Home » News » Hyperion, foes argue with state’s critique of appeals
News
Hyperion, foes argue with state’s critique of appeals
News Articles | Sioux City Journal | Michele Linck | March 04, 2010
Read the full article on the originating site
PIERRE, S.D. -- The state of South Dakota this week told opponents of the oil refinery planned for Union County and Hyperion Refining, the company planning to build it, that their objections to the air quality permit granted to Hyperion in August are without merit.
Hyperion challenged only one requirement in the permit: a carbon monoxide emission standard so low, it said, that it couldn’t be met consistently. In Monday’s court filing, written by Assistant Attorney General Roxanne Giedd, the state said it still supports the lower CO level it is requiring for the refinery’s large process heaters.
She said the DENR is relying on air quality permits for several other refineries — Bay Town Refinery, Cenco Refining and Big West Refining, as well as a “preponderance” of other evidence that indicate the limit is achievable.
However, Hyperion disagrees with those examples. The DENR air permit wants the CO level at 0.007 pounds per million Btus of carbon monoxide. Hyperion says 0.010 pounds per million Btus is reasonable.
Colin Campbell, a consulting engineer with RTP Environmental, said the state’s examples are without merit: the first refines fuels other than oil and has had its permit changed to allow a 10-fold increase; the second’s permit was for an expansion that was never built, and the third was to reactivate a long-dormant refinery, which also never happened, he said. In addition, Campbell said, those refineries were never built with process heaters, which Hyperion’s plan calls for.
Both appeals were filed in January. Hyperion and the opponents — Sierra Club, Save Union County and Citizens Opposed to Oil Pollution, referred to jointly as Citizens — have until April 15 to file their responses.
Citizens rebutted
Giedd took many of the objections of the Citizens to task. She said their demand for an Environmental Impact Statement called for an investigation far broader in scope and subject matter than the board has jurisdiction over, and said the DENR properly decided not to conduct one.
In addition, she wrote, Citizens presented no evidence or legal requirement that would justify requiring Hyperion to model effects for pollutants not covered in the Department of Environment and Natural Resources’ air permitting program, such as carbon dioxide.
She wrote further that Citizens lacked any evidence that Hyperion was unable to prepare a proper startup, shutdown and maintenance plan, or other operating plans, as it charged. In addition, Giedd noted, those plans will be subject to public scrutiny and comment later, when they are submitted.
Her filing also shot down opponents’ contention that air cooling is “acceptable and feasible” for the refinery’s cooling towers, and said that even their own witness, William Powers, admitted in sworn testimony that it wouldn’t be adequate.
The document said Hyperion correctly chose to use Sioux Falls for its air quality modeling rather than Sioux City because Sioux City sits in the Missouri River Valley, which affects its air quality and weather data more than the Big Sioux River affects Sioux Falls’.
‘Objections are valid’
Save Union County spokesman Ed Cable said Wednesday that he still believes opponents’ objections to the air permit are valid.
“The attorney general can have an opinion and the court can overturn it,” he said. “The majority of our case will relate the fact that the DENR and the attorney general’s office, in reviewing it, are not consistent with the Clean Air Act. We’ll have numerous case law findings supporting our positions as well as EPA findings.”
Hyperion plans to build a $10 billion, 400,000-barrel-per-day oil refinery and energy center just north of Elk Point, S.D.
Tagged with: south dakota, hyperion, refinery, save union county
