DNREC UPDATE
February 28th, 2008 by Maria EvansRecently at a public hearing we learned that the Delaware Department of Natural Resources hands out permits that are, shall we say, “lax.”
Click HERE for the official transcript of the Indian River Power Plant’s water discharge hearing released by DNREC so you can read the word for word account of the meeting. I would really suggest reading it, it doesn’t take long at all.
I’m nominating this fish to be the mascot of the Delaware Department of Natural Resources
Now, we have less than 30 days to contact DNREC and voice our opinions about the permit they let expire 16 years ago and their new permit that allows a daily average of “1,803 pounds” of oil and grease and a daily maximum of 3,605 pounds of oil and grease out of one outfall. On top of that it allows for things like “60 pounds of copper” a day to be discharged, which DNREC admits is “toxic” to marine life…really, read the transcript.
We can also tell DNREC that since many of us enjoy fishing and crabbing in our local waters, we’d like the department in charge of protecting our state’s natural resources to be a little more concerned about the estimated 600,000 blue crab, 3.2 million bay anchovies, 543,733 croaker and 834,775 winter flounder the plant killed over a two year period.
Those are fish that people could be cursing at as they break their lines or if they’re lucky, they could be eating them if the plant would just get with the 21st Century, or even the last decades of the 20th Century….
The technology is available to lessen the impact of the plant on its surroundings, and if DNREC and/or NRG Energy would like to argue that they are too cost prohibitive, then they should tell us exactly how much the stuff costs and what the cost breakdown would be for the everyone on the grid who gets power from the plant, cause it ain’t just Delawareans (though Delawareans carry the full burden of the plant’s pollution).
And seriously, our county, state and federal governments need to hear from you, too. That’s why I’m posting some contact information. Just click on a name or copy an e-mail address and you’ll be on your way to venting at our dysfunctional government:
The Governor:
Delaware Department of Natural Resources:
DNREC Secretary John Hughes John.Hughes@state.de.us
Director, Division of Water Resources Katherine Bunting-Howarth Katherine.Howarth@state.de.us
This is the guy who is officially taking public comment about the water discharge permit at the Indian River Power Plant, so you can’t leave him out:
Hearing Officer:
Robert Haynes
89 King’s Highway
Dover, DE 19901
(302) 739-9039
Robert.Haynes@state.de.us
Delaware House of Representatives:
14th District Representative Pete Schwartzkopf Rehoboth Beach: Peter.Schwartzkopf@state.de.us
35th District Representative Benjamin Ewing Bridgeville
36th District Representative George Carey Milford
37th District Representative Joseph Booth Georgetown: Joseph.Booth@state.de.us
38th District Representative Gerald Hocker Ocean View: Gerald.Hocker@state.de.us
39th District Representative Daniel Short Seaford
40th District Representative “Biff” Lee Laurel: biff.lee@state.de.us
41st District Representative Greg Hastings Millsboro: greg.hastings@state.de.us
Delaware Senate:
18th District Senator Gary Simpson Milford: gsimpson@udel.edu
19th District Senator Thurman Adams, Jr. Bridgeville: Thurman.Adams@state.de.us
20th District Senator George Bunting, Jr. Bethany Beach: George.Bunting@state.de.us
21st District Senator Robert Venables, Sr. Laurel: Robert.Venables@state.de.us
Our Congressman:
Our Senators:
Senator Tom Carper
Senator Joe Biden
So,I tried to get a meeting with John Hughes the Director of DNREC…
“It’s our job to ensure these plants have the permits they need.”
Tuesday morning I called DNREC to talk to John Hughes, the Director, and I was sent to the Director of Water Resources, Katherine Bunting-Howarth. I asked her straight forward questions about the amount of…stuff…their permit allowed the Indian River Power Plant to spew from its water discharge outfalls.
“Its our job to ensure these plants have the permits they need.” - Katherine Bunting-Howarth, Director of Water Resources, Delaware Department of Natural Resources
(Again, the permit I was asking about was the replacement for a permit that expired 16 years ago, not, of course, that I’m implying that DNREC isn’t doing its “job”…).
I asked Bunting-Howarth to let me come up to Dover to interview her, and she indicated that she wanted Peder Hansen there, and we could possibly do it Wednesday at around 8:30 a.m. and that she would call to confirm the interview.
The confirmation call came from Joanne Wilson, a public information officer, who wanted to know what questions I was going to ask, and basically how the station was going to use the interview.
The last call I received was from Joanne canceling the meeting, with no idea when they could reschedule, or when they could get back to me.
Hopefully I’ll hear from them since many of our listeners and readers are the Indian River Power Plant’s neighbors. And really, just because DNREC didn’t post the information about the public hearing on their website or the State’s website, and just because the information that they DID send out had the meeting place listed at a Senior Center that doesn’t exist, that doesn’t mean DNREC is trying to keep information from the public.
Maybe they’d just rather give the interview to someone who doesn’t live near the plant and isn’t walking around in shock and disbelief after attending the public hearing…or maybe DNREC is just too darn busy making sure everything Delaware’s worst polluters want to do is perfectly legal….
More to come including some political reaction…
February 29th, 2008 at 10:26 am
Again, IRPP is working within the permits it has. If you want tighter regulations and then enforcement of THOSE regulations, then lobby for them. But don’t demonize IRPP for doing exactly what they are allowed to.
February 29th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
This post is EXACTLY about lobbying the government and DNREC to tighten up permitting for the Indian River Power Plant.
And again, if the power plant had kept itself upgraded with the latest technology, pollution wouldn’t be an issue at all. They didn’t. It is.
March 1st, 2008 at 5:48 am
If , ifs and buts were candy and nuts , oh what a party we’d have!!!!
Maria you are fond of using the fact that IRPP is the ” largest SINGLE polluter” in the state of Delaware. No argument there. But I wonder if you were to combine all of the fertilizer and other chemicals put onto all of the finely manacured lawns of all the second residences in the area that surely runs into the bay , would this rise to the level of pollution from the plant? And what about the amount of pollution from all of the idling car on route 1 in the summer time? You have the co2 , but also oil leaks from many of these vehichles and this gets washed into storm drains. Where is the righteous indignation against these polluters? Why are not the same people who are screaming against IRPP not appalled at the level of pollution created by these sources? If only people would take it upon themselves to stop using lawn chemicals and let their grass die, if only people would walk to the beach from D.C. or at least spend the money to keep their cars in good shape so as not ot pollute. But they don’t.
No I’m sorry , it seems all too obvious that the reason the IRPP is targeted is that it is a large target with deep pockets. The current attempt to show blame will only lead to law suits against them. And I believe that a lot of the people pushing this issue are in it for the glory of bringing down “BIG ENERGY” and making a name for themselves, and then their are those who have been lured by the sence of doing what they believe to be a good thing. But both groups are really only leading the state into a very bad situation, where the only losers will be the consumers.
March 1st, 2008 at 9:32 am
Are you serious? Tell me about the upgrades NRG Energy has spent money on since they bought the plant, Frank, and tell me about the fines they’ve paid. Give me some numbers, and tell me about the wonderful technology they’ve installed.
Do they spend more money on keeping the plant up to date with the latest pollution control technology, or do they spend more money filing lawsuits so they don’t have to comply?
I’m not looking for the “glory” of bringing down “big energy,” Frank. I’d like to not get cancer from the disgusting amount of pollution that DNREC allows NRG to dump on Sussex. I’d also like to eat the fish out of the bay without worrying about increasing my cancer risk, go figure.
You can try to deflect attention away from the single largest polluter in the state, but it’s just too late. Too many people like you in Sussex have been protecting the plant for long enough, and too many people like me are damn sick of it. I can’t think of one reason for anyone to make excuses for the plant or for DNRENC at this point. We know the toxins they release cause illness and cancer. We know the technology exists to drastically reduce their pollution.
They have to “mothball” their oldest two units by 2011 because those two units are so outrageously outdated, yes, all of this new technology out there and units one and two at Indian River pollute like they did when Elvis was alive. They could have upgraded those units instead. They sell the majority of their power into the grid, so it wouldn’t just be Delaware customers footing the bill for their upgrades like some people like to argue.
By the way, they’re taking those two units off line by 2011 and *cough* Sussex won’t be sitting in the dark the way some other Sussex Countian who carries water for NRG tried to claim the other day on Bill Colley’s show. We won’t be sitting in the dark, people, that’s a lie.
I’m not backing off of them, Frank, so I would suggest you get used to it, and I will relentlessly call for other Delawareans to wake up and address this problem.
March 2nd, 2008 at 5:32 am
Maria, in my previous post I put forth “TWO” possible reasons for why some people (didn’t mention you) have taken on this fight. One was for the glory of making a name for themselves by bringing down big energy, the second was from being lured by the sence of doing what they believe to be a good thing.
In your responce you defended (yourself) against only the first one ,the glory, Freudian ? perhaps.
I agree that when the two units are shut down we will not be in the dark, but we will pay more for the energy we get from the grid, even though we do not now get much from the plant and most from the grid , when you shut down the plant it makes us vulnerable and allows the power companies to take advantage of the situation. More so then they already do.
Look if you really listen to what I have said and read what I have written, we are not that far apart on the issue. What I despise is the tactics of some of these eco terrorist that mis state facts and refuse to see past bringing down the hated BIG ENERGY COMPANIES,who fail to see the consequences of their actions with no reguard for the effect they will have on the average citizen. They so often say they are doing it to protect the average citizen , but then it is always the average citizen that pays the price , and the eco terrorist moves on too their next sixties style crusade.
Also the eco terrorist will stir up emotions in the un informed minds of people either too busy or too lazy to research anything for themselves to drum up popular support for their cause.
Take the so called cancer cluster around the IRPP, now I have not read the study , but unless it only includes people who have lived there for their entire lives , or for at least a minimum of twenty years it is flawed. How many of those people brought pre existing conditions with them from Baltimore, D.C. , N.J., and other highly polluted areas, but were not diagnosed until they were living here? Does it allow for the fact that some of these people have a history of cancer in their family . And before you lable me uncarring on the issue of cancer let me tell you I lost my sister a little over two years ago to cancer. Yet these “FACTS” are used to stir emotions against the IRPP, and I believe also to set up a class action law suit in the future.
If you were listening the other day to Bill Collie’s show , and I know you were you heard me say shut them down until they comply, but be ready for the consequences. Also on your other article on this topic I said refuse to issue “ANY” permits to NRG until they are complient, so if that is carrying water for NRG then I guess my bucket has a couple of holes in it.
March 2nd, 2008 at 5:57 am
“But don’t demonize IRPP for doing exactly what they are allowed to. ”
That is a singularly currious point of view. I am allowed to go out and get drunk every night. Just because I am allowed to do that does not mean I should. IR is acting in an immoral fashion by its blatant disregard to the health and wellbeing of the environment and the people surrounding the plant.
March 2nd, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Frank’s next-to-last paragraph is worth more than a second thought or glance for he makes very valid points. I don’t doubt that a power plant, any power plant, contributes to pollution but there are other factors to be considered when looking at the general health and environmental problems. One such example could be the fogging and spraying by DnRec every single year. We aren’t willing to take them to task for the use of naled or resmerthin and yet those two products, while not as effective as we would like to think against mosquito-borne disease, create an entire subset of health problems from wildlife to humans. Their use, too, follows “acceptable guidelines” for usage but acceptable to and for whom? Despite our massive growth this area is…and in particular away from the major highways and byways…is predominantly rural so we have the mosquito squadrons and the crop dusters. I, for one, if we are going to put a power plant under a microscope, would like to see the same done for those other practices given little attention but which are deemed suitable for “acceptable use”.
The power plant…any power plant…is questionable, flawed, but as Frank pointed out there are many more variables affecting health of fish, fowl and humans statistics than we choose to consider.
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Excuse me for getting on my big picture soap box.
NRG and other electric generation companies have chosen to use their political clout to effectively deflect having to be held accountable for the burden they are on society, unlike the tobacco industry. Controlling medical costs means getting a handle on things that aggravate disease, and for special education, infant deaths, asthma, heart disease, and stroke cutting power plant emissions has to be part of the effort.
NRG and Conectiv have followed a capitalist road. Do as little as possible and make as much money as possible. It was estimated the pollution controls would increase the cost of production at IRPP, but not make the plant unprofitable. The difference between a coal fired plants cost of energy production and the $109.90/MW of the most recent DLP power purchase is huge. The plant under deregulation and with gas plants setting the price that power can be sold to the grid is a CASH COW. The cost of a cooling tower would not make the plant unprofitable.
If all 3 old units closed, unit 4 would still be there. The choice to invest or not in the facility is NRG’s. It is up to DNREC and the permits they issue to dictate how the plant operates and how much of a burden the facility will be allowed to be.
In the end, everything is about money and choices. The State can tax the public or enforce environmental regulations to improve the public’s health and the productivity of the fishery. I’d rather see DNREC actually protecting human health and the environment, rather than being taxed to support increasing medical insurance costs.
NRG will protest every step of the way. The choice for our government leaders is look out of the public interest or that of the capitalist corporation which must have the consent of government permits to operate. We know were several of our representative stand and will actively support those who support the public interest.
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:19 am
Pete says, ” I am allowed to go out and get drunk every night . Just because I’m allowed to do that doesn’t mean I should”.
Pete also says that IR is acting in an imoral way.
Well Pete, first people should give to charities, but just because they should but don’t, doesn’t mean the government can force them to. Oh wait they call that taxation don’t they.
Second and this is a big one , government can not and should never attempt to legislate morality. That way lies madness !
J. Austin says that NRG has followed a capitalist road . Do as little as possible and make as much money as possible. Well Mr. Austin what is wrong with that? You say it with such distain. Is it NRG’s practices that bother you or the amount of profit they make , would you be as upset about a hot dog cart if they were dumping their daily use of hot dog water in the river as long as their profits didn’t exceed that which you or some other arbitrary soviet decided was acceptable. Please excuse me , it maddens me when I here people putting down the system of capitalism , when it is what has built this country to the level we enjoy today. Your statement seems to be an attempt at class warfare, so please understand that to me it would seem that your socialism is showing.
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:08 am
Frank
I am not proposing that the government enforce morality. I have no clue why you would think that.
As far as morality goes, we all have a moral responsibility to act in a certain way. That is just called being civilized.
If you have a problem with being a moral person or operating a business in a moral fashion, I am sorry for you.
March 3rd, 2008 at 3:43 pm
[...] But, an even more illuminating case of ……….arrogance, perhaps? is this link provided by Maria Evans on her blog at WGMD. I wasn’t going to read the link, but after her second entreaty I said what the hell. Some exerpts you have to read in order to believe: [...]
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Socialism refers to a broad array of ideologies and political movements with the goal of a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community.
Get real Frank, and stop trying to label people.
I would chose not to be taxed to support a health system to pay for the illness caused an industry or product. I think the industry/product should be held accountable. Maybe, I’m an accountablist.
I’m probably as big a capitalist. I want to keep and grow mine. They there’s. I just need a business license. NRG in this case need permits and the consent of the government. Should government gave your and my resources to NRG? Let NRG continue to degrade the Bay and the fishery? I think NRG is doing fine on their own and don’t want to give them a penny. Just stop taking from me and the people of Delaware.
March 4th, 2008 at 5:06 am
Pete I get the idea that you would want to legislate morality because of your own words, “IR is acting in an immoral fashion by its blatant disregard to the health and well being of the enviroment and the people surrounding the plant “. Now if you feel they are acting immoral in what they are doing , and you are attempting to move government to stop them , then you must wish government to enforce “YOUR ” sence of morrality ? Again this way lies madness, because today it is you sence of morality tommorow its mine and the next day someone elses.
While we do hope to have moral people as our leaders , we do not want our leaders to impose their morals upon us. I do not believe that was ever the intention of the founders.
J.Austin , on the permit issue we agree , on enforcement we agree, on the fact that the government of Delaware has dropped the ball and allowed this to carry on for far too long we agree. I part ways with you and others it would seem on the tactic of labeling NRG as evil or immoral or greedy or any of the other lables used to stir the emotions of the un informed. As for the health problems of people who live around the plant , while some may ass u me that they are all caused by the plant , to me there would seem to be quite a few variables involved that could be leading to the same health problems , but aren’t as sexy as brining down “BIG ENERGY”.
March 5th, 2008 at 8:07 am
Lets cut thru the word game.
DNREC needs to inforce the law.
Discharge of Oil Prohibited
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act prohibits the discharge of oil or oily waste upon or into any navigable waters of the U.S. The prohibition includes any discharge which causes a film or discoloration of the surface of the water or causes a sludge or emulsion beneath the surface of the water. Violators are subject to substantial civil and/or criminal sanctions including fines and imprisonment.