Page images
PDF
EPUB

of the water. Sudden increases in water temperature may in some cases damage aquatic life and limit recreational opportunities. The effects of gradual temperature build-ups on the other hand are widely debated. Clear answers concerning their environmental significance are not yet certain. It is definite, however, that any sustained increase in water temperature is a matter to be closely examined and evaluated in the planning and approval of power plant sites. Advance study and public disclosure of these problem areas will not only assure a greater possibility of properly resolving siting problems but will foster timely construction as well. The Electric Power Environmental Policy Act of 1970, with its centralized and comprehensive method of certifying power plant sites and facilities and its requirement for long-range industry planning and disclosure, promises to effectively serve these objectives.

Air. Another environmental problem of major importance in selecting and operating fossil-fueled power plant sites is the pollution of the air. It has been estimated that almost 50% of the oxides of sulfur and 25% of particulate matter and oxides of nitrogen emitted in the United States originate in power plants. By any measure these are substantial percentages. The present scarcity of low sulfur fuels and the indicated shortage of developed natural gas reserves compound these problems and will continue to do so pending the development of more complete commercial sized pollution control equipment. In our judgment this requires a careful balancing of environmental standards, and the satisfaction of the Nation's electric needs from available utility hardware and fuels.

The development of new technology has made considerable inroads on the air pollution problem and much more needs to be done. In the meantime, considerable planning and cooperation are needed between the electric utility industry and all levels of government to site and operate plants in a manner that will assure adequate and reliable energy while maintaining healthful air quality levels. The Act proposed by this Commission would aid these objectives through the certification and planning processes.

Nuclear power plants are regarded as a future source of substantial amounts of electricity. Their environmental characteristics are open to discussion, but these plants do not present the serious air pollution problems just discussed. They do contribute to concerns about thermal pollution. Additionally, atomie power plants have given rise to a serious debate among scientists and other experts regarding the dangers of radioactive contamination. Regardless of the merits of either side of this debate, it is obvious that the peculiar problems of nuclear installations require careful consideration when sites are selected. Long-range planning with full public disclosure are particularly important in an area so charged with controversy. The procedures of our proposed bill would meet these considerations.

THE CRITERIA OF NEPA

These basic data and background information are essential to a proper evaluation of the environmental significance of the siting of bulk power supply facilities and any legislative proposal to cope with the siting problem. They are also essential in any attempt to analyze such legislation within the framework of the criteria enumerated in § 102(2)(C) of the NEPA. The criteria listed in that section of the NEPA do not lend themselves as readily to an analysis of the environmental impact of legislation such as this Act as they do to individual projects or specific Federal problems. To the extent the NEPA criteria are applicable, we believe the following points are relevant:

(1) Environmental impact of the proposed action

This bill is designed to minimize environmental problems associated with the construction and operation of bulk power supply facilities. Its environments! impact will be beneficial in that the location, operation and nature of all bulk power supply facilities will be planned and disclosed far in advance of construction, thus allowing full discussion and resolution of the issues and environmental problems involved in various alternative power plant sites. Also, centralized and comprehensive EHV transmission approvals will be carried out at the appropriate governmental level in accordance with environmental guidelines drawn up by the Council on Environmental Quality. This approval process will promote thi interconnection of systems and regions. Certification of facilities pursuant to this Act will provide that the facility approved will be constructed and operated in accordance with applicable Federal, State, regional and local laws governing ar land, water quality and environmental considerations. Section 10 of the b requires that all certificates of site and facility be conditioned on compliance with such laws. Section 16 of the bill provides strict penalties for failure to comply.

(2) Adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented

We do not envision the possibility of any adverse effects resulting from the enactment of this proposed legislation. On the contrary, adoption of this bill, in our opinion, will only serve to emphasize the importance given to environmental problems in the resolution of power plant siting problems and the location of transmission rights-of-way, thus enhancing the prospects for the full and correct resolution of these problems.

(3) Alternatives to the proposed action

Broadly speaking, alternatives to this bill are (1) the status quo, viz., no bill at all or (2) some other legislative approach. We believe a clear and compelling need for legislation in this area has been demonstrated. Current procedures for the authorization of power facilities are both inadequate and diffused among various agencies of government. This situation is clearly unacceptable.

After full evaluation of other possible legislative approaches to the dual problems of providing adequate and reliable electric supplies and preservation of environmental values we are convinced that this bill provides the best course of action. Joint activity in the field by Federal and State or regional governmental entities in cooperation with advance industry planning characterizes the approach we advocate. The role we envision for the Federal Power Commission as Federal certifying agency recognizes this Commission's fifty years of experience in power planning and licensing. Our responsibility for administering the comprehensive planning mandate of Part I of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 803(a)) with respect to hydroelectric licensing has required our careful evaluation of environmental concerns over a long period of years. The Commission would undertake to exercise these same concerns under the proposed legislation in cooperation with the Council on Environmental Quality and other interested public and private agencies and groups in assuring the protection of the environment in the siting of bulk power supply facilities.

(4) The relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity

In our judgment the enactment of this proposed legislation will best protect the long-term needs of our energy-dependent economy by assuring adequate electric supplies in the years to come with minimal environmental degradation. For the short-term, this legislation is designed to facilitate the timely construction of bulk power supply facilities needed in the immediate future while providing comprehensive environmental protection. Failure to adopt this needed legislative remedy can only result in an aggravation of existing electric power problems in the immediate future without any offsetting environmental or economic advantages. For the long-term, it has become obvious that without the long-range planning this bill will require, and the streamlined but more efficient governmental licensing authority it will create, construction of needed facilities will not advance on schedule in the years ahead.

(5) Any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented

This bill in no sense commits our national resources. Rather, it offers the best workable framework in which our resources can be both developed and preserved for the dual objectives of adequate and reliable electric services and environmental protection.

We believe that it is essential to remember that the electric power industry has the primary responsibility to provide this Nation with an adequate supply of electric energy. If that responsibility is to be met, it has become increasingly clear that protection of the environment is a major factor to be considered in industry's planning. As many utility managements are recognizing, preservation and where possible, enhancement of the Nation's natural environment is a duty and an obligation of the industry. A balanced response is needed-one which accommodates environmental concern with the need for additional utility services. This legislation will enable industry and government to strike the balance that is needed.

With adequate protection of the environment at the plant sites and along the transmission rights-of-way, electrical energy is an environmental asset. At the point of consumption it is a clean energy supply. This is especially important in that the major centers of power consumption coincide with our population and industrial concentrations.

Furthermore, electric energy is a vital contributor to the success of a wide variety of other essential environmental efforts. Much of the apparatus needed to control air and water pollution is electrically powered, sewage treatment plants being a prime example. Another example would be mass transportation systems which are taking on increasing importance and also depend on electric energy. It is our opinion, therefore, that enactment of the Electric Power Environmental Policy Act is required by the public interest if we are to have the electric energy we so clearly need while providing maximum protection to our environment.

[graphic]

Coal storage yards, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway, Newport News, Va.,

September 1970.

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]
[graphic][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]
« PreviousContinue »