“Toxic Coal Ash: Adverse Health Effects from the Puerto Rico Plant and Options for Plant Closure.”
On behalf of the groups listed in the attachment to this letter, we appreciate the opportunity provided by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation of the
1. Revoke all AES permits, including but not limited to permits issued under the Clean Water Act ("CWA"), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES"), Clean Air Act ("CAA"), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA"), Coal Combustion Residuals Rule ("CCR Rule"), AES' Siting Permit, among others and denial of any new permits.
2. Order the immediate and permanent shutdown of the AES Guayama plant.
3. Order the total and complete removal of the AES coal ash waste pile ("Agremax"/ "CCRs") and the clean-up of groundwater, the South Coast Aquifer and
4. Mandate the investigation, monitoring and decontamination of all areas impacted by the AES toxic coal ash waste, as well as mandate public health studies related to pollution from the AES operation, medical monitoring, treatment, and other types of reparations to persons and communities harmed by the AES operation.
5. Require cleanup of the recent spill of AES coal ash waste off the coast of
In addition to the closure of the AES coal-fired plant and the other requests, we urge this Committee, the Federal government, and the Puerto Rican government to require the
On
A simple mathematical exercise shows that PREPA has excess generating capacity of at least 1401 MW, not counting the 935 MW of the units that were not in service but are functional. AES generation was at 448 MW of a maximum capacity of 514 MW, which illustrates that, if the AES plant closes, PREPA still would have excess generation of 953 MW, well above the necessary reserve, without counting other units that could enter service and provide another 935 MW. In short, if AES closes,
System Operation and Maintenance Agreement with
A true understanding of three points: price, reliability, and resiliency leads to the conclusion that AES can be retired without any adverse impact to ratepayers, grid reliability, or resiliency.
Price: Multiple studies, cited in this testimony have shown the economic viability and benefits of rooftop solar and storage in
Reliability: PREPA's most recent dashboard of its system showed generation capacity, enough to meet peak load with the necessary reserve margin. The recent studies cited in this testimony demonstrate that a grid powered by rooftop solar and storage is more resilient, reliable and affordable than one powered by large, centralized fossil fuel plants.
Resiliency: AES depends on vulnerable long-distance transmission to provide power to northern
Basis of the Community, Environmental and Civil Society Demands
I. AES Has a Long History of Noncompliance with Environmental Laws and Regulations
The
In addition to contaminating groundwater at and around the AES plant site in Guayama, approximately 2 million tons of AES coal ash has been used as "fill" at dozens of locations mostly in southeastern
We have inspected ten sites in the municipalities of Arroyo, Guayama, and Salinas, where Agremax has been placed on the land, including residential areas and areas close to wetlands and surface water. It is our observation, based on these inspections and subsequent investigation, that the land placement of Agremax may constitute disposal at several of the sites inspected. The volumes observed placed on the land in some cases appeared to far exceed those we would consider necessary for the appropriate engineering use of the construction material for which Agremax was allegedly being substituted. In addition, several of the Agremax land placement sites appeared to have been abandoned, in that, despite the presence of signs indicating construction permit issuance, the slated construction projects had not been initiated and no construction equipment or activity was noted, while several sites appeared overgrown and had been used for the illegal deposition of waste materials.
The letter further states as follows:
The locations at which some of the deposition of Agremax has taken place overlie shallow sole source drinking water aquifers and are thus particularly sensitive to environmental harm. A 2007
As an example of one of the disposal locations identified, an
AES has repeatedly violated the Clean Water Act. AES has also repeatedly failed to comply with the orders of the
The Toxic Release Inventory ("TRI") published by the
AES has shipped hundreds of thousands of tons of its coal ash waste to Florida and most recently, a ship full of the coal combustion residuals capsized and spilled most of its cargo into the ocean, in the vicinity of
The AES Indiana Petersburg coal-fired power plant is one of four super polluter n7 coal plants located in
AES has also been sued and has settled cases involving coal ash contamination and personal injuries to residents of the
II. Environmental Justice
In addition to Executive Order 12,898, the
To secure an equitable economic future,
The Guayama region is an environmental justice community with high poverty rates and where the majority of residents are Afro-Puerto Ricans. Many residents in this region are descendants of enslaved Africans brought by the Spanish to toil in the region's sugar cane plantations. According to the Toxic Release Inventory this region suffers the greatest contamination of any region in
In 2016 and 2018, a team from the Program in Biostatistics and
The purpose of the study was to determine if the prevalence of respiratory and skin diseases was higher in the Guayama communities, compared to the Fajardo communities. Information was collected on sociodemographic characteristics, housing, vulnerability factors to environmental pollution, perception of environmental pollution, reproductive and respiratory health, skin and cardiovascular diseases, and cancer.
The most relevant findings of the epidemiological study carried out are the following:
* 1 in 3 people in Guayama has been diagnosed with respiratory disease.
* 1 in every 4 inhabitants of Guayama has been diagnosed with cardiovascular disease.
* Pediatric asthma is approximately 5 times higher in Guayama;
* Severe asthma in boys and girls is 6 times higher in Guayama;
* The prevalence of urticaria is 7 times higher in Guayama;
* The prevalence of spontaneous abortions is more than 6 times higher in Guayama;
* The probability of suffering from chronic bronchitis in the population over 45 years of age is 9 times higher in Guayama;
* The probability of suffering from pediatric asthma is approximately 6 times higher in Guayama.
The AES disposal of CCRs in the Guayama region in proximity to the plant and the AES CCR waste pile and operation of the plant imposes disproportionate public health risks to this environmental justice community. Scholars have documented the environmental and social injustices perpetrated by AES in the region. n12
AES transports its coal ash to the
III. AES Obtained Permits Based on Fraudulent Misrepresentations
As required by the CCR Rule, AES commissioned the Corrective Measures Assessment ("CMA") Report. n14 The Report lists clean up alternatives for the aquifer contaminated with toxic AES coal ash, known as Agremax", which AES has accumulated for years in an immense, exposed pile and left in direct contact with the soil, wind, and rain in the open air at its plant in Guayama,
AES opted to implement "Monitored Natural Attenuation" ("MNA") and to excavate 4-6 feet of contaminated soil, replace it with clean fill material, install a liner, and pipe storm water to a pond adjacent to the coal pile as the main components of the corrective measures. In furtherance of the corrective measures proposed, AES filed various documents with the Puerto Rico Permits Management Office ("PMO"), including an Environmental Assessment ("EA"). In the EA submitted by AES to obtain approvals and permits for the liner construction project, AES falsely alleges the AES-PR plant produces 454 Megawatts of energy. n15 In reality, AES currently has an installed capacity of 524 MW. n16 That is an extra 70 MW of generation capacity, with the corresponding amount of additional coal ash waste, than what AES reported to the PMO in its filings to the administrative agency.
Furthermore, the Environmental Assessment submitted by AES falsely alleges as follows:
The plant is classified as a zero liquid discharge process water plant. The AES-PR plant is considered zero discharge because it reuses its process waters and does not discharge process waters either to PRASA or to bodies of water. n17 (Translation provided)
Again, AES' allegations in the EA are false. In 2012, the
Based on the findings of the CEI (NPDES Water Compliance Inspection Report (CEI Report), dated
In the 2015 Administrative Order on Consent Docket No. CWA-02-2015-3102, ("AOC"),
Based upon an
Furthermore,
Therefore, it is clear that AES is not a "zero liquid discharge process water plant" and that AES knowingly submitted false information to the PMO both as to the water discharges and the generation capacity. Puerto Rico Law 161-2009, as amended, presumes the accuracy of permits, but "when there is fraud, deceit, deception, extortion, bribery or the commission of any crime in granting or denying a final determination or permit, or in such cases in which the structure poses a risk to the health or safety, or to environmental or archaeological conditions, the final determination so issued and the permit granted by the Permit Management Office, by the Autonomous Municipality with I to V granted hierarchy or by the authorized professional, must be revoked..." n23 All permits issued by PMO to AES should be revoked and pending permit applications should be denied.
IV. AES's Plan Does Not Meet Federal Requirements and Lacks Public Health Protection Measures
AES has admitted that the source of the groundwater pollution at the Guayama plant site is its massive coal ash waste pile. Pursuant to the CCR Rule, AES is required to control the source of the contamination and clean up the groundwater. n24 Instead of removing or containing the coal ash pile to prevent releases to air and water, AES's cleanup plan consists of "Monitored Natural Attenuation" and constructing a liner beneath the existing pile. Merely monitoring the pollution in the groundwater does not constitute cleanup. In addition, expert analysis of the AES liner construction project, concludes that the AES filings raise numerous questions relating to the liner components and their compatibility with the wastes that will be accumulated on the liner. n25 In addition, the expert noted,
Additional questions remain relating to the preparation of the sub-surface before placement of the liner including the extent to which previously contaminated soils will remain in place or how it will be verified that all contaminated soils are removed, especially given the very shallow depth to groundwater in the area. As noted, construction of the liner so close to groundwater cannot protect against contaminant migration and achieve adequate source control. And, lastly, no construction details, which are essential to ensuring that the liner will be effective, are provided. n26
The groundwater level according to AES's documents is 3 feet below the liner. n27 AES proposes to excavate 4-6 feet and replace the excavated contaminated soil or materials with clean fill, then place the liner and use the site to again pile its coal ash. AES's plan would violate the location requirements of the federal CCR Rule (40 CFR Part 257, subpart D). As noted in the attached Sahu Report: Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. [Sec.] 257.60(a), waste piles must be constructed with a base that is located no less than 1.52 meters (five feet) above the upper limit of the uppermost aquifer. Clearly, by AES' own admission, the liner does not meet this standard. AES has also failed to demonstrate that there will not be an intermittent, recurring, or sustained hydraulic connection between any portion of the base of the CCR unit and the uppermost aquifer due to normal fluctuations in groundwater elevations (including the seasonal high-water table), as required by the regulation. n28
Furthermore, AES proposes to use the CCR waste known as Agremax", as part of the liner system. Using the Agremax" as a project component defeats the purpose of the liner that is meant to establish a barrier between the CCRs and the groundwater.
In addition, there are inconsistencies and omissions concerning the testing of the CCR waste to be placed on top of the liner. Specifically, as explained in the Sahu Report, AES indicates that the concentrations of various metals are "zero." In fact, the reported concentrations for almost all of the metals such as arsenic, cadmium, copper, iron, mercury, nickel, and lead are shown as zero, meaning less than 0.02 ppm or 0.005 ppm depending on the metal. This is not credible and indicates that the analyses are likely flawed and therefore unreliable. It is concerning that this characterization of the wastes was used/might have been used for liner compatibility analysis.
In addition, the Sahu Report also notes that, "the reported levels of calcium, magnesium, and potassium from the 2018 tests are quite different and much higher than the levels reported in the liner compatibility studies" and that, "high levels of these constituents can adversely affect the clay in the GCL [liner]." n29 In fact, AES did not consider the constituents of concern in the liner compatibility tests. Therefore, the record is barren of any data that might indicate whether the proposed liner would be an effective barrier against leaching from Agremax".
AES's commissioned studies show that toxic CCR from its coal plant is polluting groundwater with lithium, selenium and molybdenum. The AES' commissioned studies on groundwater quality, conducted by DNA Environmental, confirmed that metals such as lithium, selenium and molybdenum have leached from the AES coal ash waste pile into the aquifer, its toxic concentrations exceeding 4-11 times the safety levels. n30
The 2017 Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report for the AES Guayama plant site, and subsequent reports required by the CCR Rule, indicate that the groundwater in downgradient wells, especially wells MW-3 and MW-4, is highly contaminated with coal ash pollutants. n31 When compared with the upgradient wells (MW-1 and 2), the levels of coal ash contaminants in the downgradient wells are orders of magnitude higher, depending on the contaminant. The direction of groundwater flow is away from the coal ash waste pile and towards the sea and a coastal community visible from the satellite photograph in the 2017 Report. These elevated levels of pollutants indicate the AES coal ash waste pile is releasing hazardous chemicals to the groundwater, which are flowing offsite. These toxic metals cause neurological damage, gout, and liver and kidney disease in humans. In addition, selenium is highly toxic to fish and other aquatic species, and it bioaccumulates, meaning it can permanently destroy wildlife populations as it moves through the environment over a period of years. The proposed AES liner construction would continue to pollute groundwater.
An
The 2015 Coal Combustion Residuals Rule mandates that companies that pollute groundwater above federal health standards must develop a strategy to prevent new releases to groundwater, ameliorate pollution, and restore the affected area to their original condition. 40 C.F.R. [Sec.] 257.96 (a). AES's selected remedy to allegedly comply with the CCR Rule, namely installation of a liner plus Monitored Natural Attenuation ("MNA"), fails most of the criteria and objectives of the applicable regulation, 40 CFR 257.97(b) and (c), because it does not entail removal of the pollutants in the groundwater. This is cause for concern because the direction of the flow of groundwater is moving away from the AES pile of coal ash waste towards the coastal community and then to the bay.
AES's plan is flawed for several reasons. The plan does not meet CCR Rule requirements because of the deficiencies in the research commissioned by AES and the limitations of the proposed solutions. These are serious deficiencies and make the cleanup plan inadequate to remedy past and ongoing contamination of groundwater, air, and (potentially) surface waters with CCR from the AES plant. The law requires AES to submit a plan to the community that meets federal standards.
The measures proposed by AES do not prevent continued contamination from the CCR waste pile. The installation of a plastic liner to reduce future groundwater contamination would provide, at best, only a temporary barrier to CCR contaminants. The proposed liner does not meet the standards of federal law for an engineered CCR landfill and would not be effective in the long run. The AES cleanup proposal will not stop ongoing contamination from CCRs. Contaminated runoff and toxic fugitive dust are not adequately addressed in AES' proposed measures.
AES does not propose long-term or truly effective solutions to avoid continuous toxic CCR contamination. AES's plan does not present an effective solution to prevent the continued spread of CCR via air, groundwater and/or surface runoff. Containment measures for CCR should include placement in secure storage silos with impermeable floors and walls, as well as engineering safeguards to contain CCR under severe wind and rain conditions in seismic-activity proof locations.
Furthermore, AES did not adequately investigate or characterize the nature and extent of the spread of contaminants from the CCR waste pile as required by the CCR Rule. n33 This is an essential first step to developing a cleanup plan. First, as a threshold matter, AES failed to characterize the CCR waste using the Leaching Environmental Assessment Framework ("LEAF"), n34 a battery of tests that accurately detects the leaching potential of coal combustion residuals. Second, AES failed to assess the extent of the CCR releases and their migration from the waste pile into adjacent wetlands and water bodies.
The EA indicates that the project site is a flood-prone area, with flood levels exceeding 3 meters. In addition, the EA documents the wetland area in the southwest area of the project site where AES proposes to continue to accumulate tens of thousands of tons of coal ash waste. Lithium variations above the drinking water detection level were detected in the extreme southwest of the property in the TW-C well, yet no explanation is provided for these data. n35 Furthermore, AES failed to survey the large wetland area just south of the plant to determine if there were heavy metals from CCR contamination in its sediment, surface water, or its underlying groundwater. Contamination of the wetland areas is likely to negatively impact aquatic life, birds, and crustaceans. Since the area is a habitat for game birds caught for human consumption, this can have adverse impacts on both public health and the local economy. Furthermore, the EA does not address the impact of proposed excavation on the aquifer water table, wetlands, and a flood-prone area.
AES also did not investigate CCR contamination in discharge areas of
Lastly, AES cited an outdated survey on groundwater use in Las Mareas, a community neighboring the contaminated groundwater to the south. The survey used by AES dates back to 2002. To ensure that all households obtain water from a public drinking-water pipe or if there are existing private wells in the area, AES must carry out a new survey.
Further, confirmation of the leaching of dangerous contaminants from Agremax" at the Guayama site highlights the risks from the use of 2 million tons of AES' Agremax" as fill throughout southeastern
V. AES's Plan Will Worsen Fugitive Dust Pollution
The AES coal ash waste pile grew to an accumulated amount of (at least) 487,000 tons of CCR in 2019, making it the largest CCR pile of any jurisdiction in
A
AES's plan according to the EA and its engineering consultants,
The movement of the AES coal ash waste would inevitably create clouds of toxic ash particles and migrate to nearby and densely populated communities such as Miramar, Santa Ana, San Martin,
The Siting Location issued by the
In the permit application documents, AES does not address compliance with Puerto Rico Law 5-2020, known as "Law to Prohibit the Deposit and Disposal of Coal Ash or Coal Combustion Residues in
VI. AES's Closure Announcement is Suspect
Recently, the AES Executive Vice President and COO,
Government regulations in different jurisdictions where AES operates require AES to retire 5 GW of coal-fired generation within 8 to 10 years. n42 Experts have noted AES's heavy debt burden and have called into question how AES would finance the new projects proposed. n43
Another example of the untrustworthiness of AES are the recent actions of the
As in
Conclusion
For the reasons summarized in this written testimony, we urge the Committee to procure the immediate closure of the AES coal-fired power plant in Guayama,
n1 Puerto Rico Low-to-Moderate Income Rooftop PV and Solar Savings Potential,
n2 See, Motion to Present Status and Final Progress Report and Request for Release of Order, page 23; Mocion-para-Presentar-Reporte-de-Estatus-v-Progreso-Final-v-Solicitud-de-Relevo-de-0rden-NEPR-AP-2020-0001-1.pdf
n3
n4 Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board 96-9-1, 96-39-1, available at http ://www.ac,remax. com/Downloads/R-00-96-2%20ENGLISH.pdf, and 00-14-2 available at http://www.agremax.com/Downloads/R-00-14-2%20ENGLISH.pdf R. 96-39-1 at 2.
n5
n6 This Barge Capsized and Leaked a Massive Stream of Toxic Coal
n7 Super Polluter
n8 AES Petersburg was identified by
n9 https://periodismoinvestigativo.com/2018/12/arroyo-barril-coal-ash-and-death-remain-15-years-later/
n10 See Biden Administration, Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad,
n11 See,
n12 Llorens, Hilda. "In
n13 https://datausa.io/profile/geo/folkston-ga#demographics
n14
n15
n16 Mocion para Presentar Reporte de Estatusy Progreso Finaly Solicitud de Relevo de Orden, Docket No. NEPR-AP-2020-0001,
n17 EA, supra, p.3.
n18 AES Consent Agreement and Final Order, Docket No. CWA-02-2012-3452,
n19
n20 AOC, pages 9-10.
n21 See
n22 Id.
n23 Law 161-2009, as amended, Article 9.10, 23 L.P.R.A. [Sec.] 9019i.
n24 40 C.F.R. [Subsec.] 257.90-98.
n25 See Comments on the Liner Proposed for
n26 Id.
n27 Note that this high level of groundwater was not previously disclosed by AES and, in fact, AES' 2019 Corrective Measures Assessment indicates a groundwater level greater than 10 feet below the ground surface. See Haley & Aldrich Report.
n28 Id.
n29 Id.
n30
n31 Id.
n32
n33 40 C.F.R. [Sec.] 257.95 (g) (1).
n34 An
n35 Haley & Aldrich Report, p. 100-110, https://www.aes.com/sites/default/files/2021-02/Corrective-Measures-Assessment-English.pdf (last visited
n36 DNA-Environment 2019 CCR Report (last visited
n37 CCR 2017 Annual Inspection Report AES Puerto Rico, p. 3,
n38 Id.
n39 Haley & Aldrich Report, p. 13 (section 4.3.1), https://www.aes.com/sites/default/files/2021-02/Corrective-Measures-Assessment-English.pdf (last visited
n40 https://caribbeanbusiness.com/aes-enters-retail-renewable-energv-market/7cn-reloadedM
n41 Id.
n42 https://seekingalpha.com/article/4434545-aes-corp-stock-transformation-opportunity-has-a-hurdle#comments
n43 Id.
n45 Id.
n47 Id.
Read this original document at: https://naturalresources.house.gov/download/2021_06_30_ruth-santiago_testimonypdf&download=1
Damage at Surfside condo tower got ‘significantly worse’ before collapse. ‘Grueling’ rescue effort continues
Insurance Technology Market in Europe in IT Consulting & Other Services Industry: Analysis of Key Drivers and Trends
Advisor News
- Wellmark still worries over lowered projections of Iowa tax hike
- Wellmark still worries over lowered projections of Iowa tax hike
- Could tech be the key to closing the retirement saving gap?
- Different generations are hopeful about their future, despite varied goals
- Geopolitical instability and risk raise fears of Black Swan scenarios
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- How to elevate annuity discussions during tax season
- Life Insurance and Annuity Providers Score High Marks from Financial Pros, but Lag on User Friendliness, JD Power Finds
- An Application for the Trademark “TACTICAL WEIGHTING” Has Been Filed by Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company: Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company
- Annexus and Americo Announce Strategic Partnership with Launch of Americo Benchmark Flex Fixed Indexed Annuity Suite
- Rethinking whether annuities are too late for older retirees
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- Wellmark still worries over lowered projections of Iowa tax hike
- Families defend disability services amid health cuts
- RANDALL LEADS 43 DEMOCRATS IN DEMANDING ANSWERS FROM OPM OVER DECISION TO ELIMINATE COVERAGE FOR MEDICALLY NECESSARY TRANS HEALTH CARE
- Trump's Medicaid work mandate could kick thousands of homeless Californians off coverageTrump's Medicaid work mandate could kick thousands of homeless Californians off coverage
- Senator Alvord pushes back on constant cost increases of health insurance with full bipartisan support
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News
- Gulf Guaranty Life Insurance Company Trademark Application for “OPTIBEN” Filed: Gulf Guaranty Life Insurance Company
- Marv Feldman, life insurance icon and 2011 JNR Award winner, passes away at 80
- Continental General Partners with Reframe Financial to Bring the Next Evolution of Reframe LifeStage to Market
- ASK THE LAWYER: Your beneficiary designations are probably wrong
- AM Best Affirms Credit Ratings of Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
More Life Insurance News