UPDATED: Buck Steam Station a candidate for coal ash excavation
Published 1:30 pm Thursday, December 17, 2015
- JON C. LAKEY / SALISBURY POST An November 2010 aerial photograph of the first holding basin that was being used to hold the by products from the coal fired Buck Steam plant seen in the background. Currently the plant is offline and no longer discharging into the basin.
Updated Dec. 17 at 3:18 with comments from DEQ
Buck Steam Station’s coal ash ponds would be excavated and moved to lined pits under draft recommendations from an internal document released Thursday.
A number of coal ash ponds across North Carolina, including Buck Steam Station, are classified as high priority, according to the document released Thursday by the Southern Environmental Law Center. The organization says it received the document as part of discovery for a state lawsuit involving coal ash facilities across the state.
The internal document is dated Nov. 30. North Carolina’s Department of Environmental Quality is scheduled to finalize recommendations by the end of 2015.
With a high priority ranking, Duke Energy would be required to excavate Buck Steam Station’s coal ash ponds, according to the 2014 Coal Ash Management Act. It isn’t immediately clear whether the draft recommendations will mirror the final rankings for coal ash facilities across the state.
In a statement about the draft recommendations, DEQ said the document “only represents a snapshot of the complicated scientific analysis” needed for the final rankings.
“It would be irresponsible and premature to make final assumptions before Duke has provided DEQ with all of the data it needs,” DEQ said in an emailed statement. “The SELC is attempting to corrupt the process by releasing an early draft out of context and ignoring the most recent data. It also does a disservice to the DEQ employees who are working hard to finalize the prioritization list, which will be released by Dec. 31 in keeping with the coal ash management law.”
Duke Energy spokeswoman Erin Culbert said the company hadn’t seen the recommendations prior to Thursday. Culbert declined to comment specifically about the recommendations. She said it’s not appropriate for the company to respond to a draft internal document. The document “predates a lot of information” Duke has provided to DEQ, she said.
Asked about Buck Steam Station and other high priority sites, Southern Environmental Law Center senior attorney Frank Holleman said his organization would be satisfied with the draft recommendations if they were implemented.
“Assuming (DEQ) sticks with the determination of its staff, the answer would be yes,” Holleman said. “We have felt all along it’s a matter of common sense that ash needs to be safely stored.”
Contact reporter Josh Bergeron at 704-797-4246
