LJWorld.com / Judge denies dismissal of Sierra Club lawsuit

Archive for Monday, July 21, 2008

July 21, 2008

A federal judge Friday refused to dismiss a Sierra Club lawsuit related to the proposed coal-fired plants in southwest Kansas.

Hays-based Sunflower Electric Power Corp. and a Colorado partner have proposed building two 700-megawatt coal-burning plants near Holcomb.

Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ administration has rejected the project based on concerns about climate-changing carbon dioxide emissions.

Sunflower is fighting that decision in state courts.

Meanwhile, the Sierra Club has filed a lawsuit against the federal Rural Utility Service, which gave its permission to Sunflower Electric for the project. The Sierra Club said the federal government should first do a study on the environmental consequences of the project.

On Friday, the federal government sought to dismiss the lawsuit, but a district court judge refused that motion.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

21 July 2008 at 9:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

DougCounty (Anonymous) says…

A more complete, better article from subscription site www.eenews.net:

Judge refuses to dismiss coal plant expansion case (07/18/2008)
Katherine Boyle, E&ENews PM reporter

A federal judge refused today to toss out a lawsuit by environmentalists over government approval of loan restructuring that allowed the expansion of a coal-fired power plant in Holcomb, Kan.

The Sierra Club argued in the District Court for the District of Columbia that the federal Rural Utilities Service was required by law to weigh the environmental consequences of and possible alternatives to the planned expansion of the Sunflower Electric Power Corp. plant before approving the restructuring.

The Justice Department's Brian Toth said the case should be dismissed because the Rural Utilities Service merely approved the deals and did not loan Sunflower money for the expansion. Approvals are not subject to National Environmental Policy Act review, he said, adding that it was in the government's interest to approve the company's loan restructuring to ensure it paid off its government debt.

But Nick Persampieri, an Earthjustice attorney representing the Sierra Club, argued the government had subordinated its lien to allow private financing for the new construction.

Both sides differed over whether the restructuring approval constituted a major federal action, with the Sierra Club saying it did and the government arguing it was “minor.”

Judge Emmet Sullivan said he was troubled that no environmental impact study was required. “This is more than restructuring debt,” he said. “This is restructuring debt with new construction going on.”

…The group has until Sept. 8 to amend the complaint. The government will have until Nov. 10 to add documents to the administrative record. Earthjustice will be able to file objections until Dec. 19, and the government must respond by Jan. 21.

The judge has scheduled a status hearing for Feb. 19, 2009.

Sullivan suggested that in the meantime, the Sierra Club could present a settlement option to the government.

But Persampieri said a settlement is not likely. “It's kind of all-or-nothing,” he said, noting that the government would have to agree to an environmental impact statement.

“The government has indicated they're not interested at this point,” he added.
21 July 2008 at 11:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Andrew Stahmer (Andrew Stahmer) says…

I feel so DIRTY! I'm actually (just partially) on the side of the environmentally deranged Sierra Club. Coal burning plants need to be part of our past…nuclear and other alternative energy sources are our future! (So, you see me and Sierra part ways very quickly…whew…that makes me feel a little better!!) The Sierra clubs, and radicals similar to them, have blocked the usage in the U.S. of technology that would allow spent fuel rods (your 'nuclear waste') to be eliminated by 95%!! Now why would they do that!? Perhaps they want nuclear completely vilified? They don't want you to know about that technology (called 'Urex') they never mention that nuclear plants put NO c02 in the air…they don't mention that coal burning plants do put out a significant amount of radioactive material through those smokestacks. Educate yourself on today's nuclear power. If I hadn't … I'd still be living in the 70's fear of the evil, terrifying, no advantage nuclear!! yikes…