Sales and Marketing
Ever-Ready Glass
Glass Sales Health Care
BENSON HOSPITAL
RESPIRATORY THERAPIST Health Care
RLM Services, Inc.
Orthopedic Assistant-CMA

Haze will always be an occasional problem at the Grand Canyon, whether or not the nearby Navajo Generating Station is forced to install expensive equipment to reduce emissions.

Since there is no way to reduce haze caused by nature or man-made activities far away, we believe it would be unwise for the federal Environmental Protection Agency to mandate stricter controls on the nitrogen oxides and particulates produced by the coal-burning station.

The EPA is considering imposing new emission controls as part of the Clean Air Act. The agency is expected to issue a preliminary ruling in the next few months. That ruling may become final sometime next year.

Anyone who cares about the environment wants clean air. This is especially true at the Grand Canyon, one of the world's most visited natural treasures.

However, when it comes to the Navajo Generating Station, located about 12 miles east of the Canyon in Page, there are other issues that make safeguarding the station as important as protecting the Canyon. The station is vital because:

• It provides many jobs and is the economic lifeblood of the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe. The station and the Kayenta Coal Mine in Northern Arizona together directly employ nearly 1,000 tribal members.

• It not only provides electricity to the state, but sales of excess power from the plant are used to pay back the construction costs of the Central Arizona Project. The state has 40 years remaining on its repayment plan and revenues from the station contribute about $22 million a year toward that goal.

• Most importantly, the station is the main power source for the CAP. The CAP uses 2.8 million megawatt hours a year — enough energy to power 200,000 typical Arizona homes for a year — to pump 500 billion gallons of water uphill from Lake Havasu to Phoenix and Tucson. Ninety-five percent of that power comes from the station.

Simply put, without the Navajo Generating Station, Tucson and Phoenix would not be in a position to thrive because they wouldn't have access to a renewable water source. CAP water replenishes local water tables and reduces Arizona cities' reliance on groundwater.

We believe the EPA should consider all factors before making a ruling, as Gov. Jan Brewer, Sens. Jon Kyl and John McCain and Rep. Raúl Grijalva have asked.

CAP General Manager David Modeer told the Star's editorial board last week that his agency is already voluntarily undertaking a $45 million to $50 million project to install lower-level pollution controls.

The EPA is considering mandating a different, more expensive technology called Selective Catalyic Reduction, or SCR, that would reduce emissions 50 percent better than the lower-level technology being installed. However, SCR comes with a much higher price tag, which Modeer estimated at anywhere from $800 million to $1.2 billion

"Our concern is that if the EPA goes to that (SCR) requirement, the economic viability of the Navajo Generating Station comes into question," Modeer said.

In addition to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the station is owned and operated by five utilities, including Tucson Electric Power Co. Modeer said the prospect of having to invest in expensive emission controls might discourage those utilities from continuing to operate the plant.

If that were to happen, he said, the CAP would have to buy electricity on the open market, which would be two to three times higher than what it costs to operate the station. That, in turn, could raise water rates for cities, farmers, Indian communities and other ratepayers who use CAP water. The CAP would also lose a huge source of funds — the excess electricity — to pay back the federal government.

Rob Smith of the Arizona chapter of the Sierra Club, which is advocating for the stricter emission controls, said he doesn't believe claims that the plant may have to close.

"The threat of closure is a red herring," Smith said. "It's an argument that is only being made so that the EPA will back off. The costs can be spread out over a long period of time over many ratepayers, not only in Arizona but in Las Vegas and Los Angeles."

Costs aside, all sides seem to agree that haze won't disappear from the Canyon no matter what is done.

Smith said the station's emissions really only come into play during the winter months when the wind blows from east to west. Even then, it's not an everyday occurrence.

Haze at the Grand Canyon can be caused by many things — smog floating in from Los Angeles or Las Vegas, forest fires in Arizona and California, and even dust thrown up by the wind.

Kris Mayes, chairwoman of the Arizona Corporation Commission, said the EPA might be wise to give the CAP and the station a break.

"I would like to see the EPA prove up the science a little more," Mayes said. "It hasn't proven whether the proposal made by the utilities at Navajo won't work effectively."

Modeer and Brewer have argued that while the SCR technology is better at reducing emissions, that won't necessarily make skies visibly clearer to the naked eye. They say the reward won't be worth the cost.

We agree.

We also believe that sooner or later, the Navajo Generating Station is going to have to do a better job reducing its emissions. It may or may not be hit with new haze regulations, but it will likely be affected eventually by federal cap-and-trade guidelines .

So while we believe the EPA should let the Navajo Generating Station continue the emissions-control project it has already begun, this is no excuse to sleep on the issue. The station is important to Arizonans, but it too must clean up.