Navajos to have the opportunity to live in nice houses with running water and electricity. Hospitals and schools need electricity, he said.

The Navajo Tribal Council voted overwhelmingly to approve the power plant.

Frank Maisano, spokesman for Desert Rock, said the Durango City Council was hypocritical for opposing the Navajo government's desire to build Desert Rock while the Durango area gets much of its tax revenue from natural-gas drilling.

At the hearing, City Councilor Leigh Meigs defended the council's decision, saying, "We not only have a right to speak out, we have an obligation to speak out."

Thomas Johns, Sithe Global senior vice president for development, said opposition to new power plants may have the "perverse effect of damaging the environment."

Preventing new plants from being built means utilities must continue to rely on older, dirtier plants that might otherwise be retired from service, he said in an interview.

Maisano said he hopes the BIA will issue a final Environmental Impact Statement around the end of the year. Several speakers urged the BIA to extend the public-comment period scheduled to end Aug. 20, even though the EIS has been available since May 15. The EIS is 1,400 pages.

One comment posted on an anti-Desert Rock Web log doubted public comments would do much good. "There is little reason to believe that these hearings will be little more than pro-forma inputs to an unresponsive EPA."

The Environmental Protection Agency is helping analyze the project, but the BIA office in Gallup, N.M., is leading the federal government's approval process.

 

 

 

 

        


Reprinted as an historical reference document under the Fair Use doctrine of international copyright law. http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html