1. BIOMASS EXAMPLE
WORST CASE IMPACTS
“KLAMATH BIOMASS”

2. INTRODUCTION AND OBJECITVE
• ROOT PROBLEM CAUSE AND STRATEGY TO
MINIMIZE
• Inadequate and misinterpreted state and county laws allows:
• --Conditional site use on private land anywhere
• regardless of adverse impacts (citizens/environment)
• --Rulings that there are no significant impacts
• No laws requiring evaluation of impacts
• Impacts outside the council’s jurisdiction
• Agency/DOJ Interpretation of no significant impacts
• Last resort solution: legal mandamus action and injunctions to force
agencies to protect citizens/environment

3. • EXAMPLES OF WORST IMPACTS:
• SITE LOCATION –WORST IMPACTS
• --Upwind—homes/non-attainment area
• --Sandwiched between residential/wildlife area
on wetlands
Solution: Elimin. bad sites up front (Gov’s streamlining plan), state laws, country
ordinances require protection of citizens and wildlife from adverse impacts

12. PLANT AND TRUCK POLLUTION WILL ADD TO
EXISTING EXTREME HEALTH PROBLEMS
• --Residential area vulnerable
• --Community vulnerable
Solution: State laws/county ordinances require
protection of public health

15. PLANT/TRUCK POLLUTION WILL ADD TO EXISTING
POOR AIR QUALITY CONDITIONS IN BASIN
--Adjacent neighborhood propensity to attract
toxic pollution
--Worst air quality in state and nation and recent
Clean Air Act violations/ sanctions
Solutions: Sanctions and precedent cases will not allow plant in basin

18. • AIR QUALITY IMPACTS GREATER THAN PERMIT
• CAUSED BY INADEQUATE AND MISINTREPRED STATE AIR QUALITY
LAWS (ACDP)
• --Do not protect public health
• --Allow significant increase in toxic pollution in basin and no offsets
• --Allow underestimated emissions
• --Unaccounted for emissions and no modeling of
cumulative emissions
• --Inadequate emission controls and DEQ
oversight
• Solution: Enforce Clean Air Act laws, new precedent case

19. UNACCOUNTED V PERMITTED EMISSIONS
PERMITTED
EMISSIONS
UNACCT'D FOR
EMISSIONS
PERMITTED EMISSIONS UNACCOUNTED FOR EMISSIONS (Worst conditions)
--ACDP Permit (site only) --Excess site (malfunctions/variability's-open loop sys.)
(Weak permit—omissions, miscalculations
--In Adjacent neighborhood
-Diesel and ash trucks
Source: SORO expert reports -Chip pile fires and odors, etc.
-Other truck influxes (log and gravel)
-Other plant’s emissions drift

21. --OTHER IMPACTS
Improper interpretation of state and county
laws allow:
• --Adverse impacts to fish and wildlife and endangered
species
• --Other impacts and Seismic risks
• --Long run negative benefits
Solution: Mandamus legal action

22. • STATUS IN SITING PROCESS
• --STATUS
• --Contested case—stay
• --History--3 years in the siting process
• --RULING
• --DOJ findings—state law compliance
• --SORO conclusion—inadequate protection of
citizens, community, fish and wildlife and environment

23. FUTURE STRATEGY
• --Subpoena evidence
• --Conditions
• --Litigation and injunctions

24. Litigation and injunctions:
Stay motions and injunctions while agencies rule on
SORO petitions:
--Subpoena expert evidence into contested
case record
--Petitions
--Petition to EPA Moratorium for biomass projects
--Petitions-EPA not to exempt Clean Air Act
violations
--Mandamus action-enforcing EFSC responsibilities
--EPA oversight requests
--EPA petition to have DEQ recall ACDP permit (Evaluate
Permit obsolescence and errors and omissions new
precedent cases* and Clean Air Act violations and
sanctions, DEQ lack of public participation processes)
--Injunction to stop ground breaking until agencies rule on
SORO motions