ELECTRICITY: Proposal in response to coal-fired plant may be in force in a month.
WASILLA - With fast-tracked plans for a new law governing power plants, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough is stepping into the public fray over how electric power is generated for its residents.
The proposed law, introduced last week, requires utilities to pay for independent studies documenting environmental controls, emissions and noise and traffic impacts created by new power plants. The law also requires an economic impact study detailing things like how many employees will be hired, and how the project will affect the local housing market and school enrollment numbers.
The borough planning commission would be tasked with approving or disapproving permits for new power plants.
The Mat-Su planning department is taking public comments on the proposal until July 11. The Mat-Su Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on it at a special meeting at 6 p.m. July 12 in Assembly Chambers. The borough Assembly scheduled a July 17 public hearing on it.
A one-month turnaround for enacting new laws is almost unheard of.
Borough Manager John Duffy said the proposal was fast-tracked to match quickly moving plans by Matanuska Electric Association to build a 100-megawatt, coal-fired power plant and a 100-megawatt, natural gas-fired plant at a gravel pit south of Mile 38 Glenn Highway.
“The project is moving along very quickly. My gosh, we’ve already got a location and approval to move forward,” Duffy said.
Mat-Su Assemblyman Tom Kluberton requested the law be drafted.
“I feel it is government’s business to intervene in that kind of thing, to make sure that there has been a full public process,” Kluberton said.
MEA has held several public meetings about its plans. In May it asked its 41,720 members between Eagle River and Cantwell to vote on where to build the two new power generation plants. In a typical household, only one person is recognized as an MEA member.
About 107,000 people live in the area encompassing Eagle River, Chugiak and Mat-Su. At a recent Assembly meeting, several borough residents asked the Assembly to intervene and allow all its residents to participate in power generation decisions.
Kluberton said he likes what Duffy drafted. It includes thresholds for emissions and a requirement for technical review by industry experts, he said. Kluberton said he believes those details will give the planning commission objective facts and technical help it needs to evaluate power-generation plans.
MEA spokeswoman Lorali Carter said the law is full of “hoops they expect applicants to jump through.”
“We are currently researching the potential costs and delays of complying with the borough ordinance,” Carter said in a phone message left Tuesday.
Duffy said many of the so-called hoops are studies or data required by other regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
“These rules are standard practice throughout the United States.
There’s nothing particularly onerous here,” Duffy said Monday.
Carter balked at a requirement that the applicant pay for an independent third-party consultant to review its permit. She estimated hiring a consultant would add $500,000 to the cost of building a power plant.
“These are complex matters and we believe the public is better served to get an independent third-party analysis,” Duffy said. “If $500,000 makes or breaks two power plants, I think something’s wrong.”
Carter on Thursday criticized the law as being a reflection of the influence the pro-planning group Friends of Mat-Su holds over the Assembly. On Tuesday she said she since learned Friends of Mat-Su isn’t connected to this proposal. But it is similar to a California law governing new power generation facilities, she said.
“I’m surprised they didn’t review any other ordinances (being used) in the state,” Carter said.
Friends of Mat-Su project manager Mimi Peabody said her group wasn’t involved in developing the proposed borough law. But the group supports it, she said.
“We were surprised to see it,” Peabody said. “We are concerned from a land-use standpoint and a public process standpoint (about the power plant proposal). ... So far we think it is a really good, thorough ordinance. It addresses a lot of issues that we feel are important.”
Duffy said that after reviewing power plant regulations in place around the U.S. he settled on the California law, updated in April 2007.
“I thought the California one was better than most,” Duffy said.
Duffy said he reshaped the California rules to fit Alaska, adding cold weather details and removing California-specific rules relating to protected species.
Find Daily News reporter Rindi White online at www.adn.com/contacts/rwhite or call 352-6709.
