June 12, 2007

By Russell Stigall

Frontiersman MAT-SU - Glenn Highway Gravel Pits South will be the subject of about $1 million worth of tests to see if the location is suitable for 200 megawatts of new electric generation.

That half of Matanuska Electric Association's 's proposed generation will come from a coal-fired power plant has sparked opposition among MEA member-owners and Mat-Su Valley residents. Four members of MEA's board of directors voted Monday to accept the site as the co-op's preferred location. Board members Lois Lester and Peter Burchell voted against the measure.

The site was preferred by 2,381 of MEA's member-owners in a recent advisory ballot - about 4.5 percent of the co-op's 52,000 member-owners. Overall voter response equaled about 12 percent of MEA member-owners, according the MEA's Web site. The winning site, located at Mile 37 of the Glenn Highway, is bordered by the Bradley-Kepler Lakes system to the north, Palmer Hay Flats Game Refuge to the south and the Matanuska River to the east.

The next favorite site is another gravel quarry located north of the gravel pits south site across the Glenn Highway. Third most preferred is the Pittman Gravel Pits site located off the Parks Highway near Pittman Road. MEA will conduct feasibility tests on all three sites.

The South Glenn site obtained recent notoriety as one of a few proposed sites for the Mat-Su medium security prison. The prison met strong resistance from No Palmer Prison, a group of concerned residents living nearby.

Of the 5,366 votes MEA received to guage location preference for the new power generation plant, 1,067 were counted as invalid. Board director Peter Burchell asked about the primary reason for invalidating the ballots. Norma Benson, an official representing the election committee, said most invalid ballots were marked incorrectly or had notes written on them.

“If they only put one ‘X' on it we couldn't tell what they wanted,” Benson said. The ballot required voters to rank the five possible sites.

More than a dozen people spoke against MEA's proposed coal plant during the public comment session at the board's Monday meeting. Eagle River resident Sue Ely spoke directly to board member Larry DeVilbiss and MEA spokesperson Lorali Carter.

“I Don't agree with you, but I respect you as a human being,” Ely said. “I think mercury is bad and climate change is not such a good thing, and I'm going to research and fight, but I'm going to follow the rules and I'm going to be polite.”

Tony Pippel of Utility Watch presented the board with 307 protest ballots his group received in response to a campaign to give Valley residents another option than to vote for one site over another.

The protest votes were written on MEA's site selection ballots, but instead of ranking the five site options voters wrote in “nowhere,” “no coal” or “more options,” Pippel said.

Pippel called MEA's election was a sham. The choice to build a coal-fired plant was based on MEA's Integrated Resource Plan, which was released Monday. Pippel also said MEA provided no meaningful information about the five potential sites.

“That pretty much fits the definition of a sham,” Pippel said.

MEA officials declined to comment about the location options or resource plan. MEA board members voted to release the co-op's 2006 and 2007 Integrated Resource Plans at Monday's meeting. The plans can be found at www.mea.coop.

Director Burchell said he is unhappy with MEA's decision to end its power-purchasing contract with Chugach Electric Association and build a gas-fired and coal-fired plant in the Valley. He said the carbon dioxide emissions the coal plant would produce are becoming more regulated and more expensive.

“It is time to stop and re-examine the data,” Burchell said. “Our children and grandchildren will live with the outcome. We don't have to rush into a decision, that is foolish.”

Contact Russell Stigall at 352-2267 or russell.stigall@frontiersman.com.