Why Does the Kansas Attorney General Want That Coal Plant?

Topeka, August 31, 2012 – One of the most troubling aspects of the recent Kansas Supreme Court hearing in the case of Sierra Club versus Robert Moser, et al was underscored by the appearance of Assistant Attorney General Steve R. Fabert before the panel of seven justices on behalf of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE).  Fabert represented the defendant, Dr. Robert Moser, Gov. Sam Brownback’s 2011 appointee to head KDHE.  Fabert’s portion of the hearing raises an important question: Why is the state of Kansas – in the form of KDHE and the AG’s office – aligned with utility companies, one of them from out-of-state, rather than advocating for the health and environmental concerns of the people of Kansas?

This hearing represents the endgame of a long and tortuous effort by Sunflower Electric to build an 895 megawatt coal plant, known as Holcomb II, in western Kansas.  Most of the electricity from the proposed plant will be sold to Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, a Colorado cooperative, while the toxic damage from the plant’s carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, mercury, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter emissions will drift across the Kansas plains, contributing millions of tons of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere annually.  Not only is there no current need for the additional electricity in Colorado or Kansas, but the financing for the project appears shaky.

Fabert was one of three attorneys to speak in favor of the plant’s construction.  The other two represented Tri-State and Sunflower Electric.  His argument highlighted the most curious and without doubt contentious elements of this case – how the permit to build a new coal plant in Kansas came to be issued and the political pressure to build the plant.

The points of law in question in the hearing regarded the legitimacy of the permit issued by KDHE for the plant’s construction and the standing of the Sierra Club to bring suit.  Amanda Goodin, a Senior Associate Attorney for Earthjustice, described these issues in her argument on behalf of the Sierra Club.  The permit issued by KDHE, she said, failed to comply with specific requirements of the Clean Air Act and the Kansas Air Quality Act in limiting air pollutants, testing for noxious chemicals like nitrous oxide and sulfur dioxide, and using the best available technology to control emissions.  Her oral argument made no mention of the political gamesmanship of Brownback’s predecessor, Gov. Mark Parkinson, in late 2010 to approve the permit.

Yet Fabert tacked straight into those choppy waters.

Describing what he called “allegations of improper political influence” in the Sierra Club’s petition, he told the Court, “It is not clear to me that the issue has been abandoned.”

He was referring to sections of the petition that laid out the sequence of events leading up to the construction permit’s issuance.  The permit was first denied by then-KDHE Secretary Roderick Bremby in October 2007 and later approved in a compromise plan reached behind closed doors between Gov. Parkinson and representatives from Sunflower and the Kansas Legislature.  No one with scientific expertise on the dangers of coal-plant emissions was present in that room.  The meeting, announced abruptly and conducted quickly, took place while a legislative vote loomed that likely would have ended for good Sunflower’s bid to build the plant.

Still, a required public comment period on the plant lay ahead.

According to the Sierra Club’s petition, “On September 13, 2010, Sunflower directly contacted state legislators and executive officials via email to request that KDHE be urged to limit the public’s opportunity to comment on the permit and to expedite the permitting process.”

Three days later, a spokesman for KDHE announced that the public comment period would be limited to thirty days.  But despite the shortened comment period, nearly 5,900 public comments were submitted to KDHE.

Just over a month later, on Nov. 2, 2010, Secretary Bremby was fired.

Describing the hurried approval process at a public forum at Kansas City Kansas Community College on Feb. 10, 2011, Bremby said, “The process was not a benign, routine, pristine, pure process.  Unfortunately, there were abuses.”

“Look at the influence of lobbying dollars in this process,” he added.  “It’s staggering.”

The reason for the hurried comment period in late 2010 was clear.  Federal regulations for large-scale construction projects like the Holcomb II coal plant were about to change.  Further environmental study would be needed if the permit were delayed until new, more stringent guidelines became law.  Conservatives in the Kansas state legislature had no interest in seeing the EPA delay this plant, which they were promoting to the public as an economic boon.  The state went so far as to join a 21-state lawsuit to block the imposition of EPA regulations in Kansas.  Climate change deniers and conservative interests throughout Kansas, funded by Koch Industries, Peabody Energy, and other sources, have conducted an on-going assault on science and public health since Holcomb II was first proposed over five years ago.

Steve Fabert’s mission in the Kansas Supreme Court was to limit any potential damage the written petition might cause as the seven justices reviewed the case.  The background and sequence of events leading up to this hearing were laid out in the petition, which, although it had little discussion in the hearing itself, nonetheless formed part of the case the justices would review.

On the face of it, Fabert was there on behalf of his boss, Attorney General Derek Schmidt, to defend the impugned reputation of the Brownback and Parkinson administrations.  He even—in what can only be characterized as a “Hail Mary” pass—suggested that the state’s treasury would be threatened due to potential litigation over the alleged lack of due process in issuing the permit.  So, the justices should infer, financial jeopardy may result if the state has to answer for not following the law.  A strange way of justifying why the Kansas Supreme Court should rule in favor of the state—to protect the state against possible liabilities from its own prior alleged illegal action.

Perhaps most troubling and even surreal was to see Schmidt exercise his power as Kansas AG in service of building a coal-fired plant that is not needed for any other reason than to burn more fossil fuel and thus ensure the profitable down line cycle of digging up and selling and transporting coal.  It is not irrelevant to mention that as of this writing Schmidt has aligned himself with Secretary of State Kris Kobach in an effort to remove President Barack Obama’s name from the ballot in Kansas because of alleged doubts, they claim, about the authenticity of his birth certificate.  Such is the political culture in which the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (!) and the Attorney General’s office have now been turned into proxies for fossil-fuel interests.

If there were ever a doubt that the Brownback and Parkinson administrations had aligned themselves with the fossil-fuel industry and against the people they’re supposed to represent and protect in Kansas, this was surely the proof.

Bob Sommer serves as Chair of the Political Committee and as Chair of the Kanza Group.  His new novel, A Great Fullness, is slated for publication in 2013 by Aqueous Books.  He is currently writing a memoir about his late son and his family’s experience of ten years of American war.

Note: A version of this article was first posted at Uncommon Hours (www.uncommon-hours.blogspot.com).

Links of interest:

Audio archive of the hearing, Aug.  31, 2012.  Docket #105,493.  Petition for Judicial Review. Sierra Club, Appellant.  Robert V. Eye. v. Robert Moser, et al., Appellees.  Steve R. Fabert; James D. Oliver; W.C. Blanton.  http://www.kscourts.org/kansas-courts/supreme-court/archive/archived-arguments-August-2012.asp

Sierra Club Petition:

http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/Sunflowerpetition11411-rev.pdf

Court hearing report:

Scott Rothschild, “Health concerns raised at hearing on proposed coal-burning power plant,” Lawrence Journal World, Aug. 31, 2012, http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/aug/31/statehouse-live-health-concerns-raised-hearing-pro/

Bob Sommer, “How a bill became a deal: Kansas Gov.  Mark Parkinson’s ‘compromise’ with Sunflower Electric,” Uncommon Hours, June 25, 2009.  http://uncommon-hours.blogspot.com/2009/06/how-bill-became-deal-kansas-gov-mark.html

By Bob Sommer

 

Courtesy of you

The content of this website and the Sierra Club is driven by its citizen volunteers and supporters like you. Join us today and become part of America's largest environmental organization.

Join the Club
Or support our efforts financially:
Donate Now