Plans to expand SRP’s Coolidge power station have hit a deadlock after utilities agreed to invest heavily in the neighboring Randolph area, but the deal has attracted some environmental activists, Industry groups and even SRP board members are against it.

On Wednesday, the Arizona State Business Commission will consider SRP’s request to reconsider its application for an environmental certificate for the Coolidge plant expansion. Residents of the nearby Randolph area protested the proposal over concerns it would harm their health, and the Works Council rejected the application last year, calling it “environmental racism.”

The commissioners then declined to revisit the case several months later. A Maricopa County Superior Court Judge upheld the decision after SRP appealed the denial, having long argued that expansion was necessary to meet growing energy demand.

And last week, the SRP filed a motion to amend its decision to deny last week’s expansion outlining significant concessions agreed by the utility to try to convince Randolph residents.

The SRP has agreed to reduce its expansion units from 16 to 12 units and invest more than $23 million in environmental mitigation and community projects, according to the filing. SRP also commits not to seek additional gas units at its Coolidge location in the future.

The new deal is backed by several business and development groups including the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, Valley Partnership, Coolidge Chamber of Commerce and Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce, most notably the adjacent Historic is a resident of Randolph, a small black community in to Coolidge Power Station.

Residents’ attorney Diane Post has submitted a letter to the commission saying residents will reopen the lawsuit and support the SRP’s motion to approve an amendment to the environmental compatibility certificate for the plant expansion.

Post declined to comment because the lawsuit is pending. Arizona State Capitol Times Randolph residents could not be reached for comment by the deadline.

But SRP’s concessions, including multi-million dollar investments in the community, likely helped the decision.

These concessions include $4 million scholarships over 20 years to Randolph residents and their descendants. $2 million to build the community center and $4 million over 20 years to operate. $50,000 to purchase land for the community. It will cost him $1.5 million to restore 60 homes, with a cap of $25,000 per home for him.

SRP will also pay for residential air monitors and will spend $500,000 on road paving.

But critics of the deal suggest other factors may be at play.

Another attorney, Autumn Johnson, who previously served as co-counsel for the Randolph residents, said in a letter to the Works Commission that Post “has stepped forward as a volunteer attorney on this matter” but will no longer seek compensation. He claimed that he would receive a large reward as part of the gold. new settlement.

Post will receive between $171,000 and $221,000 in legal fees as part of the settlement, SRP claims.

“A serious conflict of interest exists when Mr. Post has personal and financial interests that are very important in resolving a case that may conflict with the client’s interests,” Johnson wrote. .

The speed with which the new settlement proposals appear in the committee’s records is also of interest.

SRP board member Randy Miller said the new agreement is “substantially different” from proposals previously considered by the board. Miller said it wasn’t clear if the company had a legal obligation to return the proposal to the board, “but I think there should be at least some notice if the project cost is to be increased by $23 million.” said.

SRP spokeswoman Jennifer Schuricht disagreed. “The SRP Board has authorized and directed SRP Management to proceed with the Coolidge Expansion Project. I’m going,” she said in an email.

But Miller said the company should be asked to submit a new application for an environmental certificate to the works council’s power plant and transmission line siting committee rather than amending the old decision and moving forward. rice field.

The Commission, the body that considers CEC applications, approved the CEC against the original SRP proposal in a February 2022 vote of 7 to 2. The Works Commission reversed the decision later that year after Randolph residents and the Sierra Club asked the Commission to reconsider its approval. .

Sandy Barr, director of the Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon chapter, also agreed with Miller, seeing projects like the new expansion plan move forward quickly without having to submit it to the Route Location Commission. said no. He said the public and those interested in the case should be given the opportunity to cross-examine the SRP on the implications of the new proposals at a formal hearing.

“Without public hearings and an opportunity for people to investigate what the SRP is proposing and its implications, how can the Commission really evaluate the SRP?” Bahar said.

Schuricht said the SRP is against returning to the Route Location Commission.

“There is no question that the SRP and the state will need this power generation resource online as soon as it is operational. There is no reason to bring it to the public hearing,” she said.

The committee added the SRP’s request to change the original judgment to Wednesday’s agenda, just seven days after the SRP submitted its motion to change the decision.

Critics argue that this puts expansion opponents at a disadvantage.

“And that’s been part of the SRP problem all along,” Barr said. “They tried to short-circuit the process to block this with the board; with the committee; with the power plant and track siting committees. Everything was rushed, rushed, rushed.”

Miller also questioned the potential environmental impact of Coolidge’s new expansion plans. The SRP agreed to reduce the number of units from 16 to 12, but utilities are increasing the operating hours of the units, he said.

According to the motion, the SRP agreed to “limit the average annual capacity factor of 12 new units licensed under the revised CEC to 30%.”

But Miller said the original proposal told the board that the capacity factor would be between 5% and 10%. He also pointed out that SRP is installing two more new units at its Copper Crossing location in Florence.

Miller said 12 machines running at 30% have a greater environmental impact than 16 machines running at 10%. He took issue with SRP’s press release statement that the unit “runs only a few hundred hours a year.” At 30% capacity, Miller calculates that the unit will run 1,760 hours a year.

In response to Mr. Miller’s question, SRP Chief Executive Jim Pratt denied that SRP had promised to run the unit at 5-10% capacity under the old plan. “SRP management has informed the board of Coolidge’s historical capacity figures, and those figures have been in the range of 5% to 10%,” he said, noting that SRP has had a 10% increase at past meetings. It said it specifically refused to agree to the restrictions.

Pratt also disputed Miller’s claim that the new project would have a greater environmental impact. He wrote that regulated emissions are limited on an annual basis by aviation permits administered by Pinal County, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, and the Environmental Protection Agency. “In other words, start/stop differences, run times per start, ramp speed, load run level are all constrained by the same overall permit requirements,” he wrote.

And SRP spokesman Schuricht said Miller was conflating the issue of “capacity limits as a condition of CEC issuance and the normal capacity factor expected at each facility.”

She said there was never a factor limit on the project prior to the deal, and new units are not expected to reach the 30% maximum specified in the contract with the Randolph residents. “The capacity factor limit is only a maximum usage limit. Normal operation of the power plant is expected to be well below that limit,” Schuricht said.

But Barr said the ups and downs resulting from the uncertainty of the impact of the expansion in its current form are precisely why the SRP should be required to restart the process and undergo a “full review”. .

“The commission can’t do its job without bringing the matter back to the public hearings,” Barr said. “These are significant changes for anyone’s book.”

>