Coal burning Power Plant to Spend Approximately $500 Million to Settle Clean Air Act Violations

Submitted by Charles Frost on Tue, 01/26/2010 - 18:07.

                                 Jeffrey Energy Center, Kansas. Image credit:Washington Post.

Westar Energy to Spend Approximately $500 Million to Settle Clean Air Act Violations Emissions to be cut by more than 75,000 tons annually


Release date: 01/25/2010

Contact Information: Dave Ryan (News Media Only) ryan [dot] dave [at] epa [dot] gov 202-564-7827 (202) 564-4355


WASHINGTON – Westar Energy has agreed to spend approximately $500 million to significantly reduce harmful air pollution from a Kansas power plant and pay a $3 million civil penalty, under a settlement to resolve violations of the Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Justice Department announced today. As part of the settlement, Westar will also spend $6 million on environmental mitigation projects.

The agreement, filed in federal court in Kansas, resolves violations of the Clean Air Act’s New Source Review requirements at the company’s Jeffrey Energy Center, a coal-fired power plant near St. Marys, Kansas.

“Today’s settlement sets the most stringent limit for sulfur dioxide emissions ever imposed on a coal-fired power plant in a federal settlement,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “EPA is committed to protecting clean air for communities by making sure coal-fired power plants comply with the law.”

“This settlement will lower harmful sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions by thousands of tons each year, and will benefit air quality in Kansas and downwind areas,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant
Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “The Justice Department will continue to vigorously enforce violations of the Clean Air Act’s new source review provisions at coal-fired power plants and other sources of excess emissions across the country.”

Under the settlement, Westar will install and operate pollution control equipment at the Jeffrey Energy Center that is expected to reduce combined emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides by roughly 78,600 tons per year, which is 85 percent below 2007 emissions. In addition, Westar will surrender surplus sulfur dioxide allowances. These allowances cannot be used again, which means that the emissions will be permanently removed from the environment. Westar will also rebuild and optimize controls to reduce particulate matter emissions.

The settlement also requires Westar to spend $6 million on projects to benefit the environment and mitigate the adverse effects of the alleged violations including:


    · Retrofitting diesel engines on vehicles owned by or operated for public entities in Kansas with emission control equipment;
    · Installing new wind turbines that will result in the reduction of criteria pollutants and greenhouse gases, and provide electricity for the benefit of a school or nonprofit;

· Installing advanced truck stop electrification to reduce harmful emissions from idling trucks;

· Installing plug-in hybrid infrastructure to facilitate the use of plug-in hybrid vehicles; and

· Converting vehicles in Westar’s fleet to reduce pollution by retrofitting diesel vehicles with emission controls and purchasing hybrid vehicles.

In a complaint filed in February of 2009, the government alleged that Westar modified all three units at the Jeffrey Energy Center, its largest coal-fired electric generating station, without installing required pollution control equipment or complying with applicable emission limits, in violation of the Clean Air Act. The government discovered the violations through an information request submitted to Westar.

The settlement is part of the EPA’s enforcement initiative to control harmful emissions from coal-fired power plants under the Clean Air Act’s New Source Review requirements. The total combined sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emission reductions secured from these settlements is more than 2 million tons each year once all the required pollution controls have been installed and implemented.

Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides can cause severe harm to human health and the environment. After being emitted from power plants, they are converted to fine particles of particulate matter that can lodge deep in the lungs, causing a variety of health impacts including premature death. Sulfur dioxides and nitrogen oxides are also significant contributors to acid rain, smog, and haze. Air pollution from power plants can drift significant distances downwind and degrade air quality in nearby areas.

Westar Energy, based in Topeka, Kansas, generates and distributes electricity to more than 684,000 customers in Kansas. It owns and operates three coal-fired electrical generating stations in Kansas. The settlement applies to all three units at the Jeffrey Energy Center, which comprise 2,160 megawatts, or 73 percent, of Westar’s coal fleet.

The state of Kansas joined the federal government in the settlement.

The proposed settlement was lodged today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas and is subject to a 30-day public comment period and final court approval.!OpenDocument

( categories: )

NSR Witch-hunt

I'm a huge proponent of common sense.  Unfortunately, NSR lacks this important requirement.  When I replace my muffler, change my oil, replace my airfilter or buy new tires for safety, I'm using common sense and good maintenance practices.  When a company replaces a motor, upgrades pollution control equipment, or repairs equipment that has the potential to fly apart killing everyone w/in 100 ft... they are deemed a criminal.  Where's the common sense.  NSR is a political tool used by the federal government to gain control over private industries.  I have to shake my head when I read this kind of harrassment. 


To control pollution, government has to work w/ industry.  That's how its done in Germany.  I couldn't image how much cleaner the environment would be if the billions of dollars spent on legal council by Government and industry were actually spent on environmental improvement projects and technology to reduce pollutant from industry.


This is officially the first post I've ever made on a Blog site, so have at it.


What Billions Of Dollars Spent On Legal Council???

This WAS a "common sense" agreement...

"Westar has denied and continues to deny the violations alleged in the Complaint; maintains that it has been and remains in compliance with the Act and is not liable for civil penalties or injunctive relief; and states that it is agreeing to the obligations imposed by this Decree solely to avoid the costs and uncertainties of litigation and to improve the environment"


By refusing to deal honorably with others, you dishonor yourself.

NRS? Which Witch?

Please let us know just what you are talking about.

Google does not seem to be any help -

NSR ---New Source Review

Sorry about that but I'm not sure what NRS stands for either.

NSR stands for New Source Review.  The USEPA's re-interpritation in 1998 of a Clean Air Act rule that applies to industry.  Basically, if you conduct routine repairs on your equipment, in the USEPA's view, you just built a new facility and have to meet new source standards.  Good rule for industries that avoid pollution controls while knowingly upgrading & replacing their facility.



NSR Litigation is a Boom for Attorneys


NSR as an enforcement tool is broken. 


Westar's comments related to legal council expense to fight NSR proves my point. 


The billions of dollars I reference relates to the total sum of funds (taxpayer and private sector) spent annually on legal council.  This would be best applied to improve the environment, not pork up lawyers.  What actually happens, the DOJ has their army of 25 lawyers (per case), the industry contracts their army of lawyers, and they spend years blowing billions of dollars in legal expenses.  If the USEPA proposed rational legislation to reduce emissions, industry would comply, modify their business plans and move ahead.  When an industry is being accused of Non-compliance, it will fight the accuser.

Obviously, we have different phylosophies on how to achieve a cleaner environment.  I prefer and efficient reduction in emission controls through market pressures and it seems you prefer the draconian command and control approach.  You will eventually realize, but never admit, the command and control approach will collapse the industrial backbone of our country.


51 active NSR lawsuits in the USEPA que.  My "billion dollars" in legal fees comment is a bit conservative; given the 51 active cases, it's likely much much higher.