Utility seeks accurate emissions readings
Share with others:
FirstEnergy's big Bruce Mansfield power plant has thrice dropped gritty blankets of soot on nearby residents in Beaver County, but the company says its daily emissions aren't as bad as the cloudy billows indicate and is asking the state for permission to prove it.
But at a public hearing last night in Midland, across the Ohio River from the power plant, the nine people who testified remained unconvinced that FirstEnergy won't continue what they described as an almost daily peppering of the landscape with soot.
"The DEP is considering raising the allowable limits of pollution for our communities, and that's shocking and unconscionable," said Ralph Hysong, who lives about a mile southeast of the plant in Aliquippa.
"We consider the company a public nuisance. The fallout continues daily, including today."
The Akron, Ohio-based company requested that the state Department of Environmental Protection approve stack tests for airborne particle emissions and opacity done together and using a new measuring technology. If the test data show that soot emissions aren't as bad as current testing indicates, the company will seek an adjusted opacity limit. Any adjustment to the opacity standard won't result in higher soot emissions, the DEP and FirstEnergy said.
The Bruce Mansfield coal-fired power plant is one of the 20 biggest in the nation and the biggest in the state, producing 2,410 megawatts of electricity.
The coal-fired power plant has repeatedly run afoul of its opacity regulations, which limit the density of the emissions clouds coming out of its stacks. Opacity is regulated because it indicates the amount of fine particles emitted into the air.
"We've invested millions of dollars to deal with opacity, and now we want to use current testing to determine what's actually in our plumes," said Mark Durbin, a FirstEnergy spokesman.
Since November 2002, Bruce Mansfield has exceeded its opacity limits more than 250 times. Mr. Durbin said the three "stack rain" incidents were unrelated to the daily soot emissions and occurred during cleaning or mechanical malfunctions.
"Those were isolated cases and not an ongoing problem," Mr. Durbin said. "People who live nearby lump all of that together, but the opacity issue is unrelated."
The company was fined $25,000 -- the maximum allowed by the state Clean Air Act -- by the DEP for the stack rain incident in June 2006 that affected 300 homes up to 2 miles away. It was fined $25,000 again for an incident in June 2007 that affected 28 homes and properties and another $25,000 last month.
Heather Sage, director of outreach for Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, said last night that Bruce Mansfield's soot emissions have caused damage to nearby communities and impacted the health of their residents.
"The Bruce Mansfield has what amounts to a sweetheart deal for years with the DEP," she said, noting that the state has not demanded the plant comply with current opacity limits.
"Instead of giving up, DEP should require that the plant meet its obligations and comply with opacity limits," she said.
First Published March 12, 2008 12:00 am
