UNITED ST A TES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
OIL SHALE
BRIEFING BOOK
REGION VIII
DENVER COLORADO
-------
Briefing Book
prepared for Barbara Blum
February 15, 1980 Oil Shale Trip
Table of Contents Page
Itinerary 1
Map 1 - Tour 3
Map 2 - Oil Shale Country 4
Oil Shale Industry Profile 5
Status of Oil Shale Projects 8
Environmental Concerns regarding Oil Shale 15
EPA Regulatory Actions affecting Oil Shale 16
Region VIII Energy Profile 17
Impact of Energy Development on Regulatory
Activities 28
EPA Journal Article - Roger Williams 30
Region VIII Energy Policy Statement 36
Selected Media Articles on oil shale 53
li.6. Region
Technical Library, 80 C-L
999 18th Street, Suite 300
Denver, CO 80202-2466
-------
Briefing Book
prepared for Barbara Blum
February 15, 1980 Oil Shale Trip
Table of Contents
Itinerary Tab 1
Map 1 - Tour 2
Map 2 - Oil Shale Country 3
Oil Shale Industry Profile 4
Status of Oil Shale Projects 5
Environmental Concerns regarding Oil Shale 6
EPA Regulatory Actions affecting Oil Shale 7
Region VIII Energy Profile 8
Impact of Energy Development on Regulatory Activities 9
EPA Journal Article - Roger Williams 10
Highlights of Energy Policy Statement affecting oil shale 11
Region VIII Energy Policy Statement 12
Press Conference - Anticipated Questions and Answers 13
Selected Media Articles on oil shale 14
Shale Oil Status Report - Rocky Mountain Oil
and Gas Association
-------
ITINERARY
Barbara Blum Oil Shale Trip
February 15, 1980
8:00 a.m.
Depart Denver
Fly over of oil shale country
(see enclosed maps - Tabs 2 and 3)
11:30 a.m.
12:00
9:30 a.m.
9:45 a.m.
10:00 a.m.
2:00 p.m.
2:30 p.m.
3:00 p.m.
4:00 p.m.
Arrive Grand Junction
Depart Grand Junction via helicopter
Arrive C-b
Tour C-b
Leave C-b
Arrive Colony
Lunch
Tour Colony
Briefing at Union
Leave Union for Grand Junction airport via helicopter
Press Conference
Depart Grand Junction for Denver
Notes
1. Fly over will point out . . .
o Flat Tops Wilderness Area Class I
o Private developers on southern part of
Piceance Basin - Colony, Union, Chevron, Occidental,
Naval Oil Shale REserve, Paraho
2. Tour at C-b will include . . .
o Project briefing
o Underground in the shaft
o Tour of tract
3. Tour at Colony will include . . .
o Project briefing
o Underground mine tour
o View of retort
o Visit to spent shale revegetation
4. Tour at Union will include . . .
o Project briefing
-------
Tour Group
Barbara Blum
Deputy Administrator EPA
Beth Sullivan
Special Assistant
Chris Palmer
Special Assistant - Energy
Roger Williams
Region VIII Administrator
Russ Fitch
Director, OPAIR
Terry Thoem
Director, Energy Office
Terry Ryan
Associated Press
Ed Andrieski
Associated Press
David Salisbury
Christian Science Monitor
Bob Tweedel
Denver Post
Bill Carr
KREX
-------
C-A
/ "" Cj-9
/ «
ps
I
I
1 ^
I S
I
/
UNI
C&NV/E-R.
/
A
daRANP
JUNCTION
-------
-------
OIL SHALE INDUSTRY PROFILE
The development of oil shale has been "just around the corner"
for at least 60 years. The heart of the problem facing a viable
oil shale industry has been economics. While some companies talk
about overly restrictive environmental requirements and of regulatory
uncertainty as factors in the non-development of oil shale, close
scrutiny of the situation brings one back to economics as the principal
constraint. Other factors besides economics (environmental requirements
and regulatory uncertainty to a much lesser degree) which have postponed
the development of an oil shale industry include technical and legal
uncertainties. Considerable work has been done over a number of years
to remove many of the technical uncertainties surrounding oil shale
processing. However, uncertainties regarding scale-up of technologies
remain. The largest demonstration of retorting has been at a capacity of
1200 tons per day. Commercial size modules will be about six times
larger. Two major legal constraints face a potential oil shale-industry.
The first consists of the contested ownership of 43,000 acres of un-
patented mining claims filed on oil shale land under the mining law of
1872. The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 made oil shale a leasable
mineral. Recent court decisions have unheld the validity of the pre
1920 claims. The second legal uncertainty involves Federal vs State
ownership of certain lands. Both Utah and Colorado have claimed
Federal lands bearing oil shale under provisions of the Statehood Enab-
ling Act of 1894.
Produced shale oil is entitled to the world free market price as
a result ofactions by the President and DOE. Most companies were
projecting a required price of about $25 per barrel in the 1978-79 time
frame. Therefore, even with inflation, shale oil is becoming attractive
at the present world market price of about $30 per barrel. Further
adding to the attractiveness of shale oil is the certainty of a supply
of oil, given recent events in the Middle East.
Shale oil is being produced in the USSR and in China. Commercial
size projects are under construction in Brazil and Australia. The
Federal Prototype Oil Shale Leasing Program was launched in the United
States late in 1973 in order to demonstrate the viability of the
technology and to define the environmental impacts of shale oil production.
Operations via the modified in-site technique are proceeding on the two
Colorado lease tracts. The two Utah lease tracts are involved in the
land ownership legal battle. The two Wyoming tracts attracted no bidders.
Development on private landsiin-.Co'lerado appears to be destined to under-
ground mining and surface retorting.
-------
The President established a goal of production of 400,000 bpd
of shale oil by 1990. Congress appears to be arriving at a similar
production goal but to be accomplished by 1992. Due to the recent
renewed interest in oil shale development DOI Secretary Andrus is
evaluating the need for resumption of an oil shale leasing program
prior to fulfillment of the Prototype Program objectives. A recent
survey of oil shale company production goals by 1990 resulted in a
total figure -f almost 700,000 bpd (see attached table). It should
be strongly emphasized that these must be considered as posturing
or planning figures and in no way represent firm commitments to
proceed.
In conclusion, oil shale has had a great potential for years;
it now appears that the 19801s will bring some development into being.
The role, location, and mode of development will all bear upon the
environmental acceptability of the industry.
-------
PREDICTED SHALE OIL PRODUCTION LEVELS FROM
WESTERN OIL SHALE RESOURCES
1980 —1996
NOV 1979
OIL SHALE PROJECTS
1980
I9BI
1982
1963
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
OCCIDENTAL OIL SHALE o
LEASE TRACT C-b
PILOT OPERATION, ENCR.
6,230
3O0OO
50,000
50,000
87,500
140000
2DDDOf
COMMERCIAL OPERATION
PERMITTING. CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT RIO BLANCO b
LEASE TRACT C-«
PILOT OPERATION.ENGR.
19000
45,600
760OO
COMMERCIAL OPERATION
90300
111,600
COMMERCIAL
PERMITTING. CONSTRUCTION
ENGR, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION
OPERATION
GEOKINETICS, INC C
UINTA BASIN
SAME AS
3,000
5,000
10,000
15,000
25jOOO
40P00
50,000
ABOVE
EOUITY OIL -
PICEANCE BASIN
PILOT OPERATION
PLANS DEPEND UPON OUTCOME 0* PILOT OPERATION
NAVAL OIL SHALE RESERVE •
PICEANCE BASIN
FEASIBILITY STUOY
DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION
28000
41,500
5Q000
COMMERCIAL OPERATION
PERMITTING
DEMONSTRATION OF ABOVE f
GROUND RETORTING (DOE - PON)
MOOULE MODULAR PLA
NT
6,000
4,000
END
PROJECT
DESIGN! CONSTRUCTION
DEMONSTRATION OF ADVANCED g
RETORT TECHNOLOGY (DOE-PON)
RESEARCH ,
PILOT TESTS. ENGINEERING.PERMITTING
8,000
8,000
END
PROJECT
MODULE CONSTRUCTION
UNION OIL it
LONG RIDGE, PICEANCE BASIN
CONSTRUCTION
9,500
MOOULE OPER.
SQpOG
COMMERCIAL OPERATION
75 poo
©0000
CONSTRUCTION
50 POO
SCALE UP
COLONY/TOSCO 1
PARACHUTE CREEK, PICEANCE BASIN
OESIGN, CONSTRUCTION
25,900
38,400
46,200
COMMERCIAL OPERATION
TOSCO SAND WASH j
UINTA BASIN
PERMITTING.
23,100
46,200
CONSTRUCTION
WHITE RIVER PROJECT k
LEASE TRACTS Uo,Ub, UINTA BASIN
EXACT SCHEDULE WILL DEPEND UPON OUTCOME OF LITIGATION
45,000
90 poo
CHEVRON OIL •
PICEANCE BASIN
ENGR-.PERMITTING, PILOT
7,000
I5.60C
24,200
32,800
41,400
50,0 OO
66,600 |s3,200
MOOULE CONSTRUCTION
ioopoc
SUPERIOR OIL m
PICEANCE BASIN
PERMITTING. CONSTRUCTION
6,700
10,000
12,000
COMMERCIAL OPERATION ,
-
MOBIL OIL •
PICEANCE BASIN
ENGINEERING. PERMITTING.CONSTRUCTION
6,000
6,000
30,600
42,500
50000
COMM. OPERATION
78POO
91,500
100000
SCALE UP
CARTER OIL • ®
ENGINEERING. PERMITTING. CONSTRUCTION
18,800
24,900
30000
45POO
6Q000
COMMERCIAL OPERATION
CITIES SERVICES
NO DEFINITE PLANS AT THIS TIME
TOTAL PROJECTS
0
0
14,500
22,500
81,650
181,300
304^a
337^00
446000
M7300
C930OO
723JOO
Jr56l200
82I0OC
942.40C
98Q90C
989fc4CO
-------
Status of Oil Shale Projects
COMMERCIAL PROJECTS
1. CATHEDRAL BLUFFS SHALE OIL CO. - Occidental & Tenneco(T3S,R96W,6PM
Bonus bid of $117.8 million paid to acquire rights to Tract C-b in
1974. Original partners, ARCO and TOSCO, withdrew in 1975. A third
original partner, Shell, withdrew 11/76. Occidental joined(with
Ashland as remaining partner)ll/76. Ashland withdrew 2/14/79. On
9/4/79, Tenneco acquired half interest for $110 million. Modified
DDP for 57,000 BPD modified in situ plant submitted March 1, 1977.
DDP approved 8/30/77. EPA issued conditional PSD permit for first
phase of development 12/16/77. Primary contractor is Ralph M. Parsons
Company. Three headframes, two of concrete and one of steel, have
been erected. As of mid-October the shaft depths were: Ventilation/
Escape - 910', Service - 725', Production - 726'.
Project cost: $1 billion
2. COLONY DEVELOPMENT OPERATION - ARCO (60%) and TOSCO (40%)(T5S,R95W,6PM)
Proposed 46,000 BPD project on Colony Dow West property near
Grand Valley, Colorado. Underground room-and-pillar mining and
TOSCO II retorting planned. Production would be 66,000 TPD of
35 GPT shale from a 60-ft. horizon in the Mahogany zone. Development
suspended 10/4/74. Draft EIS covering plant, 196-mile pipeline
to Lisbon, Utah, and minor land exchanges released 12/17/75. Final
EIS has been approved. World price for shale oil and inclusion of
shale oil in entitlements program increases likelihood that project
will be reactivated. EPA issued conditional PSD permit 7/11/79. If
a proposed $3/bbl tax credit indexed for inflation or equivalent
incentive becomes law, Colony hopes the climate will improve to
attract enough investment for reactivation of the project.
Project cost: Estimated at $1,132 billion(1977 dollars) including
$20 million for community development.
3. UNION LONG RIDGE PROJECT - Union Oil Company of California (T5S,R95W,6PM)
In 1974,' Union announced plans for a commercial project ranging in
size from 50,000 BPD to as much as 150,000 BPD on some 22,000 acres
of fee land near Grand Valley, Colorado. Land, shale and water
resources are adequate. Underground room-and-pillar mining and
Union "B" retorting would be employed. Union's "B" retort is a
modification of their direct-heated,rock pump retort first tested
in the late 1950's. Current plans are to proceed with a 9,000 BPD
(10,000 TPD) prototype facility before expanding to commercial
production. Environmental and engineering studies are substantially
-------
2.
COMMERCIAL PROJECTS (Contd.)
completed for prototype facility. Union has announced that it
will proceed if a $3/bbl tax credit is enacted. EPA issued
conditional PSD permit 7/31/79. Colorado Mined Land Reclamation
Board issued permit 8/2/79.
Project cost: Approximately $100 million for 9,000 BPD module.
4. RIO BLANCO OIL SHALE COMPANY - Gulf & Standard(Indiana)(T2S,R99W,6PM)
Proposed project on federal Tract C-a in Piceance Creek basin,
Colorado. Bonus bid of $210.3 million to acquire rights to tract;
lease issued 3/1/74. Revised DDP calling for use of LLL Rubbilized
In Situ Extraction(RISE) of shale oil submitted to Interior 5/77.
Combination of modified in situ retorts and surface retorts(T0SC0 II)
will be used to produce 76,000 BPD. Five-year process development
project will be conducted to prove in situ technology. Commercial
facility scheduled to get underway in 1987. DDP approved 9/22/77.
American Mine Services Inc. of Denver was awarded a $4 million contract
11/21/77 to sink a 15-foot wide, 971-foot deep shaft. EPA awarded
PSD permit on 12/16/77. Primary contractor is Morrison-Knudsen
Company with a $38.8 million contract. Tests are underway to
determine underground water quantities. Agreement($6 million) reached
3/79 with Oxy for exchange of modified in situ technical data. On
8/31/79 approval was granted to modify in situ retorts using RB0SC
design. On 7/16/79 announced 1-year design and cost study($4 million)
that could lead to $100 million construction and operation of Lurgi-
Ruhrgas surface retort demonstration plant. Shaft completed at
979' in 10/79, and outfitting is progressing. Surface processing
facilities scheduled for completion 1st quarter of 1980. First burn
is scheduled for April 1980.
Project cost: Four-year process development phase budgeted at
$93 million. No cost estimate available for
commercial facility.
5. WHITE RIVER SHALE PROJECT - Phillips, Sohio & Sunedco(T10,R94E,SLM)
Proposed joint development of federal lease Tracts U-a and U-b in
the Uinta Basin near Bonanza, Utah. Bonus bid for Tract U-a was
$76.6 million by Sun(now Sunedco) and Phillips. Bonus bid for
Tract U-b was $45.1 million by White River Shale Oil Corporation
(jointly owned by Phillips, Sohio and Sunedco). Rights to Tract
U-b subsequently assigned to Sohio. Both leases issued 6/1/74.
Detailed Development Plan filed with Interior 6/76 proposes modular
development with ultimate expansion to 100,000 BPD. Application
for one-year suspension of lease terms granted 10/76 based on
environmental considerations. This suspension was superseded by a
court injunction suspending the lease terms based on property title
questions. WRSP's leases U-a and U-b are in jeopardy due to the
existence of unpatented pre-1920 oil shale placer mining claims and
-------
3.
COMMERCIAL PROJECTS (Contd.)
by an, as yet unresolved,application for a state lease to the same
property by Peninsula Mining associated with Utah's in-lieu land
selection procedure. The injunction order suspending the U-a and
U-b federal lease terms is uncontested and is in full force and
effect. The final Environmental Baseline Study report was issued
on 11/15/77 by WRSP. Utah approved White River Dam and Reservoir
funding 2/78. EIS for the Dam is proceeding.
Project cost: Estimated at $1.61 billion for 100,000 BPD
project (1975 dollars)
6. NAVY OIL SHALE RESERVE DEVELOPMENT - TRW Inc.
Navy issued RFP 6/77, calling for preparation of Master Develop-
ment Plan for Naval Oil Shale Reserves 1,2, and 3. Objective is
to put N0SR in position for large scale development of resources
within five years. Contract awarded 6/22/78 to team composed of
TRW, CF Braun & Company, Gulf Research & Development Company,
Williams Bros. Engineering Company, and Tosco Corporation.
Comparative analysis of N0SR 1 and eight other Piceance Creek basin
properties has been completed. A production range of 50,000 to
200,000 BPD is being evaluated. Baseline environmental data are
being obtained.
Project cost: $2.16 million through 10/1/79
$60 million in 4 annual options
7. CHEVRON RESOURCES CO.
Project feasibility study is ongoing. Project would consist of
open pit mining and surface retorting. Feasibility plans are
directed toward a 100,000 BPD operation by 1990. Baseline environ-
mental data are being collected. Although on private land an
EIS would be prepared because of offsite right-of-way approvals.
8. EXXON COAL USA, INC.
A request for land exchange was sent to BLM on December 28, 1979.
Project feasibility study is ongoing.
9. SUPERIOR OIL CO. (TIN,R97W,6PM)
Proposed project involving production of shale oil, nahcolite,
alumina and soda ash from a 6,500-acre privately owned tract in
Piceance Creek basin near Meeker, Colorado. Underground mining and
aboveground processing to yield shale oil, nahcolite, aluminum
trihydrate, and soda ash. Facilities proposed to be constructed
in modules of 11,586 B0PD from 26,176 TPD shale feed. Co-products
-------
4.
COMMERCIAL PROJECTS (Contd.)
would be 4,878 TPD of 80 percent nahcolite, 580 TPD alumina,and
1,005 soda ash. Land exchange request to block up economically
viable property filed with Interior 12/73. Draft EIS issued by
BLM 7/17/79.
Project cost: $300 million for one multi-mineral module
$473,459 for EIS
10. TOSCO SAND WASH PROJECT - Tosco Corp.(T9S,R21E,SLM)
Proposed 50,000 BPD project on 14,688 acres of state leases in
Sand Wash area of Uinta basin near Vernal, Utah. State-approved
unitization of 29 non-contiguous leases requires $8 million tract
evaluation by 1985. Minimum royalty of $5 per acre begins in 1984
and increases to $50 per acre in 1993. Preliminary feasibility
study completed for TOSCO II surface retorting. Process and
engineering work underway. Environmental assessment underway on
site, but no other field work being conducted. Tosco has drilled
a core hole on the Sand Wash site as a preliminary step to shaft
sinking and establishment of a test mine. The test mine would
confirm economics and mining feasibility plans for the commercial
project. Permits for this new work have been received from the
state.
Project cost: Approximately $1 billion
11. OCCIDENTAL OIL SHALE, INC.,LOGAN WASH(T75.R97W,6PM)¦
Oxy is developing its modified in situ retorting technology on its
Logan Wash site near De Beque, Colorado. Field tests have been
underway since 1972. Initial tests were conducted on three small
retorts measuring 30 feet square by 70 feet high. Tests are now
being conducted on commercial scale retorts measuring 120 feet by
280 feet high. Thirty thousand barrels of oil were produced from
first commercial retort between December 75 and June 76. A $60.5
million cost-sharing contract was signed 9/30/77 with DOE.
Production from retort 5 was 11,287 barrels. Retort number 6 was
rubblized 3/25/78. In mid-September, two weeks after ignition, a
sill pillar collapsed within Retort 6, but there was no interruption
in operation. As of 10/15/79 gross oil production from Retort #6
was 47,733 barrels. PSD permit for Retorts 7 & 8 awarded 11/1/79.
Project cost: To date at least $45 million spent
$60.5 million DOE cost-sharing contract
-------
5.
COMMERCIAL PROJECTS(Cont.)
12. PETROSIX - Petrobras (Petroleo Brasileiro, S.A.)
A 2,200 TPD Petrosix demonstration retort located near Sao
Mateus do Sul, Parana, Brazil. The plant has been operated
successfully near design capacity in a series of tests since
1972. A U.S. patent has been obtained on the process. A 50,000
BPD plant is now being designed. Preliminary indications favor a
scaled-up facility about five miles from existing site. A 36-ft.
inside diameter vertical retort is being designed for construction
at the San Mateus plant site for cold-testing of shale feed and
discharge devices. This is a scale-up factor of four over the
existing 18-foot inside diameter retort. Part of commercialization
project is underway, viz. mine expansion, engineering of the retort,
and equipment procurement. Partial operation will begin in 1984,
and full capacity will be reached in 1987.
Project cost: Total expenditures in excess of $35 million
Projected cost of 50,000 BPD plant is $1.3 billion
13. RUNDLE PROJECT - Central Pacific Minerals & Southern Pacific Petroleum
Development of the Rundle deposit in Queensland, Australia.
Construction will begin in 1980 on two commercial demonstration
modules using Superior and Lurgi-Ruhrgas processes. Production
projected to be 20,000 BPD by 1982. By 1986, production would
grow to 250,000 BPD from 40 retorts.
Project cost: $316 million (US) for 20,000 BPD
$2.16 billion (US) for 250,000 BPD
R&D PROJECTS
14. DOW CHEMICAL CO.
DOW was awarded a four-year contract by ERDA in March 1977, for
production of fuels from Antrim oil shale formation. Project
includes characterization and mapping of Antrim shale resources
in Michigan Basin, evaluation of three in situ fracturing techniques
on an 80-acre site belonging to DOW, and two in situ production
tests. Explosive fracturing activities for the hydraulic fracturing
subtask were completed in the 100 series wells. Well cleanout was
almost completed and permeability studies and fracture evaluation
will proceed as soon as it is complete. Evidence that there is
communication between these wells continues to accumulate. The
third and fourth shots in the explosive underreaming series were
detonated in well #301. The well cavity was increased by a factor
of 2.4 compared to the original borehole volume for a 62-foot section
-------
6.
R&D PROJECTS(Contd.)
after the third shot. The fourth shot produced more damage to
the bottom section of well casing. For the chemical underreaming
subtask, well #201 was notched in a limestone stringer below the
Antrim formation. The well was hydrofractured with water but no
communication with nearby wells was observed. Further evaluation
of this subtask is underway. The data from extraction trials on
the front site have been collected and processed. Analysis of
product gases from the final trial showed that they had a total
energy content 4.9 times the total solid fuel and gaseous fuel
put into the well for ignition, thus establishing that significant
quantities of Antrim shale had been affected by the operation.
Ignition in well #305 in 10/79 gave indicati
combustion occurred.
Project cost: $14 million
15. EQUITY OIL COMPANY
Equity received a $6.5 million contract from ERDA in June 1977,
for development of in situ technology using superheated steam.
The work is being conducted on a one-acre site in the Piceance
Creek basin of Colorado. The first phase of the contract has
been completed which involved drilling two core holes near a
previous steam injection site. Site evaluation has been completed.
Start-up of field project occurred 6/79. As of mid-October 1979,
steam was being injected at 950°F and 1,450 psi at a rate of
20,000 to 25,000 lb/hr(about 50% design rate). No shale oil had
been produced.
Project cost: DOE cost-sharing contract for $6.5 million.
16. GE0KINETICS,INC.
Geokinetics has been conducting field tests to develop horizontal
in situ retorting technology since 1973. Obtained ERDA contract
7/77 to develop technology in thin horizontal beds of oil shale in
Uintah County, Utah. Porosity is established in formation by
raising the shallow overburden during explosive fracturing of the
shale formation. Total production to end of 1978 was 5,437 barrels.
Project cost: DOE cost-sharing contract valued at $9.2 million
-------
7.
R&D PROJECTS(Contd.)
17. LARAMIE ENERGY TECHNOLOGY CENTER
Laramie and Rocky Mountain Energy Co. have been conducting
in situ shale oil production tests for several years near
Rock Springs, Wyoming. Partial dismantling of Site 12 began
5/79, and post-operation water monitoring phase began 7/79.
Project cost: Undetermined
18. PARAHO OIL SHALE FULL SIZE MODULE PROGRAM - Paraho Development Corporation
Paraho is seeking six sponsors, each contributing $500,000, for
Phase I of a 3-phase module program. Phase I consists of engineering
and planning; Phase II is detailed design, procurement, and
construction; and Phase III is operation. Paraho initiated Phase I
at its own expense on 12/1/77.
Project cost: $4 million for 16-month Phase I
$75 million for 21-month Phase II
$14 million for 24-month Phase III
19. U.S. BUREAU OF MINES - Multi Minerals Corp.
USBM began drilling 10-foot diameter, 2,400-foot deep shaft 3/77.
Objective is to mine samples of oil shale, nahcolite, and dawsonite
from shale formation. Shaft may be used for ventilation in future
experimental mine. Drilling operations were completed 10/2/77 at
2,371 feet. Shaft classified as gassy mine. Multi Mineral Corp.
is performing experimental mining. EIS in preparation for
"Integrated In Situ Process" testing.
Project cost: Over $8 million for shaft sinking.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS REGARDING OIL SHALE DEVELOPMENT
Mining and conversion of oil shale will degrade air quality,
will consume precious water resources, may degrade surface and/or
groundwater quality, will create solid and hazardous wastes to
be disposed of properly, and will create significant population
growth in a predominantly rural setting which translates into
potential social and economic problems. That these things will
occur is a given...the question is the magnitude and the signifi-
cance of the occurrence. Key questions such as the following
exist:
1. How much groundwater will be intercepted during mining?
2. What will the quality of potential discharges be?
3. Can groundwater quality be protected during and after
in-situ retorting?
4. Can processed shale be disposed of properly without
degrading ground or surface water quality?
5. Will revegetation of processed shale be successful over
the long term?
6. What are the concentrations of various sulfur species in
retort off gas streams?
7. What will be the air quality and visibility impacts on
the Flat Tops Wilderness Area (nearest Class I area)?
8. What are the expected trace element concentrations in
air, water, and solid waste residual streams?
9. Is conventional pollution control technology directly
applicable to oil shale residuals? Is it as effective?
10. What is the expected population growth associated with the
development of an oil shale industry?
Answers to the above questions (and perhaps other questions not
yet posed) will in part determine the ability of individual plants
and of an oil shale industry to be compatible with the desired
environment for oil shale country.
Answers to some of the above questions may be partially answered
by theoretical research work and limited-scope field investigations
in the absence of any oil shale facilities. Answers to the
remaining questions will necessarily be developed through rigorous
testing programs and data analyses performed on facilities represen-
tative of commercial size.
Much has been said and written about the environmental advan-
tages and disadvantages of in-situ development vs. surface
retorting technology. Without hard data from operating facilities
it is difficult to reach firm conclusions. However, surface retorting
appears to have slightly greater air emissions and has more of a
solid waste-processed shale disposal problem compared to in-situ.
On the other hand in-situ development poses greater risks to ground-
water movement and quality than does surface retorting. Firm data
are desirable prior to the launching of a large industry.
-------
EPA Regulatory Actions Affecting Oil Shale
Environmental regulatory actions which we have taken include -
EIS Reviews
o Prototype Oil Shale Leasing Program (D and F)
o Colony (D and F)
o Superior (D)
PSD Permits Issued
0
C-a
1000
BPD
12-15-77
0
C-b
5000
BPD
12-15-77
0
Colony
50,000
BPD
7-11-78
0
Union
9000
BPD
7-31-79
0
Occidental
1000
BPD
11-1-79
NPDES Permits Issued
o C-a dewatering phase
o C-b dewatering phase
o Occidental experimental facility
Future regulatory involvement will include -
RCRA Permits
Final regulations scheduled for April 1980 may impose requirements
applicable to processed shale.
IIIC Permits
Reinjection of produced water will be subject to the requirements
as a Class III well. Final regulations are scheduled for April 1980.
In the absence of air NSPS, water effluent guidelines, and solid waste
disposal performance standards the Region has been using test engineering
judgment. The Agency through the lead of ORD is preparing a series of oil
shale documents which will provide "early guidance" on control technology
expectations, monitoring methodologies, and impact assessment. The EMB
Task Force - Alternative Fuels Group is responsible for the development
and implementation of a regulatory and research strategy.
-------
Region VIII Resource Overview
o 16% of Nation's land area
3% of Nation's population
o 32% Federally owned land
o 10 million acres of Class I area
o 6.3 mill ion people
o 25 Indian Reservations
o Energy Resources
Coal 197 bill ion tons
Uranium 273,000
Petroleum 1.6 billion barrels
Oil Shale 731 billion barrels
Natural Gas 7.9 TCF
Energy Production - 1980
Coal 140 million tons
Uranium 9,000 tons
Petroleum 750,000 BPD
Oil Shale 0
Natural Gas 0.6 TCF
Import/Export 1975
Production 6600 trillion BTUs
Export 4300 trillion BTUs
% of U.S. Total Quads
46
3430
45
120
4.4
9
100
464
3.6
8
-------
Coal
60
fl-
14
1975
140
125
15
1980
MILLION TONS
330
285
45
1985
30%
-------
Rntvr Plant
Capacity
MW
16,000
1975
US.
he,ooo
550,000
3%
23# 00
5%
-------
INDUSTRY
Oil Shale
1979
750,000
REGION
^ 8 J
1990
700,000
SHALE
OIL
750,000
CONVE-
NTIONAL]
-------
Uranium
36,000
TON8
U3°8
6400
1975
1980
1985
US. \ 6400
11,600
R8
R8
.36,000
^60,000
US.
55%
60%
-------
ENERGY BRIEFS
EPA Region VIII States are rich in both energy and environmental
resources. Clean air, free flowing streams, clean water, unspoiled
landscapes, and the wide open spaces abound. Energy resources are
colocated with these environmental resources. About fifty percent of
the Nation's coal reserves, fifty percent of the uranium supply, essen-
tially all of the economically attractive oil shale, and ten percent of
the oil and gas reserves are found in Region VIII. An energy vs. the
environmental potential exists.
0
Coal
resource
- 200
billion tons
reserve Region
430
11 ll
U.S.
84
II II
strippable Region
137
II II
U.S.
0
Coal
mining
Year
Region
U.S.
1975
70
640 million tons
1980
140
750
projected
1985
300
1100
o Region VIII has permitted 100 million tpy of coal mining capacity
from 19 mines through the PSD process in the past year and a half.
o Coal mining in the Region in 1978 consisted of 105 million tons
from the surface (85 percent) and 15 million tons from underground
(15 percent).
o The number of coal mines will increase from 74 in 1978 (42 surface/
32 underground) to 134 (76 surface/58 underground).
o Coal fired power plant capacity will double between 1976 and 1985.
Generating capacity will go from 16,000 MW to 32,000 MW.
o Uranium resources
U3O0 reserves U.S. 315,000 tons
Reg. VIII 131,000 tons
0 Uranium production will triple between 1978 and about 1985. Develop-
ment will occur from new open pits, underground mines and from in situ.
0 Coal gasification - The first commercial high BTU gasification plant
will be built near Beulah, N.D. and will be based on Lurgi technology.
Construction will start in 1980.
-------
Coal liquefaction - No projects are planned. The President's and
Congress' program envision 1 to 1.5 million BPD equivalent (i.e.
20 to 30 plants - half of which could be in the West) by 1990 - 1995.
Oil shale - "The industry with the 60-year pregnancy".
Oil shale resource
compare to
731 bill ion barrels
U.S. proven reserve
U.S. consumption 1978
Middle East
Alaska Prudhoe Bay
West Texas
Tract C-a alone
6.5
350
10
8
4
35 billion
Production Plans
President's Program
Congress
Company plans
400,000 BPD
700,000 BPD
?
1990
1995
1990
(speculative, however)
Key factors to oil shale development are
- Congress action on economic incentive. Shale oil presently is
entitled to World Market Price ($30/barrel). Companies say they
can make 15% DCF ROI at $25-30/barrel.
- PSD Class I air quality
- Water availability above a 1,000,000 BPD industry
- Socio economic solutions
- State philosophies
Oil reserves
Region VIII 2 billion barrels
U.S. 35 billion
Oil Production - 1978
Region VIII 750,000 BPD
U.S. 8,000,000 BPD
-------
3.
Oil "Hot Prospects"
- Overthrust Belt in Utah, Wyoming, and Montana
- Williston Basin in N.D.
Conventional Gas Reserves
Region VIII 10 trillion scf
U.S. 237
Gas production - 1978
Region VIII 0.6 trillion scf
U.S. 21
Unconventional-gas
From tight sands in Region VIII there are 40 - 400 trillion scf
recoverable.
Tar sands resource 30 billion barrels
-------
Location of Western Tight Sands Basins
froa'S ppwpv
-------
Recoverable Reserves of Unconventional Gas
Recoverable U.S. reserves of unconventional natural gas
are truly enormous. Tight sands natural gas recoverable
reserves at current oil prices exceed the U.S.'s current
proven oil reserves.
"Unconventional Gas" is natural gas from western and
southwestern tight sands, from Devonian shale in the Appalachians
and Midwest, from geopressurized methane along chiefly the
Gulf of Mexico, from coal seams in most regions, and from
very deep wells. Limited production, chiefly from the tight
sands regions, has begun.
DOE's National Energy Plan estimates of recoverable
reserves of unconventional gas were as follows:
Lewin and Associates and the Institute of Gas Technology
have made similar estimates. To put these figures in perspective,
we now import 16 quads of oil a year.
In addition, the United States Geological Survey has
recently informed the National Petroleum Council that their
examination of drilling logs from old wells indicates the
existence of previously uncounted tight sands gas deposits
below 10,000 feet. These deposits are roughly equal to 400
quads (less than half recoverable), but they will cost the
equivalent of $25 to $55 per barrel to recover because of
the depth involved. These reserves are in addition to those
shown in the table and illustrate an important point. These
estimates only include discovered basins. No provision is
made for new field discoveries.
Price will be the chief determinant of how quickly
these reserves are developed. The Administration's proposed
tax credit of 50 cents per thousand cubic feet for all forms
of unconventional gas, specifically including tight sands,
would make an enormous difference.
Recoverable Unconventional Gas Reserves
(Trillions of Cubic Feet (Quads))
Tight Sands Formation
Devonian Shale
Coal Bed Methane
Geopressurized Methane
40 420
25 400
50 700
5,000 63,000
Source: NEP II, Table IV-6
-------
Production Estimates for Tight Sands Areas
Tight Sands production could provide the equivalent of
up to 4 million barrels of oil a day by 1990:
Estimated Tight Sands Production
(in barrels of oil equivalent per day
assuming a $20/Barrel price
in 1979 dollars)
Low High
1985 800,000 to 1,850,000
1990 1,750,000 to 3,800,000
2000 2,100,000 to 3,350,000
Source: Lewin Associates (Report for DOE, 1978)
For comparison, the U.S. imported 8 million barrels of oil
in 1978.
The actual level of production we achieve over the next
decade will depend on the price of the gas produced, the
risks, and the pace of technological development. Covering
tight sands under the unconventional gas tax credit will
help push production towards the upper end of these ranges.
-------
1978
EIS Reviews 9
PSD Permits 28
NPDES Permits 25
REGULATORY ACTIONS
ENERGY FACILITIES
1979
32
43
31
62
106
1980
35+
40+
60+
1981-85
135++
200 per year
-------
ADDITIONAL IMPACTS ON REGULATORY ACTIVITIES
OF PRESIDENT'S SYNFUELS PROGRAM
Facilities
Coal Mines 14
Coal Synfuels 10
Oil Shale 7
Unconventional Gas
35
Associated Activities
Water-for-Energy Resource Projects
Transportation Systems
Population Induced Power Plants
Population Induced Sewage Treatment Plants
180 million tpy
600,000 bpd
350,000 bpd
200,000 bpdoe
-------
EPA JOURNAL
ENERGY--RE ION 8
BYLINE—ROGER WILLIAMS
"You realize, of course," my friend said, "that steet in front of
your house is connected to every other road and highway in America."
The statement kind of dangled there in the space between us. "It's only
a matter of connections, turns and distances."
Unlike the highways he referred to, that particular converstation
led nowhere, but his matter-of-fact observation has stayed with me.
That simple idea of connections, so elemental to understanding and
dealing with environmental and energy issues, is routinely ignored by
millions of Americans until a blackout, a strike, a foreign oil embargo
or a sharp price increase brings the connections into sudden, discomforting
focus.
Tonight, millions of lights, appliances, motors and gadgets will be
switched on in Chicago. How many users or that electricity will realize
that following the electrical wires in their homes would lead them to a
coal strip mine on the Montana-Wyoming border?
There, power shovels 7 stories tall dig coal from the earth in 25
cubic yard bites, filling trains a mile long with 10,000 tons of coal.
Sixteen such trains leave daily from Wyoming alone. A trainload arriving
at a 1,000 megawatt power plant-- a not unusual size for an urban area
and capable of providing the electrical needs for about a million homes-
is enough coal to last one day.
-------
2.
There, possibly, the connections are better understood because
it is there that the environmental, social and economic impacts—good
and bad—are felt.
And it is there (in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Utah and Wyoming) that EPA1s Region 8 Office works at the difficult task
of balancing the need for markedly increased domestic energy production
and the need to preserve and protect some of the highest quality environment
remaining in the Nation.
The Region has about half the Nation's coal reserves, some 200
billion tons with 84 billion tons available to today's strip mining techniques.
Mining of that coal, at a rate of 60 million tons per year in 1975, doubled
by 1978 and is projected to reach 300 million tons/year by 1985. Coal-
fired power plant capacity, 16,000 megawatts (MW) in 1976 will double by
1985.
Uranium production is expected to triple between 1978 and 1985.
An oil shale resource estimated at 731 billion barrels--compared to
total U.S. oil coinsumption of 6.5 billion barrels in 1978—seems to be
nearing development with the industry currently awaiting an improved economic
climate. The President's energy program envisions a 400,000 barrels per day
oil shale industry by 1990.
Oil and conventional natural gas reserves in the Region are substantial
and up to 400 trillion standard cubic feet of recoverable gas lie locked
in "tight" sandstone and shale formations awaiting incentives to industry
to make their recovery economical.
If the resource base is huge, so is the potential for environmental
damage from its exploitation. Even the best controlled coal-fired power
plants will emit thousands of tons of sulfur dioxide gas each year. Much
-------
3.
of that gas, through a series of chemical reactions in the air, becomes
sulfate, obscuring visibility in this land of awesome vistas.
Scarce water in the arid and semi-arid West is consumed at the rate
of 15,000 acre feet per year by a 1,000 MW power plant. Huge quantities
are used in fugitive dust control, reclamation and other uses at mine sites.
Mining may disturb underground water supplies as well.
Spent shale—the material remaining after shale has been crushed and
burned to extract the "oil"—would fill entire mountain valleys under one
of the mining/retorting plans. A shale industry, too, would consume large
amounts of water.
Sudden, large population increases from the influx of energy project
workers and their families overtax the abilities of primarily small rural
communities to provide housing, schools, water, sewer and other essential
services'. Proper planning and "front-end" financial assistance are needed
by many communities to help them cope with the boom and avoid negative impacts,
And, side-by-side with the resources are millions of acres of National
parks and monuments, current and proposed wilderness areas and Indian
reservations encompassing some of the most beautiful and primitive environment
remaining in this country.
Many of those areas enjoy the special protection of Class I air quality
under the Clean Air Act's "prevention of significant deterioration" policy.
That policy, called PSD, is designed to protect areas where the air is
already cleaner than required by National standards. PSD contains pollution
limits far more stringent than the National standards.
More than one third —10 million acres—of the Nation's Class I areas
are in this Region. There are hundreds of miles of sparkling, free-flowing
-------
4.
streams , wide open spaces and areas that offer a rare commodity—solitude.
Those qualities attract millions of tourists annually and lead residents
and visitors alike to understand—the West has a lot to lose.
Energy or energy-related proposals on-hand or expected in the next
few years in the Region number in the hundreds. Each will involve EPA's
review of permit responsibilities at one point or another.
Late in 1979, I directed the preparation of a regional energy policy,
putting down on paper this Regional Office's commitments and procedures
related to energy development.
The policy is our way of demonstrating to industry, environmentalists,
other levels of government and interested citizens that this Region is
committed to helping the Nation achieve energy self sufficiency.
But since we are first and foremost an environmental/health agency,
assurance that environmental standards and objectives are not violated by
energy facilities is the cornerstone of the policy. It is our experience
in the Region that we can accomplish reasonable energy goals without
weakening existing local, state and Federal environmental requirements.
High in the policy's objectives is a commitment to process key permits
covering air and water discharges for energy facilities within six months
of our receipt of a completed application. We will commit ourselves to
similar timetables for review of permit applications under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act and the underground injection program (to
protect underground water supplies) when the rules for those programs are
fi nalized.
-------
5.
Especially important, we will assist other agencies during the
"scoping phase" of impact statement preparation to identify and resolve
many potentially troublesome aspects of energy projects early to avoid
delays inherent to protracted conflicts. Review of energy impact state-
ments will be given highest priority.
We will provide a similar service to representatives of the energy
industry itself, in seminars concentrating on details of permit application
forms and other issues.
To the degree possible under various laws, we will consolidate our
permit programs and develop procedures for a single joint application form.
Internally and with other federal, state and local agencies, we will
coordinate our reviews of energy project applications to cut out as much
duplication as possible in reporting, application and monitoring requirements.
Our regional perception of the energy/environment and conservation
connection is sharpened by the existence of our vast resources and we are
increasing our promotion of conservation. We insist upon full consideration
of energy conservation and recovery techniques, for instance, in plans for
new sewage treatment facilities submitted by communities.
We are actively pursuing innovative and alternative waste treatment
technologies and providing financial incentives for their application.
Under RCRA and the President's Urban Policy Program we will fund programs
aimed at turning wastes into resources, thereby saving or recovering energy.
In our review of energy proposals, we will carefully scrutinize energy
demand projections since recent information indicates electrical demand is
growing at a slower rate than most utilities have been accustomed to planning
for.
-------
6.
We will look for and encourage water saving techniques on the part
of industry as well, since water is so limited a resource here and must
be shared by agriculture, communities and industry while its environmental
uses are also protected.
Cooling techniques which use less water...the use of poorer quality
waters for industrial purposes...and water management techniques which do
not contribute to increasing salinity in the Colorado River Basin will
receive favored treatment in the Regional Office.
We will markedly increase our communications with all parties concerned
with Western energy development to reduce confusion and delays and to
assure that the best possible projects are built.
We will continue to encourage and support strong State roles in
guiding their own energy destinies and we will delegate Federal programs
to the States just as quickly as they establish the needed authorities
specified by the Congress.
In this era of intense public concern over energy supplies, we can
only preserve the important benefits we have realized through environmental
laws if we administer them as fairly, comprehensively and expeditiously
as we can.
Like the roads in front of our houses, the path to energy self-
sufficiency and environmental protection can take us anywhere we want to
go. It's only a matter of connections, turns and distances. Working
together, we can make the right choices.
-------
Sr4r*
-------
EPA REGION VIII
ENERGY POLICY STATEMENT
PURPOSE
This policy statement demonstrates EPA Region VIII's commitment to do
its part in helping the Nation achieve energy self sufficiency. EPA Region
VIII is also conmitted to the protection of the high quality environment
presently enjoyed by the citizens and visitors in the Region. We believe
that energy resource development and environmental protection can be com-
patible in most situations.
Magnificient vistas, pristine air, fertile plains, clean water, and
untouched wilderness areas make up the Region's geography. Abundant energy
resources coexist with these natural conditions. Essentially all of the
Nation's oil shale resource, half of the Nation's coal reserves and half of
the Nation's uranium deposits are found in the Region. Recent actions by
the President and by Congress point toward an increased emphasis on the
development of these energy resources. A delicate balance must be imple-
mented to allow energy resource development to proceed in appropriate areas.
BACKGROUND
A cornerstone of the National Energy Supply Plan is the development of
the Nation's abundant coal reserves. With fifty percent of the Nation's
strippable reserves located in Region VIII states, coal development will
continue to increase rapidly. The 1978 Regional production of about 100
million tons is projected to reach nearly 300 million tons by about 1985.
Along with the increase in coal mining, coal fired power plants are
being constructed in the Region at an increasing rate. The electricity pro-
duced is transmitted to load centers in the Midwest, Southwest, West Coast
and Northwest. Power plant capacity will double in the Region between now
and 1985. At that time, almost half of the electricity produced will be
exported from the Region.
The President's Energy Program will stimulate additional coal mining
and power plant activity via the construction and operation of coal gasifi-
cation and coal liquefaction plants. Mandatory conversion of power plants
now burning oil or gas to coal will also increase the demand for Western
coal.
-------
-2-
Oil shale deposits in the Region conprise more than 90 percent of the
oil shale resources found in the U.S. Estimates of recoverable reserves are
placed at 600 billion barrels. By comparison the U.S. consumed slightly
more than 6 billion barrels of oil in 1978. Oil shale deposits are con-
centrated in a relatively small area in Western Colorado, Northeastern Utah,
and Southwestern Wyoming.
Vast uranium reserves exist in Wyoming, Colorado and Utah. Production
of uranium ore is expected to almost triple by 1985. If a heavy National
reliance upon nuclear energy develops, the Region's resources will be
developed even further.
Development of these energy resources will change the environment and
the life styles of the Region. Mining activities and fuel conversion faci-
lities will generate vast amounts of solid waste. Construction and opera-
tion of synthetic fuel facilities and conventional power plants will consume
water resources and release pollutants to the atmosphere. The labor and
support force to construct and operate these mining and conversion facili-
ties will rapidly increase population in predominantly rural settings. The
potential for social and economic problems is great unless adequate and
timely planning and financing are available. New transportation systems
will have to be developed throughout the Region in order to satisfy resource
and people needs.
A coordinated local, State, and Federal government/industry/ public
effort is going to be necessary to ensure that energy resource development
goals are achieved while environmental standards and objectives are main-
tained. EPA Region VIII has a responsibility to ensure that timely and
effective coordination of environmental decisions occurs. Thorough environ-
mental reviews and effective public participation are essential and will
take time. However, through this policy statement we demonstrate our
commitment to the reduction of unnecessary delays involved in our review of
energy projects. EPA Region VIII's Energy Policy Coordination Office has
the role of monitoring the progress and evaluating the benefits/impacts of
this Energy Policy Statement.
-------
-3-
POLICY
Region VIII of the Environmental Protection Agency (The Region) has estab-
lished the following goals and objectives. The Region
...is committed to assuring that environmental standards and objectives,
e.g. Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) increments and water
quality criteria, are not violated by energy facilities. It is not neces-
sary to weaken existing local, state or Federal substantive environmental
requirements to accomplish reasonable energy goals. The Region will
maintain its present procedures which ensure full and timely public partici-
pation in its regulatory process.
...will expedite its regulatory decision making on all energy projects.
Special priority will be placed on processing energy project permit appli-
cations. It is our objective to process energy project permit applications
within six months of receipt of a complete application. Exceptions to the
six month processing time would include circumstances such as the need for
preparation of an EIS on a proposed permit or judicial challenges to the
proposed permit. The Region will provide assistance in the scoping phase of
any energy EIS to expedite issue identification and resolution. Energy
facility EIS reviews will be performed consistent with Council on Environ-
mental Quality (CEQ) guidelines. Special priority has been placed on many
EIS's expected during the next year. This priority list will be reviewed
annually.
...is actively developing consolidation of procedures for applying for,
reviewing, and issuing environmentally-related project authorizations and is
seeking to reduce or eliminate duplication of those requirements. The
Region will coordinate its regulatory responsibilities and decisions with
other Federal agencies and with appropriate State and local agencies.
Delegation of permit programs to States, where authorized by law and
warranted by circumstances, is an EPA policy which is being given the
fullest credence and emphasis in Region VIII.
...is increasing the promotion of energy conservation measures, energy
resource recovery and the development of renewable energy resources.
Incentives are provided for these measures in awards for wastewater treat-
ment plants, solid waste grants, and in air pollution control grants.
...will continue to provide assistance, within available resources, to state
and local environmental agencies on energy issues. It must be recognized
that secondary environmental impact potentially associated with energy
development may be of as great, and as valid, a concern as potential
"primary" impacts. Uncontrolled and unplanned rapid growth can result in
inadequate drinking water supplies, overloaded wastewater treatment plants,
-------
-4-
unpaved roads, and other environmental impacts. The project proponent must
share in the management and mitigation of these secondary impacts. The
Region will continue to provide assistance to local conmunities Cor growth
management. The Region will assist the states and local agencies in their
environmental regulatory decision making in order to expedite their review
of energy projects.
...advocates selection of energy development options which minimize consump-
tive use of water, do not increase salinity levels in streams, and which
preferentially utilize lower quality (e.g., saline) waters when feasible.
The Region recognizes that energy and other resource and population develop-
ments may have significant cumulative, basin-wide water resource and water
quality implications. Early development of comprehensive plans is highly
desirable.
...advocates the phased modular development rather than immediate commercial
scale construction of synthetic fuels facilities,e.g. oil shale, coal gasi-
fication and coal liquefaction plants. The Region will continue to work
with EPA's Office of Research and Development toward a thorough research
effort characterizing environmental residuals and assessing regional
cumulative impacts. Based i#on this more complete data base we will be able
to more accurately define the environmental carrying capacity of geographi-
cal areas where synthetic fuel facilities may be concentrated.
...will provide information on energy/environmental matters to governmental
agencies, the public, legislators, and industry. The Region will hold
seminars and workshops on energy issues, publish reports on energy matters,
and make quarterly status reports available on our permitting and EIS
activities.
...will continue to promote energy conservation measures internally and with
other Federal agencies. Actions such as employee use of mass transit and
car pooling instead of individual automobiles, participation in the com-
pressed work week, restrictions on building heating and cooling, elimination
of unnecessary travel, etc. help reduce the demand for energy.
...will provide energy/environmental liaison to the public, industry, legis-
lators, and government officials through the Energy Policy Coordination
Office. This Office serves as the focal point for energy/environment
information in the Regional Office.
-------
-5-
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION
EPA Region VIII is conmitted to assuring that environmental standards
and objectives, e.g. Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) incr-
ements and water quality criteria, are not violated by energy facilities.
It is not necessary to weaken existing local, state or Federal substantive
environmental requirements to accomplish reasonable energy goals. The
Region will maintain its present procedures which ensure full and timely
public participation in its regulatory process.
1. Existing and future environmental standards and objectives will
limit the degree of environmental degradation.
2. The Region will expedite regulatory decision-making, consolidate
permit procedures and expedite the review of energy facilities.
The Region will also thoroughly communicate its policies and
decisions to legislators, public and industry.
3. The Region believes that it is unnecessary to grandfather future
synthetic fuels facilities from future substantive requirements.
4. The Region will continue to provide opportunity for thorough and
timely public review of its regulatory policies and decisions
regarding energy facilities.
EPA Region VIII will expedite its regulatory decision making on all
energy projects. Special priority will be placed on processing energy
project permit applications. It is our objective to process energy project
permit applications within six months of receipt of a complete application.
Exceptions to the six month processing time would include circumstances such
as the need for preparation of an EIS on a proposed permit or judicial
challenges to the proposed permit. The Region will provide assistance in
the scoping phase of any energy EIS to expedite issue identification and
resolution. Energy facility EIS reviews will be performed consistent with
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) guidelines. Special priority has
been placed on many EIS's expected during the next year. This priority list
will be reviewed annually.
1. The Air and Hazardous Materials Division will process Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit applications for energy
facilities within six months of a complete application.
-------
-6-
2. The Enforcement Division will process National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NUDES) permit applications for
energy facilities within six months of a receipt of a complete
application.
3. Future permit responsibilities, such as those pursuant to the
Resource Recovery and Conservation Act(RCRA) or Underground
Injection Control (UIC), will be carried out as expeditiously as
practicable. Since procedural regulations have not yet been
promulgated it is not possible to specify a processing time
objective at this time. Subsequent to promulgation of regula-
tions, objectives will be established as has been done for PSD
and NPDES processing.
4. The Water Division will place special emphasis on the review of
Amy Corps of Engineers proposed dredge and fill (404) permits
for energy facilities. Submitted material will be reviewed as
expeditiously as practicable with a goal of making a final
Regional decision within six months.
5. Special priority will be assigned by all Divisions in the Region
to the expeditious and thorough review of any energy related
environmental impact statement (EIS). The Region will prepare
EIS's, when required, for energy facilities as expeditiously as
practicable.
6. The Water Division will assign special priority to providing
early assistance to other Federal agencies in the identification
and resolution of environmental issues associated with energy
related EIS's.
7. The Energy Policy Coordination Office (EPCO) and the Office of
Public Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations (OPAIR) will
conduct annual seminars (first one in February 1980) for the
energy industry to explain the details of permit application
forms as well as any other issues which arise. This is designed
to expedite the front end adequate application time for industry
and to provide a better understanding of EPA policies by industry.
8. The Region will coordinate its permit application reviews with
EIS reviews.
9. The Surveillance and Analysis Division will provide prompt ret-
rieval and review of all revelant monitoring data and/or proposed
monitoring programs associated with permit applications for
energy facilities.
-------
-7-
10. Where appropriate, the Region will follow applicable procedures
to consider the cost and energy effectiveness of pollution
control measures.
11. Consistent with the consolidated permit regulations, permit pro-
cessing will be tracked by a central organizational unit within
the Region. Appropriate follcw-up actions will be taken.
EPA Region VIII is actively developing consolidation of procedures for
applying for, reviewing, and issuing environmentally-related project author-
izations and is seeking to reduce or eliminate duplication of these require-
ments. The Region will coordinate its regulatory responsibilities and
decisions with other Federal agencies and with appropriate State and local
agencies. Delegation of permit programs to States, where authorized by law
and warranted by circumstances, is an EPA policy which is being given the
fullest credence and emphasis in Region VIII.
1. EPA is actively developing procedures for the consolidation of
permit programs under the NFDES, RCRA, UIC, and PSD authorities.
A single joint application form is being developed. Commonality
in procedural aspects and public hearings is being sought.
2. Coordinated reviews of energy facility applications will be per-
formed.
3. The Region intends to continue to aggressively pursue the delega-
tion of permit programs to the states where appropriate. Assist-
ance will be provided to the states in the preparation for and
smooth transition of these delegations.
4. The Region will provide technical assistance in the review of
energy facility permit applications to states which have been
delegated permit programs.
5. The Region will strongly encourage and assist the states to meet
the same permit processing goals previously identified.
6. EPA will develop a Memorandum of Understanding with the Depart-
ment of Interior, Office of Surface Mining, by early 1980 which
will address coordination of similar responsibilities. Duplica-
tive water discharge permit issuance and environmental monitoring
requirements will be eliminated. Conmonality of inspections and
enforcement procedures will be sought.
-------
-8-
7. EPA and the Department of Energy will develop a Memorandum of
Understanding by early 1980 which will address coordination of
environmental research programs related to the emerging synthetic
fuels industry.
8. The Region will pursue participation with the Department of
Interior in future coal and oil shale leasing activities. The
Region will provide assistance to the early identification and
resolution of any "red flag" issues.The Region will place special
priority on seeking the definition of criteria for areas which
are unsuitable for development.
9. The Energy Policy Coordination Office will establish formal links
with State Energy Policy Coordinators. Routine communication and
meetings will seek to ensure that the Region and the States have
commonality in objectives or at least a common understanding of
State/EPA energy/environmental policies.
10. Appropriate Divisions in the Region will communicate to their
state counterparts on a continuing basis appropriate aspects of
this Energy Policy Statement.
11. The Region will solicit from states, local units of governments,
the public, and industry their views on the environmental
questions which need to be answered regarding resource develop-
ment. These envircrimental/energy research needs will be conveyed
to EPA's Office of Research and Development. The Region will
follow-up on the response to these needs and provide feedback to
appropriate persons.
12. The Enforcement Division will provide detailed assistance to EPA
Headquarters in the development of National Effluent Guidelines
for energy facilities.
13. The Air and Hazardous Materials Division will provide detailed
assistance to EPA Headquarters in the development of New Source
Performance Standards for energy facilities.
14. The Energy Policy Coordination Office will continue to assist EPA
Headquarters in the development of EPA regulatory and research
strategies applicable to the emerging synthetic fuels industry.
15. Through the Federal Regional Council and the Federal Executive
Board, the Region will communicate this Energy Policy Statement
to other Federal agencies. Appropriate statements for their
agency will be encouraged.
-------
-9-
EPA Region VIII is increasing the promotion of energy conservation
measures, energy resource recovery and the development of renewable energy
resources. Incentives are provided for these measures in awards for waste-
water treatment plants, solid waste grants, and in air pollution control
grants.
1. The Water Division requires that energy conservation and energy
recovery techniques be fully considered for all wastewater treat-
ment plants. Facility plans are not approvable unless this con-
sideration is provided by the applicant.
2. EPA provides special financial incentives for innovative and
alternative technologies which promote energy resource recovery
and/or energy conservation techniques. Additional funds are
available for projects using techniques such as co-disposal of
sludge and refuse, methane recovery, self sustaining incinera-
tion, co-incineration, solar collectors, etc., if the technique
can demonstrate a 20 percent reduction in the facility's energy
requirements.
3. The Region is aggressively pursuing extension of the funding
authority established by section 205(i) of the Clean Water Act.
An expiration date of September 30, 1981, was established for the
credit of a maximum of 2 percent of the total construction grant
funds toward the increase in Federal share from 75 to 85 percent
for innovative and alternative technologies. The funding limit
and the time limit both cause constraints in the full utilization
of benefits.
4. The Region will strongly urge that active and passive solar
systems be considered as alternatives to the development of non-
renewable resources.
5. The Air and Hazardous Materials Division will continue to provide
funding through RCRA and the President's Urban Policy Program for
energy resource recovery projects. Two projects are funded in
the Region at the present time. The Region will also aggressively
pursue increased funding authorization for solid waste/energy
resource recovery projects.
6. The Air and Hazardous Materials Division will continue, within
available resources, to provide transportation planning grants.
Benefits accrue in the form of both reduced air pollution and
gasoline savings.
-------
-10-
7. The Surveillance and Analysis Division will evaluate the applica-
tion of solar powered systems for long term monitoring systems.
A pilot particulate air monitoring program using solar power will
be implemented by sunmer 1980.
8. The Region will aggressively promote and encourage support for
the energy conservation measures and the development of renewable
resources aspects of the President's energy program.
EPA Region VIII will continue to provide assistance, within its avail-
able resources, to state and local environmental agencies on energy issues.
It must be recognized that secondary environmental impact potentially assoc-
iated with energy development may be of as great, and as valid, a concern as
potential "primary" impacts. Uncontrolled and unplanned rapid growth can
result in inadequate drinking water supplies, overloaded wastewater treat-
ment plants, unpaved roads, and other environmental impacts. The project
proponent must share in the management and mitigation of these secondary
impacts. The Region will continue to provide assistance to local commun-
ities for growth management. The Region will assist the states and local
agencies in their environmental regulatory decision making in order to
expedite their review of energy projects.
1. The Region will work with the states in the development of state
consolidated permit programs.
2. The Region will provide planning assistance to the states in
their energy/environmental pollution control strategies.
3. The Water Division will provide continuing assistance to "208"
planning agencies in efforts to coordinate with Office of Surface
Mining activities. This will ensure that coal mining operations
develop consistent with the maintainence of local water
quality management goals and objectives. The Region will aggres-
sively pursue continued financial assistance for energy 208's.
4. The Region will continue to work with the Colorado River Salinity
Forum and the Colorado River Basin states in the development and
implementation of salinity control plans.
5. The Energy Policy Coordination Office will continue to support
the Federal Regional Council Energy Impact Office in providing
growth management assistance to energy communities.
-------
-11-
6. The Region will assist the states in expeditious decision making
on their water quality standards setting process. Colorado and
Utah will receive priority attention.
EPA Region VIII advocates selection of energy development options
which minimize consuirptive use of water, do not increase salinity levels in
streams, and which preferentially utilize lcwer quality (e.g., saline)
waters when feasible. The Region recognizes that energy and other resource
and population developments may have significant cumulative, basin-wide
water resource and water quality implications. Early development of compre-
hensive plans is highly desirable.
1. The Water Division will strongly request that any energy conver-
sion facility EIS evaluate alternatives which minimize consumpt-
ive water use. An example would be full consideration of dry
and/or wet/dry cooling techniques. Other appropriate water con-
servation and water reuse opportunities should also be evaluated.
2. The Region will strongly encourage that, when possible, energy
development facilities utilize poorer quality water not suitable
for domestic, municipal, or agricultural purposes as opposed to
higher quality water. An example would be the use of highly
saline water for energy development/conversion activities.
3. In the Colorado River Basin, the Enforcement Division will review
industrial effluent discharges for consistency with the Salinity
Control Forum adopted and EPA approved "Policy for Implementation
of the Colorado River Salinity Standards Through the NPDES Permit
Program." In essence, this policy has the primary objective of
no salt discharge whenever practicable.
4. Adequate disposal of solid wastes to prevent leaching and effect-
ive reclamation practices to minimize surface runoff should be
implemented by energy facilities. All aspects of the exploration,
mining, conversion, disposal, and reclamation phases of energy
development should adopt appropriate Best Management Practices to
minimize adverse water quality impacts.
5. The Region will assist states, Regional agencies, and other units
of local government to develop comprehensive water resource man-
agement plans which take into account the long-term water needs
of the energy industry and other users; which address the needs
for control of discharges to surface waters; and which identify
and protect aquifers, as appropriate, from contamination and
depletion.
-------
-12-
EPA Regies VIII advocates the phased modular development rather than
immediate commercial scale construction of synthetic fuels facilities, e.g.
oil shale, coal gasification and coal liquefaction plants. The Region will
continue to work with EPA's Office of Research and Development toward a
thorough research effort characterizing environmental residuals and asses-
sing regional cumulative impacts. Based upon this more complete data base
we will be able to more accurately define the environmental carrying cap-
acity of geographical areas where synthetic fuel facilities may be concen-
trated.
1. Instead of a crash program designed to immediately construct and
operate conmercial size synthetic fuel facilities, the Region
encourages the synthetic fuels industry to adopt a phased modular
development program. The Region will communicate the benefits of
this approach which include gradual population growth, elimina-
tion of uncertainty in the data base, minimization of catastrop-
hic environmental risks, and reduction of chances for techno-
logical and economic failure.
2. The Energy Policy Coordination Office and the Air1 and Hazardous
Materials Division will encourage industry to provide for air
pollution controls beyond BACT on their proposed facilities. By
doing so, the maximum amount of energy production can occur in an
area which is limited by air quality constraints.
3. The Energy Policy Coordination Office will continue to identify
energy research targets of opportunity and needs to the Office of
Research and Development. The Region will aggressively support
ORD budget requests to conduct such studies.
EPA Region VIII will provide information on energy/environmental
matters to governmental agencies, the public, legislators, and industry.
The Regien will hold seminars and workshops on energy issues, publish
reports on energy matters, and make quarterly status reports available on
our permitting and EIS activities.
1. The Region will communicate EPA energy/environment policy to all
possible interested persons. These include legislators,
industry, public, governmental officials, universities, and the
environmental conmunity.
2. The Office of Pt±>lic Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations
(OPAIR) will prepare press releases, arrange meetings with
legislators, seek speaking engagements, and organize public
meetings in order to comriunicate the Region's policies. OPAIR
will place special priority on the conmunication of this Energy
Policy Statement.
-------
-13-
3. OPAIR will seek forums with industry such as trade association
meetings, conventions, etc., to discuss energy/environment
issues, objectives and policies.
4. OPAIR will continue to provide for toll free telephone service
(800-525-3022) for Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah,
Wyoming, and (800-332-3321) for non-Metro Denver, Colorado.
5. OPAIR and the Energy Policy Coordination Office will provide an
energy/environment information service. Permit status reports,
EPA energy/environment research reports, and National energy
policy information will routinely be distributed to the Region's
Energy Interested Party mailing list.
6. OPAIR will arrange for periodic press briefings and media inter-
views with Regional senior staff on energy issues..
7. OPAIR will prepare press releases on major permitted energy
facilities.
8. The Region will make staff available to any Congressional staff
or Congressman to provide energy/environment information.
9. The Region will maintain a close working relationship with envir-
onmental organizations on energy/environmental matters. Informal
meetings will be held on at least a bimonthly basis. Energy
project updates will be provided at these meetings.
10. The Region and the public environmental organizations will strive
to identify any potential "red flag environmental issues" early
in an energy facility planning stage.
11. The Regiai will communicate National and Regional energy policies
to the environmental community.
12. OPAIR, in conjunction with the appropriate Division, will prepare
a layman's guide to the various EPA permit programs.
13. OPAIR will provide prompt information on EPA regulations,
policies, etc. which affect energy facilities to our Energy
Interested Party mailing list.
14. The Region will make information available on past PSD and NPDES
decisions which aid in the definition of BACT and Best Available
Technology (BAT). It is expected that information on past PSD
decisions for surface mining and for natural gas recovery faci-
lities will be sunmarized by early 1980.
-------
-14-
15. The Region will make available a quarterly status report on
permit and EIS actions.
16. EPA will provide regulatory and administrative policy guidance to
the emerging synthetic fuels industry. A report for the oil
shale industry will be issued in March 1980. A report on coal
gasification/liquefaction will be published in late 1980.
17. The Energy Policy Coordination Office will make results of EPA's
energy/environment research program available.
18. The Energy Policy Coordination Office and OPAIR will publish
semi-annual status reports on the progress and benefits of the
implementation of programs described in this Energy Policy State-
ment.
EPA Region VIII will continue to promote energy conservation measures
internally and with other Federal agencies. Actions such as employee use of
mass transit and car pooling instead of individual automobile, participation
in the conpressed work week, restrictions on building heating and cooling,
elimination of unnecessary travel, etc. help reduce the demand for energy.
1. The Air and Hazardous Materials Division will continue to commun-
icate the benefits of reduced air pollution and energy conserva-
tion of activities which reduce vehicle miles traveled. Region
VIII employees have and will be encouraged to continue to rely
i4?on mass transit and car pooling alternatives to single
occupancy vehicles.
2. The Region will continue to implement the compressed work
schedule. Benefits in terms of vehicle miles travelled reduct-
ions will be evaluated.
3. The Region will continue to encourage Building Management through
GSA to observe the building heating and cooling restrictions.
Unnecessary lighting will be turned off.
4. The Energy Policy Coordination Office will continue to work with
the Department of Energy in the communication of energy conserva-
tion methods and their benefits.
EPA Region VIII will provide energy/environmental liaison to the
public, industry, legislators, and government officials through the Energy
Policy Coordination Office. This Office serves as the focal point for
energy/environment information in the Regional Office.
-------
-15-
1. The Energy Policy Coordination Office will continue to serve as
an energy focal point in the Regional Office.
2. The Energy Policy Coordination Office will monitor and evaluate
the implementation and the effectiveness of this Energy Policy.
For further information on specific aspects of this Energy policy
please contact any of the following individuals.
Name
Roger L. Williams
Terry L. Thoem
Thcmas A. Speicher
Russell W. Fitch
Charles C. Ganez
David D. Emery
Lance C. Vinson
Irwin L. Dickstein
Robert L. Duprey
David E. Standley
Ivan W. Dodson, Jr.
Norm Huey
Bob Burn
Jack Hoffbuhr
Jon Yeagley
Dale Vodehnal
Bill Geise
Marshall Payne
Tan Entzminger
John Tucker
Dave Kircher
Paul Ferraro
Mike Hammer
Telephone
837-3895
837-5914
837-3826
837-5927
837-3276
837-3846
837-3868
837-4935
837-2407
837-4871
406/449-5432
837-3763
837-4901
837-2731
837-2221
837-4812
837-4831
837-4261
837-2226
837-2721
837-3711
837-2351
837-2751
Ti tie/Respons i bi1i ty
Regional Administrator
Director, Energy Policy Coordination
Office
Regional Counsel (Acting)
Director, Office of Public
Affairs and Intergovernmental
Relations
Director,Civil Rights and
Urban Affairs
Director, Management Division
Director, Enforcement Division
Director, Surveillance and
Analysis Division
Director, Air and Hazardous
Materials Division
Director, Water Division
Director, Montana Operations
Office
Air, PSD Permit
Water, NPDES permit
Water, UIC permit
Solid Waste permit
"404" permit
EIS reviews
Monitoring Programs
Data Analyses
Water Quality Planning
Air Quality Planning
Permits Tracking
Community Impacts
-------
-16-
Lou Johnson
Stuart McDonald
Rich Lathrop
Charles Stevens
Gordcn Weller
837-3926 Toxics
837-5927 Congressional liaison
837-5927 Media liaison
837-5927 Environmental liaison
837-5927 Industry liaison
-------
-------
-------
conservation energy D.noe^p*st
Fast Track' for Energy
Energy
Approved
0eve\0p^en* OH shale
• Li , Fri Nov. 2,1979, Denver,Colo. B
60—Rocky Mountain News '' ¦aIMWI
• ¦ energy plan
«Ti' C. mi ©n®1 *1# 1 /m»
U.S» o1
Ijf Colorado Oil Project
C
°^D
Officials
'PO$jffS Caspar Shu-
io/^/C9
not worried about
gasification plant
-------
&
\'£ ^-,r Pollution Perils Scenery
West's Parks
-------
Colony's pilot plant neat Grand Valley, Col d.. wher• the ground-up stone is cooked in order to extract the precious fuel
STEVE HORTHUf
Energy
Tapping the Riches of Shale
Venturesome companies bet big on "the rock that burns "
nee again the lurmoil in Iran em-
phasizes American dependence
upon what Jimmy Carter calls the
"thin line of oil tankers stretching half-
way around the earth to one of the most
unstable regions in the world." The drive
to gain some freedom from OPEC by de-
veloping domestic energy sources has
never been more pressing. Last week
the Senate easily adopted by a vote cf
65 to 19 a S20 billior. synthetic-fuel pro-
gram that, among o:her things, would
turn the nation's vast coal deposits into
oil and gas. But of all the old and new
sources of petroleum now being freshly
examined, none is mere promising or as
controversial as the oil-bearing rcct
known as shale.
Venturesome companies are betting
millions on shale as ttey plunge deep into
developmen: projects that could soon fos-
ter a new energy industry. Time Los An-
geles Bureau Chief William Rademaekers.
reports from the heart of the U.S. shale
country:
The dir. road running up Parachute
Creek in western Colorado winds through
an ever steeper canyon. As the road
climbs, it deteriorates into first a stream
bed and then a cliff-hugging path that
passes a blackened ledge of shale rock that
was struck by lightning two years ago and
spouted flames for three days. The Indi-
ans once cubbed the magic mineral "the
rock that turns."
Finally, at an altitude of 8,200 ft.,
the track breaks through onto a rolling
plateau of sagebrush, juniper and pine.
It is here, on this remote plateau, south-
west of Rifle, Colo., that Caterpillars of
the Colony Development Operation have
already cut 300 yds. into a mountain of
shale. Near by, in another canyon, Union
Oil engineers monitor a conveyor belt
delivering a stream of shale into a giant
funnel. Some 40 miles south, at Logan's
Wash, Occidental Petroleum miners have
cut two mine faces into the sides of a
shale mountain. Farther northwest lies
another tract of shale land soon to be
developed by Gulf Oil and Standard of
Indiana.
This is the Piceance Basin, the heart
| TIME Map by P.J. Puglie»e
of a geological formation containing the
world's biggest known deposit of oil shale.
Locked in the mottled rock is the energy
equivalent of about 1.2 trillion bbl. of oil,
or roughly 40 times the nation's present
proven reserves of liquid petroleum.
Actually, "shale oil" is neither shale
nor oil. The rock is marl, a variety of lime-
stone laced with a solid fossil fuel called
kerogen. The kerogen was deposited 40
million years ago in the form of millions
of tons of vegetable matter that collected
on the bottom of a mammoth fresh-
water lake that iien covered Utah, Wy-
oming and Colorado. Bur. these lake-bed
accumulations were never subjected to
temperatures as nigh as 300° F and to ex-
treme pressures :hat in time created un-
derground deposits of readily usable liq-
uid oil and natural gas. Now man must
finish nature's work.
For years shale oil remained unde-
veloped because conventional petroleum
always hovered about $2 below the pro-
jected price of shale. Capital development
costs have inflated almost as fast as OPEC
prices. In the 1960s, when crude was sell-
ing for $2 a bbl., estimates were that oil
from rock could be produced for $4 a bbl.
Now, with world prices going up almost
daily beyond the $23.50 OPEC level, shale
oil may be produced for $30. But spurred
by the ever higher price of crude, a group
of energy entrepreneurs aim toward turn-
ing out more than 200,000 bbl. of shale
oil a day by 1990. This surpasses the av-
O
62
TIME. NOVEMBER 19.1979
-------
erage amount of crude oil imported so far
this year from Iran.
Shale drillers know where to find their
fuel, but they differ on the best way to
get it out. Essentially, shale rock must be
"cooked" at 900" F so that the kerogen
can be vaporized and extracted. Two pro-
cesses have been developed to do this.
One is an above-ground method in
which the shale is "distilled" in somewhat
the same way that moonshiners extract al-
cohol from corn mash. After the shale is
mined, the rock is crushed. Union Oil then
moves shale chunks through a towering
surface retort, where hot gases heat it to
release the kerogen. Colony uses a dif-
ferent process: it cooks finely ground shale
in giant drums by mixing the marl with
superheated, marble-size ceramic balls
that distribute the temperature evenly and
vaporize the kerogen. The balls are then
separated from the spent shale by a
screen, reheated and used again.
A second, more radical method in-
volves cooking the shale underground.
Occidental, which has pioneered this pro-
cess, plans to dig at least 2,000 chambers
connected by tunnels under a 5,000-acre
shale tract leased from the Government.
The chambers, each about the size of a
football field and 250 ft. to 300 ft. high,
are created by drilling parallel tunnels
leading from a vertical mineshaft into the
rock at two different depths. The shale in
between is then reduced to rubble by ex-
plosions in both the top and bottom. Each
chamber is sealed, and pilot-light burn-
ers are lowered to start cooking the rock.
Kerogen released from the shale settles
to the bottom of the chamber and is piped
out. Occidental engineers have already
"fired" six giant chambers at an exper-
imental facility at Logan's Wash—with
mixed results. In an experiment last July,
the roof of the chamber collapsed. In oth-
ers, the yield of shale oil was not as high
as expected.
Whatever extraction method is used,
A chunk of kerogen-rich marl limestone
For days, a ledge spouted flames.
Support towers for Occidental's mining gear
the investment will be enormous. Union's
proposed 9,000-bbl.-a-day plant would
cost $130 million; Occidental's 50,000-
bbl.-a-day operation carries a $1 billion
price tag. Colony's process, because of its
size and capital investment, would be the
most expensive: $1.5 billion to $2 billion
for 50,000 bbl. of oil a day.
The Government stands ready to help
because shale oil is an important part of
Jimmy Carter's energy program. The Ad-
ministration is more optimistic than oil-
men: it envisages the production of 400,-
000 bbl. a day by 1990. Carter wants Con-
gress to grant shale developers a tax
credit of $3 a bbl. to make shale oil
prices competitive with those of con-
ventional petroleum. In addition to the
Senate's $20 billion program, the Ad-
ministration is providing $2.2 billion in
fiscal 1980, largely for shale.
But if the energy companies and
Washington policymakers are sold on
shale, others are not. Colorado Governor
Richard Lamm protests that any crash
development program "could do irrepa-
rable damage to our water supply, to our
communities, to our environment." State
officials, local representatives of the En-
vironmental Protection Agency, the Sier-
ra Club and similar groups are allied to
stop or at least to stall shale development.
Water, a precious resource in the tri-state
region, is one of their greatest concerns.
Conservationists claim that shale extrac-
tion could use from one to five barrels of
water for each barrel of oil, but company
officials maintain much less would be re-
quired. Critics also argue that the under-
ground marl-cooking process could re-
lease salts, and perhaps even arsenic, into
the region's ground water. Shale oppo-
nents protest finally that the surface-
retorting process leaves piles of rubble and
dust behind that would ruin the pristine
Rocky Mountain valleys. A 400,000-bbl.-
a-day industry would require 500,000 tons
of shale to be mined, retorted and in some
cases relocated.
Nonetheless, opponents are willing to
permit small test projects of the
new energy so that the impact of
unknown technologies can be fully mea-
sured. Says Terry Thoem, a director of
the Denver EPA: "We have been studying
shale for years, and now we would like to
see some further development on a lim-
ited scale to get further data on a shale in-
dustry's impact—on water tables, on soil,
on just about everything."
The energy companies insist they can
respond to the environmental concerns.
They claim that their water requirements
would be reasonable. Company officials
also say that the underground cooking
process seals the chambers, actually fus-
es the rock, and prevents salts from leach-
ing into ground water. Firms plan to con-
tour the piles of leftover shale rubble and
to plant them with local wild flowers and
grasses; tests have shown good results.
And most of the industry agrees that the
first production units should be small test
sites rather than giant plants.
Although the first shale patent was
granted in England in 1694 and called
for distilling "oyle from a kind of stone,"
oil from the dark, veined rock so far has
not been developed primarily because
conventional petroleum has always been
cheaper. Now, at last, economic neces-
sity and innovative technology may lead
to tapping the vast potential of shale. ¦
Crashed minerals at the Union Oil retort
Now man must finish nature's work.
TIME. NOVEMBER 19. 1979
63
-------
-------
de
all
ite
he
^rs
10
«g
e
i-
a i
a VMi •
i a w I
»/
w w w w wa 11;
>
3.
nt
oe-
;ed
ved
jsed
jived
of the
ian30
CEDAREDGE — With impetus pro-
vided by friends and foes, western Col-
orado's "energy boom," still only an
echo in many areas, is gaining momen-
tum.
The friends include, presumably, the
U.S. Department of Energy, as well as
several other federal and state agen-
cies, a number of corporations and an
assortment of other private interests.
The foes include — again, presuma-
bly — Iran, the Soviet Union and Af-
ghanistan, whose recent activities
have spurred efforts to expand Ameri-
ca's sources of energy and minerals.
The Energy Department bestirred .
itself last week and announced that it's
finally getting ready to allocate the
first $200 million of $2.2 billion it plans
'0 spend on synthetic fuel develop-
nent.
The department's announcement
vas followed quickly by indications
.iat the Paraho Development Corp.,
•uperior Oil Co. and the Tosco Corp.
vill accelerate their plans to make
ommercial shale oil production a
ong-awaited reality.
PARAHO, A Grand Junction-based
firm which has been operating a small
experimental shale oil facility on the
U.S. Naval Oil Shale Reserve west of
Rifle, is set to begin negotiations with
the Energy Department on a $6.5 mil-
lion contract for design and cost esti-
mate of a full-size, above-ground mod-
ule retort.
If the negotiations are successful,
they could lead to construction of a
new Paraho plant about 40 miles south-
east of Vernal, Utah.
Paraho decided to abandon its oper-
ation near Rifle because it has been
unable to obtain an environmental im-
pact statement on the site — the
paperwork is bogged down somewhere
in the Energy Department.
So the impact of the Paraho opera-
tion on western Colorado apparently
will be indirect.
Tosco, which has demonstrated its
surface retorting technology at the
Colony Oil Shale Project north of
Grand Valley, in association with At-
lantic-Richfield, also plans to build a
demonstration plant south of Vernal if
an Energy Department contract is
forthcoming.
Again, the effect on the Western
Slope would be indirect. But that
doesn't mean it wouldn't be important,
with short- and long-range implications
for the environment and the economy.
The proposed Paraho plant would
produce between 6.000 and 10,000 bar-
rels of oil a day from a supply of shale
estimated to contain 57 million barrels.
Tosco has reservations about a plant
that small for its process and hopes to
convince the Energy Department that
one twice that big should be built.
SUPERIOR OIL Co., which has
demonstrated still another above-
ground process for extracting oil from
shale, expects to huild a commercial
plant at a site in the Piceance Basin
northwest of Rifle. Superior's plans de-
pend in large part on the successful
completion of a land swap that must be
approved by the U.S. Interior Depart-
ment. A decision is expected by mid-
year.
Another entrant in the field, Union
Oil Co., last week reiterated its inter-
est in building a commercial oil shale
facility at its location on Parachute
Creek in Garfield County. Union is
awaiting favorable action by Congress
on the proposed $3 a barrel tax credit.
In the meantime, the company is pro-
ceeding on schedule with planning and
engineering work.
The activity in the oil shale field is
being paralleled, at a somewhat slower
pace and on a smaller scale, by mining
operations.
At Crested Butte, Climax Molybde-
num is treading down a road that ends
with an environmental impact state-
ment and various operating permits
for its mine on nearby Mount Em-
mons. In spite of strong opposition by
town residents, it is a good bet that the
mine will open in a few years, along
with a mill to process the ore.
To the east, the Homestake Mining
Co. is moving right along with its ura-
nium mining and milling project.
Near Ouray, the famous old Camp
Bird Mine, revitalized by the soaring
prices of silver and gold, is back in op-
eration — at a make-ready level — and
is expected to be in production by the
end of the year.
COAL MINING is spotty, depending
in part on whether the coal is for use in
the coking ovens of steel mills or to
fuel electric power plants.
In the latter case, demand will con-
tinue to grow. The Colorado-Ute Elec-
tric Association, for example, already
involved in the huge new coal-fired
plant at Craig, is busy buying or taking
options on big hunks of land in several
Western Slope counties, one of which
will become the site of another big
power plant.
The availability of coal will be a key
factor in locating the facility.
As the Energy Department's svn-
By ROBERT TWEEDELL
WMtim Slop* Iwmu
thetic fuels program is further unfold-
ed, either by it or some other federal
agency, one result will be the mining of
coal for conversion to liquids and
gases. Private industry already is pre-
paring to build plants for coal gasifica-
tion and liquefaction.
The "energy boom" is reverberating
more and moremp and down the West-
ern Slope, causing at once exhilaration
and despair. Advocates of economic
growth and what they deem as prog-
ress are generally pleased; devotees of
a disappearing lifestyle are dejected.
Jimmy Durante used to say that
"everybody wants to get into the act."
On the Western Slope, as time passes,
everyone is going to get into the act,
one way of another, whether they want
to.
Officers Arrest
2 After Scuffle
Two men were in custody Saturday,
accused of assaulting a Denver police
officer who was going to question them
about the possible theft of a pair of
gloves from a car.
Officer John Diaz, 26, had been sum-
moned to the 1700 block of Bryant
Street by a man who said he had found
someone in his car when he returned
to it about 12:20 a.m. Saturday after a
concert at McNichols Sports Arena.
The man told Diaz that a pair of gloves
was missing from the car and that the
man who had been in the car was sit-
ting with another man in a pickup
truck nearby.
According to Diaz and the car's
owner, when Diaz approached the two
men in the truck, they attempted to
run over him. Diaz said he fired six
shots at the pickup truck's tires. The
two men then got out of the truck and
began scuffling with Diaz, police said.
Other police soon arrived and the
two men were arrested. They were
identified as Michael Balerio, 19, of
5281 W. 17th Ave., Lakewood, and
Jacob Cisneros, 18, of 8811 Hastings
Way, Westminster. They were being
held for investigation of assault and for
theft from a vehicle.
Diaz was treated and released from
Denver General Hospital.
-------
Show Colorado
By BRUCE WILKINSON
Denver Post Business Writer
Whatever its problems may be in
other parts of the country, coal is once
again king in Colorado as far as the
energy industry is concerned.
In 21 years, coal production has
riserr some sixfold. — from a post
World War II low of 2.97 million tons m
1958 to what is estimated at nearly 18
million tons in 1979.
Already well past its peak of 12.5
million tons in 1918. Colorado coal pro-
duction is expected to reach between
19.5 and 20 million tons in 1980 and to
continue- advancing steadily during the
1980s. :
In economic terms, coal has shown
even greater- growth because of sub-
itantial price increases that have ac-
iompanied the hefty tonnage gains.
In 1971, the more than 5.3 million
tons extracted were valued at only
! about $30 million (an average price of
S5.70 per ton). In 1974, 6.% million ions
contributed about $88 million to the
slate's economy. And in 1975, 9.46 mil-
lion tons were valued at $145 million —
more than double that of 1974.
THIS YEAH, production of the once-
neglected heat source (now calculated
at $13.50 to SI9 per ton) has added up to
at least $323 million. Next year's antici-
pated yield — approaching 20 million
tons — is expected to account for more
than S400 million in new wealth.
In terms of jobs, Colorado's coal
mines have been a major growth area
"within the mining industry but ac-
counting for less than 1 percent of the
state's employment. There are about
4,350 people employed in coal mining
compared with about 2,1C0 at the end
of 1975 and a low of between 1,200 and •
1,300 toward the end of 1973, according
to the Colorado Division of Mines.
The number of miners is far beiow-
that m coal's original heyday, but in-
dustry people are averaging $20,000 to
524,000 a year now and work year
round where employment used to be
seasonal,
COLORADO HAS 49 underground"
and 25 surface mines contributing
about the same tonnage each because
surface mines tend to be larger. The
bulk of Colorado's coal is goms to the
big utilities for use in generating elec-
tricity in addition to the fairly sizable
amount j.hat_contmues to be mined by
CF&I Steel for its own use from mines
near Trinidad.
Despite fairly large-scale coal min-
ing early m the century and today's en-
ergetic activity, all the coal muung to
date has brought the removal of only
about G50 million tons from an estimat-
ed minabie reserves of 450 billion tons,
according to Andy Deborski. chief coal
mine inspector for Colorado.
Routt County continues to be out
front as the state's biggest coal-pro-
ducing county with 5.9 million tons
mined in the first 10 months of the
year. Moffat County is in second place
with 4 million tons reported for the
cuius icyuntrti LVl uw?
same period. A major portion of the
3979 estimated increase of more than
3.5 million tons will be from these two
counties, Deborski said.
ANOTHER FAST-DEVELOPING
coal-mimng area is Gunnison County,
which produced 1.4 million tons by the
end of October and is expected to be up
300,000 tons for the year. Continued
production increases are expected m
Delta County, where about 900,000 tons-
are being mined each year, the bulk
accounted for by the 3-year-old Orc-
hard Valley Mine.
Las Animas County remains a
steady producer at about 850.000 tons a .
year, a large percentage being mined
by and for CFA.-I Steel Corp. Fremont
County, once one. of southern Colora-
do's most active coal areas, is pro-
ducing about 160,000 tons a year, but it
comes from smaller underground
mines that aren't being expanded.
IT DOESN'T REQUIRE much anal-
ysis to see *hv Colorado's coal produc-
tion machine has been revved up in the
last seven or eight years after the era
in which coal had ceen supplanted to a
considerable extent by natural gas as
' the primary heat source for the area's
power plants. -
In the early 1970s, Public Service Co.
of Colorado, by far the region's largest
.utility company, was drawing on natu-
ral gas for about 60 percent of the fuel
needs of its power plants. Now the
Denver-based wholesale and retail sup-
plier of. electricity generates ¦ mere
than 90 percent of its power with coal-
fired sU'-ions.
BiIL Martin, manager of eiectnc
planning ar.d analysis for PSC, esti-
mated the company will have burned
more than_ 6 mdlipnjons cf coal this
year at its metropolitan Denver plants
and its Comanche Plant, just east of •
Pueblo. This compares with "a little .
jiver 2 miUion.tQDs;;.;n 1970..
WHEN THE 500-MEG A WATT
Pawnee Power Plant being built by
PSC outside Brush goes on stream late
in 1980, the utility will need almost an- Color
other 2 mtilion tons.a.xear^Dutting its ..
Year ^Brociucttoa.
1930 -Cn9.5-2QjruL
1S79 '18 mil.
1978 14 36 mil.
.977 11.97 mil.
1S75 9.46 mil.
coal Boo/
otal usage over the 8 million ton level.
Colorado-Ute Electnc Association,
the Montrose-based cooperative whole-
sale power supplier for 13 Colorado ru-
ral electric associations in western and
southern Colorado, was burning only a
half million tons a year in 1968 when its
chief power facility was the Hayden
No. 1 unit. By 1977, with the addition of
the second unit at Hayden, Colorado-
Ute was using 1.5. million tons a year.
IN 1980, Colorado-Ute power plants
will be consuming 3.6 million tons, with
the first 400-megawatt Craig Station
unit of the Yampa Project operating
throughout all of 1980 and the second
unit on line most of the year, said Rob-
ert A. Moving, director of public infor-
mation.
After the Craig Station No. 3 urut is
added in 1983, he said, annual con-
sumption will be about 5.1 million tons.
THE MONTROSE UTILITY signed
a contract on Dec. 10 valued at slightly-
more than $1 billion with Colo-Wyo
Coal Co. for 70 million tons of coal to
be supplied over 35 years from the
Colo-Wyo Mine 20 miles south of the
Craig Station. This coal will be used
primarily by Craig Unit No. 3.
Colorado Springs, through its De-
partment of Public Utilities, has shift-
ed from a primary emphasis on natu-
ral gas as late as 1973 to a virtually all-
coal fuel program. The municipal
utility's usage of coal grew from
176,000 tons of coal in 1973 to SSO.OOO
tons of coal in 1978 at its Martin Drake
Power Plant. Consumption is expected
to be 1,274,000 tons in 1980, with the ad-
dition of the 200-megawatt. Ray D. N'ix-
on Power Plant. Its entire output ini-
tially will be sold to PSCo.
The Platte River Power Authority,
which is owned by Fort Collins. Love-
land. Longmont and Estes Pari;, is be-
coming a sizable user of coal as a 16
percent owner of the first two Craig
Station Units.
Colorado is, on balance, a coal ex-
porter even though its largest user,
PSC brings most of its coal in from
Wyoming.
1975
J974-..
-1973.V
1972..
1971 ..
1970.
J.3S mil.
....... 6.96 mil.
.w..__6.23 mil.
5.53 mil.
5.31 mil.
6.02 mil.
Tonnage
Shipped Out
Value Per Ton
Total Valut
*7.5-8 mil.
*$20-21
*$400 m:!.
*6.5-7 mil.
*518.50-19
*$333 mii.
5 89 mil.
$17.30
S249 mii.
4.31 mil.
$16.48
S196 5 mil.
2 76 mil.
$15.17
il-15 mil.
2.56 rr.il.
$10.51
$SS mil.
_.2.SS mil.
$9 85
$69.5 mil
J.72 mil.
-"3 8 14
-- StOttu
. - 1.-3 mil.
~~ SR.11
S-TtJmii
1.68 mil.
•- S5.ro
-5.10-2 rral
1.54 mil.
$5 70
S'W.2 mil.
-------
-------
of an on air inloke ducf designed lor.
lockheedCalifornio Co.'s t-1011 Tri-
Scattered oil shale r6serve$
shaped funnel is to scco'p air jnto"TMfJ"
plone's tail jet engine.
whcfrin s'.ir.r-r: --'—rrj.——
cllidcs in lis own area, lie said.
Colonyf BLM swap (mid on Western
Colony Development Operation Monday an- :
noiinccd a .W-acre land swap with the Bureail of
Land Management in western Colorado. ¦
The lam! exchange involved Colony's acquisi-
tion of several small, scattered tracts of public
lands containing oil shale reserves in Garfield
County. . ¦ •' : ' " 'f. ¦1:
Colony deeded a like amount of Acreage adja-
cent to the U.S. Naval Oil Shale Reserve to Hie'
government,
111
', 1
The tracts acquired by Colony are within its
8,000-acre block of oil shale holdings.
"This 15 .mother significant step in proceeding
toward commercialization of the Colony
project," said I.es L.udlam, Colony manager. '
"ft will permit us to develop & more efficient
mining plan and serves to prevent the waste of
federal resources," said.
Colony Development Operation, which is also
known as Colony Development Co., has secured
most of the necessary permits and is "cautiously
optimistic" that conditions will allow the start
of construction ot a 17,000 barrels per day com-
mercial plant before the end of 1980, Liidlam
said.
This plant. Ludlam said, will "produce a very
at tractive product which can be reprocessed into
a variety 01 transportation fuels at almost any
refinery In the U S."
The 111 .M, according to Colony, acknowledged
that the exchange was the first involving oil
shale reserves by the federal agency since the
issuance nf executive orders withdrawing oil
shale lands from development.
Colnitv Development is a joint venture of
Atlantic Richfield Co. and TOSCO Corp. ARCO
has 6Q percent of the venture and is operator of
the project. TOSCO has 40 percent.
The project is about 15 miles north of Grand
Valley.
to bring it on stream," added
"We need to persuado 11
makers in the outside work
benefit to use solar energy," I
Helving on those who w
"moral obligation would n
penetration" into the ener,'
lace, Veigc! said.
"It h as to be to the aih ;
owner, of the home build':
everyone else," he said
"iVc have to remove som
rounds solar energy," Veige
The morning-long briofit
tcrs discussed a number 0.
tions of Slr.RI. SERl emplo
involved in a variety of othc
mation functions in additio
search and data collection
SERJ is involved with C
lishers of the non-profit C
testing of various system'
protection duties, plus ati
solar industry itself as to r
-------
ocu"11 t-cvice^ «¦"
u|13/79
New Police
EPA to E:
J'/'?
"nm to ho»»i
*p. fjrfT
By Robert S. Halliday
Tribune Environmental Specialist
The Environmental Protection
Agency is gearing to pc: eoersj
projects on a iasi track to pemn
approval.
In a draft of its new energy policy,
EPA Region 8, Denver, said it will
expedite its regulatory decisions or. ail
energy projects, granting them special
¦ priority" for action. The objective is to
process energy project permit applica-
tions within six months.
The EPA said, however, it is commit-
ted to assuring that environmental
standards and objectives are not viol-
ated by energy facilities, adding that
"it is not necessary to weaken existing
local state and federal substantive
environmental requirements to accom-
plish reasonable energy goals."
Provide Assist
The EPA regional office said it will
provide assistance in the scoping phase
of any energy environmental impact
statement to expedite identification and
resolution of issues.
It is also developing a consolidation of
procedures for application, review and
Issuance of project authorizations and
is seeking to reduce or eliminate
duplication of requirements.
The agency advocates selection of
energy development options that
minimize consumptive use of water, do
not increase stream salinity and utilize
lower-quality (saline) waters when feas-
ible.
It favors phased modular develop-
ment rather than immediate commer-
cial-scale construction of synthetic
fuels facilities ... oil shale, coal
gasification and liquefaction plants.
Promote Measures
The EPA offic said It will also
continue to promote energy conserva-
tion measures Internally and with other
federal agencies.
It will develop a "memorandum oI
understanding1' 1889 irtiSUiS '
Department of tn^.^^coordinatfirtv
of environmental progrdiftrgj
related to the eraergiri^yTStels indts-^
try and see* naroapaQOG' tise
Department of Interior in""fo»oru coal
¦nd oil shale leasing activitJ«s.'-'Jiv
The agency is increasing energy
conservation promotion by adding in-
centives in awards for wastewater
treatment plants, solid waste grants
and air pollution control grants.
Energy conservation and recovery
techniques will be fully considered for
wastewater treatment Plants and the
facility plans will not be approved
unless this consideration is provided by
the applicant.
The phased modular approach to
synfuels development (rather than a
crash program) will mean more gradu-
al population growth eliminate much
uncertainty in the data base, minimize
catastrophic environmental risks and
reduce chances for technological and
economic failure, the EPA office re-
ported.
-------
I Pi IV I w
n/HjlQ
p.SC
p and Down the Street • ! j i
West to Insist on Energy Mole
By Robert H. Woody
Tribune Business Editor
ST. GEORGE — Just after the Middle
East oil embargo in 1973, there were
apocalyptic utterances that the West
would become "a national sacrifice
area" in the name of securing the
Ration's energy independence.
It hasn't happened yet.
now Congress is laying the
legislation for a powerful energy mobil-
ization board,-and the president talks
jibout a $161 billion synthetic fuels
program.
Will Utah and the other western
states (wherein lie much of the synthe-
tic fuel minerals coal, oil shale and tar
sands) bow down and be sacrificied"!
Gov. Scott M. Mat&eson made it clear
Tuesday at the Utah Mining Associa-
tion convention, that Utah and the other
western states are heading the federal
government off at the pass.
There is a concensus among western
governors, he said, that the states must
be participants in any decisions or
programs on synthetic fuels.
A«ion by Stales
And. the governors have cievejoped a
four point " affirmative action" policy
to apply to energy minerals and which
could apply to any other minerals — or
even the <30 billion MX missile project
— in establishing a complimentary
federal-state policy.
Mainly, the program c alls for: !
— Intergovernmental cooperation.
— Phased development of synthetic
fuels ("A hypothetical combination of
five projects constructed concurrently
within the same area could be devastat-
ing. My concept of phased development
is to encourage quality development
within the environmental and socio
economic carrying capacities of the
areas.")
— Meaningful conservation efforts.
— And impact assistance from the
federal government to deal with such
sudden needs as worker housing,
schools, hospitals, etc.
The concept of a powerful energy
mobilization board, said Gov. Ma; he-
son, is a snare and delusion. "Instead of
re-examining the accumulated capaci-
ty of a decade of environmental
enthusiasm, Congress has created
another spool of federal red tape. . .
He added that new western governors
have told President Carter that state
water rights must be respected.
There already is an effort by the
Interior Department solicitor to assert
a new class of water claims called
"non-reserve rights."
The governors will meet shortly with
Interior Secretary Cecil Andrus, lie
said, "to challenge this new etfort to
circumvent statp law."
Criticism of Laws
Allen Overton Jr., president of the
American Mining Congress in Wash.,
D.C., termed the result of the nation's
environmental laws and regulations
and land withdrawals a "case of
self-imposed paucity in the midst of
plenty. And I am profoundly concerned
about what it portends for Americans in
an increasingly competitive and still
dangerous world."
There are stark geopolitical risks in
the fact that the United States is
becoming increasingly dependent on
foreign sources — many of them
located in the most volatile parts of the
globe — for many of the commodities
that are basic to modern civilization.
The convention wrapped up with a
'.business meeting. Members approved
in principle a single resolution support-
ing Sens..Jake Garn and Orrin Hatch's
bill to cause transfer of federal lands to
the states. The resolution now goes to
consideration of the association's ex-
ecutive committee.
-------
A"
1759
SPECIAL REPORT
REGION VIII: ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION FACES DILEMMA
OF BALANCING ENERGY DEVELOPMENT, PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT
Only recently has the image of Region VIII (the Rocky
Mountain region) as predominantly a center of tourism and
agriculture begun to change — both in the eyes of
Westerners and in the eyes of those outside the region.
The states that comprise the region — Colorado, Montana.
North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming — contain
the majestic mountains, arid deserts, lush forests, and vast
prairies that make up the traditional picture of the region.
Much of the region is either federal land, Indian
reservations, or wilderness areas.
The changing image of the region, like so many changes in
the last few years, is related to energy. Region VIII contains
one-half of U.S. oil shale, coai reserves, and uranium
deposits — all energy resources that increasingly are being
exploited as the future of other energy supplies becomes un-
certain.
In an area of great natural beauty, energy development in
appropriate areas requires, in the words of a draft energy
policy prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency's
regional office ir. Denver, "a delicate balance" (Current
Developments. December 14, p. 1663).
"Region VIII is divided between those who want economic
growth and those who want to preserve the environment —
and the environmentalists really flock here," said Roger
Williams, the newly appointed deputy regional ad-
ministrator.
"The issues are more intense out here and more polarized.
There's so much emotion in the West," said Williams.
Because of its low population density, the region is
relatively clean — "what is correction ia the East, is preven-
tion out here."
Cities are few and far between in the region.
It's an area low in population and large in land size. As
Larry Gazda, head of EPA's waste management branch,
commented, "In dealing with just the state of Montana, it's a
day to fly up and a day to fly back."
But because of the size and sparse population of the region,
it's also relatively clean. "What is correction in the East, is
prevention out here," said Williams. "Clearly we don't have
pollution problems."
"In the Chicago region, with all its problems, they don't
have to look very hard to find legal cases to take to court,"
said Gazda "We look more to apply pressure than to taking
to court. Our enforcement is used in terms of enlightenment
about what can happen — followed by pressure. There's just
not an awful lot of enforcement cases."
Williams went on to explain that although the region has no
massive pollution problems, every community seems to
have its hot spots, many recently surfacing as the energy
thrust moves westward
Williams believes the region can withstand the promised
pollution that accompanies energy growth. "We can have
energy growth and still protect the environment," he said.
He defined the energy boom in Region VIII to include oil,
uranium, and coal power — "We have processed 40 PSD
(prevention of significant deterioration) permits recently,
with 68 on the drawing boards. That's high when you're talk-
ing about power plants. By 1990, there will be 160 additional
projects.
"We have 28 synfuel facilities in the region, 30 new coal
mines and Bellaire, the largest coal mine in the United
States, is in our region. The Solar Energy Research Institute
(SERI) is located here, making us the Detroit of the solar in-
dustry. There's a potential eight oil shale facilities, which
will move approximately 70 tons of rock a day. That would
make it bigger than Alberta, Canada.
"Someplace down the road the reality of all this is going to
hit us. And we're going to have to ask the question of how to
create more energy without risk." Williams said.
Clearly, Williams is not opposed to development, but only
to development that cannot be reconciled with environmen-
tal protection.
"We have to accommodate more energy. I'm committed
to having new projects in Region VIII," Williams said.
He said that at present it takes 12 to 18 months to process
new PSD permits. "Today that length of time is unaccep-
table," Williams said. He is pushing to have the review and
processing time for permits reduced.
"With the cooperation of the industry on the front end, we
should be able to make a final decision in six months by
tightening up our bureaucracy," Williams said.
Concrete evidence of the region's intentions is contained in
its draft energy policy. "It is not necessary to weaken ex-
isting local, state, or federal substantive environmental re-
quirements to accomplish reasonable energy goals," the
policy says. What the regional office hopes to do is to let per-
mit applications for energy projects go to the head of the
Line However, the policy says, when an environmental im-
pact statement needs to be prepared, or when there are
judicial challenges to a proposed permit, it may be impossi-
ble to stick to the six-month period.
How long the region will have a free hand to set its own
procedures for issuing permits to energy projects remains to
be seen. The federal Energy Mobilization Board bill now in a
House-Senate conference would, in the House version (HR
4985), allow substantive waivers from some environmental
laws in certain circumstances. While it is still unclear
whether this provision will survive the conference, it does
seem certain that any "fast track" provisions that federal
law makes for energy projects will have substantial reper-
cussions on Region VIII.
Editor's Note: This Special Report is the eighth of a
series of Environment Reporter profiles of the 10 EPA
regions. The previous Special Report, on EPA Region
VII, was published on page 1G97 of the December 21
issue.
12-23-79
Copyright r 1979 by The Bureau of National Affairs Inc
0013-9211/79/SOO 50
-------
1760
Williams admitted the real thrust of energy development
will be more severely tested in the future. Meanwhile. EPA
sits with an uneasy partnership with the states and in the
middle with everyone else.
At the end of the legislative session, described as the
longest and most bitter in Colorado's history because of the
air pollution bill, the bill remained unpassed and was left for
another round next year.
What are some key issues?
Air. On a clear day in Denver, one can almost see the
mountains through the smog. Denver and Salt Lake City are
most heavily affected by smog, with Pueblo, Colo., running a
close third.
"Denver sits in a bowl and we don't get good movement of
air. In fact, we took a film of the air moving out and it show-
ed it moving right back in," Gazda said
In Denver, the dirty air is caused primarily by the
automobile. Without a mass transit system, the more than
1 6 million population drive the city streets throughout the
55-mile length of the sprawling city, usually alone in their
cars.
The state legislature set an air pollution tiil as top priority
for passage this year. However, at the end of the legislative
session, which was described as the longest and most bitter
in Colorado's legislative history because of the bill, the Dili
remained unpassed and delayed for another round nest year
In the legislative fray, the state Senate approved an annual
emissions inspection and maintenance program in its ver-
sion of SB 1, which was the major pollution control bill being
considered at the session.
The House, however, substituted a mandatory annual
tune-up program for automobiles to control air pollution. The
bill set standards for the inspecting garages and for each
automobile model year after 1968.
As the Senate and House sparred well after the session
usually closes, EPA was, as some accused, "'silently" veto-
ing either plan, putting at stake millions of federal doilars m
highway and sewers funding for Denver and other Frcni
Range cities.
All three entities agreed finally to the delay of any bill
while a committee formed, made up of Senate and House
members, to study the two rival vehicle emissions programs
with the results to be reported to the 1980 legislature.
While the agency is doing a good job processing SIPs from
Region VIII. Schell said, the quality of the plans has been
mixed (Current Developments. August 3, p. 927).
For example. Wyoming's SIP was the first one the agency
took final action on and that action was approval. But the
next SIP it took a final action on was South Dakota's — a dis-
approval because the plan had inadequate new source review
regulations
The agency was also close to taking final action on Utah's
plan, but that action would have been to disapprove it.
Instead. EPA held off, Schell said, because Utah was working
actively to correct the plan's efficient strategies to attain
ambient air quality standards.
Colorado's plan was conditionally approved with the
stipulation that by March 1980 several deficiencies be
remedied.
Conditional approval was given because of deficiencies to
the plan's ozor.e and carbon monoxide attainment strategy
for Denver, carbon monoxide plan for Colorado Springs, and
total suspended particulates plan for Pueblo.
Conditional approvals also were given for the plan's
volatile organic compound regulations, new source review
regulations, and its auto inspection and maintenance plan
authorization (August 3, p 927).
Araas of Pristine Air Quality
The region has many areas of pristine air quality, usually
around its national forests. The EPA has been active and
direct when that quality has been threatened.
For example, construction permits for two huge coal-fired
power plants in Colstrip, Mont., were denied when they
threatened the pristine quality of the air over the Northern
Cheyenne Indian Reservation, 12 miles away.
The Montana Power Company, head of a consortium of 26
utilities, has two plants already producing a combined 700
megawatts of power. The two new ones, with 773-megawatt
units of power each, would have passed national air stan-
dards. But the reservation with its Class I Air Quality, the
first area to have this protective designation, would have had
its standard violated 19 times in one year.
EPA recently approved the company's current proposal of
95 percent removal of sulfur dioxide, which, replaced the
previous 82 percent, and particulates controlled to 99.6 per-
cent. ending a three-year battle.
'"This was a big victory for us," said Rich Lathrop. head of
EPA's trLbhc awareness office. "It sets precedents."
EPA says it's hard to create awareness of the dangers of
abandoned uranium milling sites.
EPA is making its best progress in reviewing state im-
plementation plans in Region VIII.
However, despite the setbacks on inspection and
maintenance, it's in Region VIII where EPA is making the
best progress in reviewing and taking action on state im-
plementation plans (SIPs). Robert Schell. of EPA's a1 r quail'.;-
programs development division in Research Triangle Pi:'-:.
N.C , said.
All six states in the region have submitted their re-.'.sea
S(Ps to EPA and the agency has taken final action on three
— Wyoming, South Dakota, and Colorado And portions of
Montana's plan are very close to final approval. Schell said
But EPA doesn't always win. With copper mines and
smelters surrounding Salt Lake City, sulfur dioxide levels
are not even mentioned in its state implementation plan. And
in Wyoming, with its small population resulting in an even
smaller tax base, the Wyoming Mining Association has been
able traditionally to fight any radiation control regulation.
It's the only state without a radiation control act.
"And they have half the supply of radiuim," said Paul
Smith Smith is the region's outspoken director of the radia-
tion control program
In the last few years, the Western states, and Colorado in
particular, have started identifying old uranium sites —
everywhere from under a pancake house in Denver to a hous-
ing development in Grand Junction, Colo., which was built
12-28-79
-------
1 / J3
CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS
over a radioactive fill because the mine tailings from a local
uranium mill were free.
Seventy-five percent of the ore that comes from uranium
is in this region and 100 percent of the oil from oil shale. So
far, 22 inactive uranium-milling sites have been identified in
Colorado and Utah
"We've been identifying abandoned sites since 1960, but
it's been hard to create an awareness of the dangers of the
sites. A lot of this stuff we can't do a lot about. If you live
downwind of a radon pile, that's the luck of the draw,"
Smith said.
He said radioactive dust is blowing over Durango, Colo.,
causing an increased health hazard for the city. The same
dangers are happening in other Colorado cities. Smith said.
More than a dozen sites were found near Paradox Valley,
Colo., the remains of a radium refinery established after
Marie Curie discovered the radioactive substance might
cure cancer. Smith said the fate of the waste products in
Colorado and Utah still isn't known.
One official said he feared Colorado would be left "holding
the nation's radioactive garbage bag" as disposal sites are
debated for radium, uranium, and other hazardous nuclear
wastes. As Gazda said. "Nobody wants it in their backyard."
EPA participated in drafting a federai-state remedial
program. Under the 1978 Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation
Control Act, the Energy Department recently assigned
clean-up priorities at processing sites, and many of those
given a high priority are in Colorado and Wyoming (See
related story, p 1751>.
The radioactivity problem spreads into water — from the
Dakotas to California — as a result of the long-term use
of low-level radiation frcm uranium mining and natural oc-
currence of the mineral.
EPA measured radiation levels in water. Smith said the
occurrence of dangerously high radiation levels in drinking
water in communities where a mine is located has been
evidenced. Smith recommended a reevaiuatior. of uranium-
caused radiation in drinking water supplies in Western states
with the idea of upgrading water companies' treatment
facilities, improving discharge treatment systems at
uranium mines or changing to another available water
source.
Other situations also create dangers — yellowcake
(uranium oxide) spills from uranium mines and oil spills
from truck accidents in the mountains when brakes fail —
each causing equally insidious dangers.
And there are other issues. This sirmrrer EPA granred
farmers in South Dakota permission to use insecticides to
fight a serious infestation of grasshoppers that threatened
animal forage. The use, says the National Audubon Society,
is also killing an entire songbird population, plus other wild
fowl. The issue is going to court.
1761
The Jackson Airport in Grand Teton National Park is the
only commercial airport within a park boundary — possibly
endangering the air quality and raising the noise level. Now
airport officials are requesting commercial jet service. EPA
is monitoring the issue, so far finding the noise levels un-
acceptably high.
Colorado's 'sagebrush rebellion' involves a oiaiin by the
state that, because of an inaccurate survey 100 years ago,
the Federal Government owes the state 10,000 acres of land
rich in oil shale.
Colorado's newest land fight is called the "sagebrush
rebellion," by which Colorado is laying claim to some 10,000
acres of federal land, mostly on the Western Slope where it's
oil-shale rich with potential energy development.
Colorado's Governor Dick Lamm claims the Federal
Government owes Colorado the Bureau of Land Management
land because of an inaccurate survey 100 years ago.
The fight is similar to one in Utah, which a few years ago
also chose some shale land on federal property as land owed
to the state. A lawsuit is now pending before the courts, as
sides are being formed in this newest angle to energy
development.
MX Missile Project
Another looming issue is the building of the MX missile
project. If current Air Force plans go ahead, this huge pro-
ject could involve use of land four times the size of Connec-
ticut and construction of 10,000 miles of "racetrack" to
enable missiles to be moved between shelters. The best loca-
tion, according to the Air Force, is desert. There is growing
concern about the availability of water for the projects, and
about the effect of moving in thousands of construction
workers and their families into such sparsely populated
areas (December 14, p. 1639).
EPA's Williams is finding most environmental issues don't
stop at state borders. Water quality in Colorado affects all
the states in which its tributaries flow. Poor air quality in
Utah threatens Colorado's air quality.
"There's a lot of polarization of issues — couple that with
strong states' rights motivation," Williams said. "States
want their own programs, but fight at every turn on con-
niiDns.
"But we respect states' rights, even though that
sometimes makes for a difficult partnership between us. We
are an independent regulatory agency. We try not to
politicize EPA — that would be a big mistake," Williams
said.
12-28-79
Copyright r 1979 by The 8urp.au of Natioral Affairs Inc
0013-921 1/79/S00 50
-------
1640
ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
cond. filed with EPA in October 1978, analyzed project
effects of MX full-scale engineering.
The second EIS identified a number of environmental
aspects of the project including effects on wildlife, water
availability — said to be "highly site-dependent", loss of
recreational areas, loss of habitat and vegetative cover, and
particulate air pollution during construction.
According co Russell Shay, of the Sierra Club's national
conservation staff, one of the major concerns is availability
of water Construction of the project is expected to require
building of a new town whose population is variously es-
timated to be between 50,000 and 100,000. This will require
considerable amounts of water and energy, Shay said.
Air Force General Hecker told a public hearing that unap-
propriated water rights would be used, Sh3y said, but was
not specific about how these rights would be obtained. There
have been suggestions that water would be brought from as
far away as California, or even the Columbia River system,
Shay said. "The Air Force believes that it can solve the
water problem, and they're so determined to go ahead that
they're not going to let anything stop them," he said.
The Air Force's Stern said, however, that "in and of
itself" the MX project would not use "that much water.''
once completed. Water would be needed in the largest quan-
tities during construction, and this need might be met by
drilling into deeper aquifers, he said.
Third EIS
The Air Force said that it is preparing a third environmen-
tal impact statement "to assist decisionmakers in selecting
future deployment locations for the MX advanced intercon-
tinental ballistic missile." According to a November 30 an-
nouncement, the EIS will analyze the environmental effects
of deploying MX missiles in one or more locations, will ex-
amine the effects of withdrawing federal land from the
public domain for the MX. and will consider the results of
segregating or restricting these lands from specified general
land and mineral laws.
The first stage in the preparation of the EIS is formulating
and defining issues for EIS study, known under the new CEQ
regulations on impact statements as "scoping.'' The Air Force
plans to publish the results of the scoping process in January
1930 and has set a deadline of January 15, 1930, for com-
ments on what the EIS should cover.
The draft EIS is scheduled for completion in spring 1980,
after which the Air Force plans to seek public comments. A
final EIS will be made pubiic in the fail 1980, the Air Force
said, and decisions on site selections, restricting uses of
federal lands, and withdrawing and acquiring land areas for
initial MX deplovment would follow in late 1980 or earlv
1931.
Further information is available from the Ballistic Missile
Office, Civil Engineering Division (BMO/MNBD) Norton
Air Roce Force Base, Calif. 92409, (714 382-6891.
OIL SHALE COMPANIES RUSHING
FOR PSD PERMITS INCOLORADO
Oil shale companies are rushing to apply for facility per-
mits in Colorado so they will be able to use the rapidly
dwindling prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) in-
crements.
The situation in Colorado, industry and Environmental
Protection Agency representatives say. reflects what is
becoming an increasingly difficult issue to deal with — ex-
cessive demand for PSD increments connected with in-
creased energy production in the West
The Piceance Basin, in Northwestern Colorado and
Northeastern Utah, is a Class II area, about 40 miles from
the Flat Tops Wilderness Area, a Class I area. Beneath the
basin lies 94 percent of U.S. shale oil resources, 85 percent in
Colorado and 9 percent in Utah.
Oil companies lease the four federal shale oil tracts in the
basin, two of which are in Colorado and two in Utah.
Occidental Oil Shale Incorporated and Tenneco Oil Shale
Company, which together lease one of the Colorado tracts,
are planning to submit an application to EPA in January for
a 200,000 barrel-a-day oil shale plant.
And that move is prompting the company that leases the
other Colorado tract, Rio Blanco Oil Shale Company, a
general partnership owned by the Gulf and Standard oil com-
panies, to rush its permit application to EPA, also for a
200,000 barrel-a-day facility.
Rio Blanco, knowing of Occidental's and Tenneco's plans
"got nervous because they thought they might not be able to
fully utilize their tracts," said EPA Region VIII Director of
Energy Policy Coordination Terry L. Thoem, adding that
"other companies are rethinking how fast they want to come
in with their applications, too."
Basin Capacity Being Used Up
The companies seem to have good reason to be nervous.
According to EPA's "preliminary and conservative" es-
timate, the basin's total air pollution capacity under PSD
would be totally consumed by 200,000 barrels a day produc-
tion — and EPA already has granted PSD permits for 65.000
barrels a day of that capacity, Thoem said (Current
Developments, July 20, p. 719).
And EPA intends to grant PSD permits to qualified
applicants on a first in line basis, which Thoem said, is im-
plied in the PSD regulations.
Furthermore, Thoem said the line for oil-shale permits
may be just beginning to form. "Chevron, Texaco, City Ser-
vice, Exxon, Mobil — you name it, they all have [private]
land here, about 200,000 acres. And all of those companies
have oil shale plans."
Thoem stressed that a number of factors may ameliorate
the situation, such as better, less conservative modeling and
citing plants farther away from the Class I area. But he con-
ceded that "there's going to be some trouble."
"I wouldn't say EPA is worried. EPA is struggling with it
2nd 'ihnking about it, and certainly industry is worried,"
Thoem said.
Pressure To Make Application
Jay Knepper, Rio Blanco's senior engineer on the oil shale
project, says the company feels "a definite and very strong
pressure to make an application."
Furthermore, Knepper said, "Rushing could cause wasted
time and money. Any application we could produce now
would not have the benefit of engineering field work. So
anything we came in with would almost certainly have to be
changed as a result of the test " But, he said, the company
must apply now.
Knepper agreed, however, that granting permits on a first
come, first serve basis is rational. "While it's logical and
nobody sees any other way to do it, there's probably no basis
for it in law. But to do it any other way, EPA would have to
make some very difficult judgments."
"It's going to be an extremely interesting situation,"
Knepper said "We are going to have to face this issue,
though, if we are going to increase energy production."
Referring to PSD, Knepper said, "EPA is uncomfortable
with it. Congress gave them this Clean Air Act and now we
are going to see its true implications."
12-14-79
Environment Reporter
0013-9211/79/SOO 50
-------
CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS
1641
Production Goals 'Can Ba Met'
Thoem, however, said EPA thinks the PSD constraints
will not thwart President Carter's oil shale production goal
of 400,000 barrels a day.
If the oil shale plants are split between Colorado and Utah,
the 400,000 barrel a day goal can be met, Thoem said.
The 200,000 barrel a day capacity for the basin — which in-
cludes Utah — Thoem said is conservative, and with better
modeling the plants could be sited farther from the Flat Tops
Wilderness Area, which lies to the east in Colorado
However, he said, there are no current plans for ci! shale
production on the two federal lease tracts in Utah because
environmentalists are challenging in court the federal
government's right to lease the Utah land.
Terrain Model Needed
Meanwhile, a regional complex terrain model is "vitally''
needed in order to model with accuracy the effects of
long-range transport of pollutants on the Class I area. Thoem
said. Results of current, standard modeling, he said, are un-
certain, and as the distance increases so does tie uncertain-
ty-
Furthermore. Thoem said, the 200,000 barrel-a-day total
capacity figure is a linear assumption based on the modeling
for the Colony Development Operation's PSD permit.
Colony's proposed plant would be the closest or.e to Lie Fiat
Tops Wilderness area — another reason why the 2OO.Oi"'
barrel figure is conservative, he said
"EPA is very comfortable that that level is safe sased on.
conservative assumptions. With different assumptions,
maybe we could give more," Thoem said
EPA faces the same situation in North Dakota, where the
Class I increment in the Theodore Roosevelt National Park
already "has been essentially consumed," Thoem ss:c
Thoem said that as far as he knows, the recent plans for in-
creased energy production are making the "PSD increments
felt," for the first time.
And many more applications for energy facility permits
are expected after Congress passes its energy legislation.
Thoem said (see related story below).
Litigation
EPA RACE-TO-THE-COURTHOUSE RULES
SUSTAINED 3Y U.S. FOURTH CIRCUIT
The Environmental Protection Agency's attempt to im-
pose some order on the filing of petitions for review of the
Clean Water Act's final National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit regulations was up-
held December 4 by a U.S. court of appeals (VEPCO v.
EPA, Nos. 79-1308, 79-1323, 79-1333, 79-1347) (Current
Developments, July 27, p. 782)
EPA set 1:00 p m. Eastern time, seven days after the
NPDES regulations were published in the Federal Register,
as the effective date for purposes of seeking judicial review
The U S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
characterized EPA's action as a reasonable effort to avoid
some "confusion and expense and unseemliness that had
developed in the statutorily inspired races to the
courthouse." to allow all parties to read ana corsider the
regulations before seeking review, and to eliminate the "un-
fair advantage of those parties who find out first that an un-
announced physical event constituting 'promulgation has
occurred "
The "triggering device'' established by EPA for judicial
review was. said the court, a valid exercise of the Agency's
statutory powers.
All petitions for review filed prior to June 14, 1979, at 1:00
p.m. Eastern time were ordered dismissed as premature by
the court.
Racing to the courthouse to file petitions for review is in-
spired by 28 U.S.C. Section 2112(a) which requires that when
an agency order is challenged in more than one court o:
appeals, the agency record is to be filed m the court where
filing occurred first, and all other actions are to b-:-
transferred to the court of nrst filing. Filing first, then, after
promulgation of the challenged regulations, gives the
petitioner the advantage of selecting a court of appeals
perceived to be favorable to the petitioner's desired disposi-
tion of the case, said the court.
Energy
EPA'S REGION VIII ISSUES DRAFT
CF MEW ENERGY PLANT PERMIT POLICY
The Environmental Protection Agency's Region VIII of-
fice. which covers six Western states, issued a draft policy
for issuing permits to new energy facilities that says the of-
fice will try to process applications within six months.
The draft policy acknowledges the potentially serious en-
vironmental and social problems that could accompany the
projected increase m energy production in the West. And the
statement outlines a general policy aimed at expediting
energy production while minimizing those problems.
The draft policy said the region will try to process energy
facility permit applications within six months of receiving a
complete application. Exceptions, however, would be when a
proposed permit needed an environmental impact state-
ment. or if court challenges held up the permitting, the draft
policy said.
EPA will coordinate its work with other federal, state
and local agencies, and will delegate as much permitting
authority as possible to states, the draft policy said.
"It is not necessary to weaken existing local, state or
federal substantive environmental requirements to ac-
complish reasonable energy goals," the draft policy said.
The policy also:
* Advocates selecting energy options that minimize the
use of water, do not increase the salinity levels in streams,
and use lower quality water, such as saline water; and
~ Advocates the phased modular development of synthetic
fuel facilities, rather than their immediate commercial
scale construction.
Furthermore, the policy said that exempting synthetic fuel
facilities from future substantive environmental regulations
is unnecessary.
Region VIII is circulating the draft policy among state,
local, industry, and environmental representatives for com-
ment.
The region plans to issue the final policy — which would
have no legal authority — in January, said Region VIII's
Director of Energy Policy Coordination Terry L. Thoem.
The draft policy is published in the Full Text Section of this
issue
Comments on the draft should be sent to Thoem at EPA
Region VIII, 1860 Lincoln St., Denver, Colo., 80295.
Energy
ARMY SECRETARY APPROVES PERMIT
FOR OIL REFINERY IN PORTSMOUTH, VA.
Secretary of the Army Clifford L. Alexander December 11
announced a final decision to grant a permit for construction
of the Hampton Roads Energy Company's proposed refiner.*
at Portsmouth, Va
12-14-79
Copyright r 1979 by The Bureau of National Affairs. Inc
C-C13-921 W9/S00 50
-------
ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS
unnecessary delay." he said. "Accordingly, we oppose the
Udall-Wirth substitute."
The Commerce bill, with the Santini-Lujan amendment,
will "substantially achieve the Administration's objec-
tives," Duncan said. This version, however, allows substan-
tive waivers, and the Administration "would strongly prefer
a bill with no provision for waiver of substantive laws, ex-
cept for those which might be covered by a 'grandfather'
provision." he said.
Duncan said the Administration will support an amended
version of the Commerce bill. Congressman Bob Eckhardt
(D-Tex) plans to offer an amendment to remove provisions
for substantive waivers and to provide for court reviews of
board decisions to grandfather projects after project deci-
sion schedules are set.
The Administration "does not seek authority for any sub-
stantive waiver, and will support efforts to delete this
authority on the House floor," Duncan said. "However,
should the choice ultimatey fall between the Udall-Wirth
substitute and the Commerce Committee bill as amended by'
the Santini-Lujan amendment, we would support the latter
as closest to our position, because it avoids the delays in-
herent in the addition of new opportunities for judicial
review."
Enargy
, ADMINISTRATION SHIFTS POLICY
\TOWARD CONSERVATION. BLUM SAYS
In a major policy shift, the administration is placing heavy
emphasis on energy conservation, but is not retreating — at
least now — from its commitment to synfuels, Environmen-
tal Protection Agency Deputy Administrator Barbara Blum
said.
The administration is looking at ways to encourage
large-scale private investment in making existing homes and
buildings more energy efficient, Blum said October 29 in an
interview with Environment Reporter.
"I think it's the right way to go," Blum said. "We have to
hit the energy problem on all fronts, but the front that was
most overlooked, was the energy conservation front."
To the disappointment of environmentalists, former
Energy Secretary James Schlesinger placed little emphasis
on using energy conservation to reduce dependence on
foreign oil.
However, at a Harvard University energy seminar two
weeks ago, new Energy Secretary Charles Duncan broke
with his predecessor by coming out strongly for solar energy
and energy conservation.
"That was probably the first time I had heard or heard of a
major energy speech made by the Department of Energy on
energy conservation," Blum said.
The switch, she said, came with the realization that energy
conservation can provide a greater barrel of oil per capita
savings than any other energy alternative.
Synfuels
"Until we can see if energy conservation takes," Blum
said, "the administration considers it important to continue
its synfuel efforts."
"But if energy conservation comes along as I think it will
— if we can educate people and find long-term financing —
we may find there isn't as great a need for synfuels."
Producing and burning synfuels cleanly is expensive, and
increasingly is being recognized as inflationary, Blum said.
EPA unsuccessfully pushed for a greater stress on energy
conservation in the President's July energy message. Blum
Reporter
I'VS/SOO 50
confirmed, adding that the Council on Environmental Quali-
ty and "elements in DOE" also tried to further that position.
RCRA: 'Search and Seizure*
On another matter, Blum said, EPA probably will change
its strategy for assessing and investigating hazardous waste
sites
Currently, as hazardous waste sites are discovered the
task force lists them according to priority for cleanup and
enforcement.
However, Blum said the agency will be moving toward a
"search and seizure" operation, whereby hazardous waste
dump sites will be actively sought out and EPA. working
with a state, will decide if it is an immediate danger that
should be removed or contained.
"1 hesitated to do it, and Doug [Costlel hesitated, too. be-
cause it's difficult to panic the public when you don't have a
mechanism in place to remedy it," Blum said. "But I think
we've got our task force together enough now so we can deal
with these emergency sites. So even though we have our
hands full, it would be better to try to discover these sites."
The operation would work only if the states agree to take
the lead with EPA providing back-up and technical
assistance, Blum said.
Wildlife
HOUSE APPROVES FUNDING BILL
FOR SPECIES ACT, PLACES ESSA UNDER INTERIOR
The House of Representatives October 24 passed HR 2213
which would reauthorize the Endangered Species Act
through fiscal 1982 and which would clarify the ad-
ministrative procedures for carrying out the Act.
The bill which was designated as S 1143, would authorize
$25.6 million to the Department of Interior and $3 million to
the Commerce Department in each of the next three fiscal
years. In addition, ?600,000 would be authorized for the En-
dangered Species Committee and review board process es-
tablished under the 1978 amendments to the Act.
The Senate passed a simple reauthorization bill (S 1143) in
June (Current Developments, June 22, p. 286).
Passage of the House bill without weakening amendments
was secured by President Carter in exchange for his
signature on an energy and water appropriations bill that
contained a rider exempting Tellico Dam from all laws
prohibiting the dam's construction (September 28. p. 1239).
The most controversial amendment adopted by the House
was introduced in the Rules Committee by Fisheries sub-
committee Chairman John B. Breaux (D-La) as a tech-
nical amendment. Breaux's amendment would move the En-
dangered Species Scientific Authority — an independent pan-
el which advises Interior's Fish and Wildlife Service on
limiting exports of endangered species — into the Interior
Department. The amendment originally included other
restrictive provisions concerning the role of ESSA but were
dropped because of opposition expressed by the State
Department, environmentalists, and the committee minority
member Congressman Paul McCloskey, Jr. (R-Calif) who
said these amendments would violate the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
Other committee members were upset because they did not
have a chance to vote on the package last May (May 4.
p. 15).
Another amendment adopted by the House, and introduced
by Congressman Edwin B. Forsythe (R-i\:J), would authorize
$1 5 million, $1.75 million, and SI.85 million respectively in
fiscal 1980-82 to the Department of Agriculture to monitor
11-2-79 Copyright E 1979 by The Sure
0013-9211/"
-------
1520
ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
Brennan continued that stay to give the Supreme Court as
a whole the opportunity to hear the matter, but the Court
vacated the stay.
Sara Bates, attorney for the Conservation Law Founda-
tion, said the Supreme Court could have continued the stay of
the sale while the appeals court considered the preliminary
injunction appeal, and ultimately, the disposition of the case
on the merits.
Currently, the plaintiffs' request for an expedited appeai
of the preliminary injunction denial is before the First Cir-
cuit; the litigation of the case on the merits remains before
the federal district court for Massachusetts.
Sale Rescheduled
Because Sale 42 was not held November 6. the Interior
Department is required by its regulations to provide 30 days
notice in the Federal Register of a rescheduled sale.
Interior was expected November 13 to announce
rescheduling of the sale for December 18.
"gSneral Policy .
COSTLE SAYS. SINCE 1977 AIR ACT,
4JC0AL PLANT PERMITS APPROVED J
Although industry SfgUSfl mat tflS prevention ot significant
deterioration provisions in the 1977 Clean Air Act
amendments would "chili" new construction, the En-
vironmental Protection Agency has since approved 83 of 85
permit applications received for new coal-fired plants, with
the final two permits to be approved soon, according to EPA
Administrator Douglas M. Costle.
The approval of the permits will result in 18 million tons of
new coal-fired capacity, 20 percent more than in 1978. Costie
told the sixth annual Environment and Safety 3nefing Ses-
sion, sponsored by the Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.. on
November 8.
"Yes, we can go to coal and protect environmental stan-
dards," Costle said.
Costle, who is also chairman of the interagency regulatory
council set up to streamline the federal regulatory process,
said that the average time taken by EPA to deal ~lth permit
applications for new coal-fired plants was five ana a half
months.
Referring to the need to cut red tape in the regulatory
process, Costle said that the multiplicity of permits needed
for new projects is "less of a problem at the federal Levei"
than at the state ana iocai level.
Costle said that the Energy Mobilization Board in the Ad-
ministration's energy proposal is needed to bring new energy-
facilities through the "complicated regulatory' maze'' for
quick decisions on permits.
Regulatory R9form Saving Billions
President Carter's regulatory reform efforts are "saving
billions of dollars, millions of hours" but comprehensive,
permanent reform requires new legislation approved by
Congress, according to Costle.
Costle said that Carter's message to Congress last April on
the benefits and shortcomings of federal regulation have
resulted in substantial savings to government and industry.
Costle said, however, that Congress should act on the
President's legislative proposal, the Regulation Reform Act
of 1979. He said the bill would make permanent the im-
provements already initiated by Carter within the Executive
Branch and would extend them to the independent federal
agencies.
Costle pointed out that the Federal C-ovcmrnent has 90
regulatory offices issuing a total of 7.000 ruies per year
About 2.000 of these rules have a significant impact on state
and local governments or private industry and about 100
have major economic impacts, Costle said.
Costle said that federal environmental rules alone impose
direct costs of almost $20 billion per year, with state and
local environmental rules costing even more. Costle cited a
1979 study by the Business Roundtable showing that federal
regulation costs 48 large companies ?2.6 billion.
Regulation* Must Giva Monsy'j Worth
"If we are to continue our progress, we must ensure that
regulation gives Americans their money's worth," Costle
said
Costle said airline deregulation, which many airlines had
opposed, saved travelers $2.5 billion in the first year and
boosted airline profits. EPA regulations lowering the level of
water pollution controls on 64 nontoxic polluting industries
saved about $200 million in control costs (Current
Developments. August 31, p. 1070). EPA's air bubble policy,
allowing plant managers to choose the most economical air
emissions control strategy, will save up to 25 percent of con-
trol costs, he said.
Costle said the Du Pont de Nemours Chambers works in
New Jersey saved $15 million through the application of the
air bubble policy to reduce its "significant hydrocarbon
emissions." He said the conventional emission reduction ap-
proach would have reduced hydrocarbon emissions by 85
percent at a cost of $20 million, while application of the air
bubble policy reduced emissions by 89 percent at a cost of 35
million.
Less Red Tape
In addition, Costle said, elimination of unnecessary
regulations and paperwork, mandated by the President, has
resulted in
*¦ OSHA cutting 924 standards "that did not contribute to
worker safety." and exempting 40,000 low-risk businesses
from annual reporting requirements;
> EPA speeding up its average processing time for rural
water treatment applications by more than a year, saving
local governments several hundred millions of dollars an-
nually. and.
*¦ HEW reducing its reporting burden in its educational
programs by an estimated 274.000 hours annually.
Costle also said that the Administration recently dis-
covered that 21 federal laws regulate carcinogens under
sever, iifrrer.t agencies. He said that the Regulatory Coun-
cil -viii be coordinating the seven agencies on carcinogens.
Costle said the purpose of Carter's reforms were to "get
rid of bad regulations, to save the good, and to improve
federal management of the regulatory process."
Post-War Chemical Industry Growth
"Our modern, industrialized society has created problems
no government ever had to de3l with" Costle said. Chemicals
had been manufactured from natural products until 1S45,
and there was much less need for controls. The synthetic
chemicals industry has developed rapidly since then. Now
about 4.5 million chemicals are known, widi 45,000 in com-
mercial distribution, and "it takes a team of scientists, 300
mice, two to three years, and about 3300,000 to determine
whether a single suspect chemical causes cancer," he said.
"Big society has spawned a thousand problems that the
founding fathers could not dream of," he said. Although
these new laws make sense by themselves. "The accretion of
these h'-vs slowly builds a cumulative burden that can in-
terfere with business wirr.out oestDwins any compensatory
benefit on society, ' Cosrle said.
11-15-79
En/r;-;(r«nt Reporter
OC-,2 921 1/79'SOO 50
-------
CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS
1521
Costle said that the government must get rid of un-
necessarily discriminatory rules, restore competition to
"healthy mature industries that do not need regulations
passed in a time of monopoly 75 or 100 years ago." and
enable U.S. business to devote its energies to production.
Questioned about legal challenges by industry and conser-
vationists to EPA regulations, Costle said the main effect is
the delay in the effectiveness of the regulations and the un-
certainty of investment planning.
He said the Federal Government is trying to go a better
job in its regulations, and cited as a good example the new
source performance standards for coal fired plants under the
Clean Air Act. Costle said these regulations cost the Govern-
ment $100 million and two years to complete but that the
regulations are defensible in the courts.
"If government does a better job analyzing its regulations,
we will have less to argue about,'' Costle said He said the
biggest mistake would be for EPA to give up in the face of
litigation challenging the validity of rules and to say, "let
the court write the rules."
Litigation
TOXIC WASTE RULES EXPEDITED HEARING
SET BY FEDERAL COURT FOR DECEMBER 12
The U.S. District Court for the District of Coiurnbia
granted November 5 the Environmental Defense Fund's mo-
tion for an expedited hearing on the status report submitted
by Douglas Costle on the development of regulations under
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (EDF v.
Plehn, Nos. 73-1715. 78-1689. 78-1734, 78-1899).
The hearing for review of the Environmental Protection
Agency Administrator's status affidavit is scheduled for
December 12. The motion filed October 23 by the state of
Illinois and several environmental groups requested that the
court set a new and realistic schedule of compliance for the
adoption by the agency of regulations pursuant to RCRA
(Current Developments. November 2, p. 1473).
Motor Vehicles
EPA DENIES REQUESTS TO DELAY
1981 CARBON MONOXIDE STANDARDS
The Environmental Protection Agency November 9 denied
recuests to delav the 1931 =nd 1582 carbon monoxide- emis-
sion standards for three foreign auto companies ana granted
another foreign automaker part of its request.
The agency granted a one-year waiver of the 1981 standard
to Toyo Kogyo of Japan for the four-cylinder. 91-inch cubic
inch and 120 cubic inch displacement engines used in its
Mazda models.
¦ . EPA denied requests from Fugi Industries for its 97-cubic
inch and 109-cubic inch Subaru engines. Nissan for eight of
its four-cylinder engines used in Datsun models and Toyo
Kogyo for its 70-cubic inch engine used in Mazda models
Renault was denied a waiver on its four-c.1 l.nder 85-cub;c
inch engine
In August. EPA denied the majority of requests for
waivers of the 1981 carbon monoxide standard from
American Motors Corporation. General Motors Corporation.
Chrysler Corporation. Volkswagen of America. Toyota
Motor Sales and Britain's BL Limited formerly British
Leyland (Current Developments. August 31 p 1073)
1981 Stand2rd3 Can Be Mat
EPA says the majority of domestic and toreign..
automakers can meet the more stringent 19R1 carbon
monoxide standards, which allow 3.4 grams of the pollutant
per mile. The current carbon monoxide standard is 7 grams
per mile
"I am encouraged by the progress the auto industry has
made in developing technology to meet the 1981 standard,'"
EPA Administrator Douglas M. Costle said.
The engines can incorporate the effective control
technology to meet the 1231 standards even considering
costs, driveabiiuy and fuel economy Costle .~aid.
Waivers were granted for two engine models manufac-
tured by Toyo Kogyo because for those engines meeting the
standards would have required consumers to replace the
catalytic controls within the first 50.000 miles. '"Placing
these extra burden on consumers was not deemed to be
effective control technology," Costle said.
Air Pollution
OZONE DEPLETION, SKIN CANCER RISK
GREATER THAN 1976 PREDICTION. NAS SAYS
Continued worldwide growth of chlorofluorocarbon (CFCi
use at the present rate will deplete stratospheric ozone by 56
percent and will increase the incidence of skin cancer by 200
to 300 percent, according to two studies performed for the
Environmental Protection Agency.
If uses of CFCs are held to the 1977 level, a 16 5 percent
ozone- reduction and a 66 percent skin cancer increase will
result, the studies say.
Even a 25 percent decrease in CFC emissions in 1983
would deplete stratospheric ozone by 13 percent and would
result in a 52 percent skin cancer increase, the studies say.
Both studies, along with a third now undergoing EP.A
review, will be used to determine the need for additional
regulation of CFCs under the Toxic Substances Control Act.
EPA officials said.
The first study was performed by the National Academy of
Sciences under an EPA contract. The study predicts that
ozone depletion will be more than double the seven-percent
level of depletion predicted in a 1976 NAS study.
The second study, performed by the National Cancer
Institute under EPA contract, says each 1 percent reduction
in the ozone layer results in a 4 percent increase in skin
cancer.
Pvecuction of the ozone layer exposes .the earth to greater
levels of ultraviolet radiation, which is known to be a
causative factor in skin cancer development.
Both reports are scheduled for delivery to EPA during the
coming week. Executive summaries of the reports,
however, outline the effects of various levels of CFC use and
compare them with expected skin cancer rates.
Based on constant 1977 CFC production levels, ozone
depletion will reach 16.5 percent early in the next century,
the NAS study says.
A National Aeronautics and Space Administration study,
based on 1975 CFC emissions, predicted an 11 to 14 percent
ozone depletion. The 1976 NAS study used 1973 CFC release
rates when it arrived at the 7 percent depletion figure cited
in the 1976 NAS report.
CFC Usas Increasing
According to the NAS report summary. EPA estimates
that world CFC production will increase by 5 percent each
year through 1900 for F-ll and F-12 and by about 8 to 9 per-
cent a year for F-113 and F-114.
A.cCQi;d:ng.:taJlie_NAS summary, production of F-ll and
F-12 has not Increased significantly since the 1976 study
11-16-79
Copyright 1 1979 by The 8ureau of National Affairs. Inc
00)3 9211'79'ioo 50
-------
1663
Full Text
EPA REGION VIII
ENERGY POLICY STATEMENT
PURPOSE
This policy statement demonstrates EPA Region VTirs
commitment to do its part in helping the Nation achieve
energy self sufficiency. EPA Region VIII is also committed
to the protection of the high quality environment presently
enjoyed by the citizens and visitors in the Region. We Kiieve
that energy resource development and environmental
protection can be compatible in most situations.
Magnificent vista's, pristine air, fertile plains, clean
water, and untouched wilderness areas make up the
Region's geography. Abundant energy resources coexist
with these natural conditions. Essentially al! of the Nation's
oil shale resource, half of the Nation's coal reserves and half
of the Nation's uranium deposits are found in the Region. Re-
cent actions by the President and by Congress point toward
an increased emphasis on the development of these energy
resources A delicate balance must be implemented to allow
energy resource development to proceed in appropriate
areas.
BACKGROUND
A cornerstone of the National Energy Supply Plan is the
development of the Nation's abundant coal reserves. With
fifty percent of the Nation's strippable reserves located in
Region VIII states, coal development will continue to in-
crease rapidly. The 1978 Regional production of about 100
million tons is projected to reach nearly 300 million tons by
about 1985.
Along with the increase in coal mining, coal fired power
plants are being constructed in the Region at an increasing
rate. The electricity produced is transmitted to load centers
in the Midwest. Southwest . West Coast and
Power plant capacity will doable m the Region oerween sow
and 1985. At that time, almost half of the electricity produc-
ed will be exported from the Region.
the President's Energy Program will stimulate additional
coal mining and power plant activity via the construction
and operation of coal gasification and coal liquefaction
plants. Mandatory conversion of power plants cow burning
oil or gas to coal will also increase the demand for Western
coal.
Oil shale deposits in the Region comprise more than 90
percent of oil shale resources found in the U S Estimates of
recoverable reserves are placed at 600 billion barrels. By
comparison the U.S. consumed slightly more than 6 billion
barrels of oil in 1978. Oil shale deposits are concentrated in a
relatively small area in Western Colorado Northeastern
Utah, and Southwestern Wyoming.
Vast uranium reserves exist in Wyoming. Colorado and
Utah. Production of uranium ore is expected to almost triple
by 1935 If a heavy National reliance upon -uciear energy
develops, the Region's resources will De developed even
further
POLICY
Region VIII of the Environmental Protection Agency (The
Region) has established the following goals and objectives.
The Region ...
... is committed to assuring that environmental standards
and objectives, e.g. Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) increments and water quality criteria, are not
violated by energy facilities. It is not necessary to weaken
existing local, state or Federal substantive environmental
requirements to accomplish reasonable energy goals. The
Region wiii maintain its present procedures which ensure
full and timely public participation in its regulatory process.
... will expedite its regulatory decision making on all
energy projects. Special priority will be placed on proces-
sing energy project permit applications. It is our objective to
process energy project permit applications within six
months of receipt of a complete application. Exceptions to
the six month processing time would include circumstances
such as the need for preparation of an EIS on a proposed per-
mit or judicial challenges to the proposed permit. Tlie Region
will provide assistance in the scoping phase of any energy
EIS to expedite issue identification and resolution. Energy
facility EIS reviews will be performed consistent with Coun-
cil on Environmental Quality (CEQ> guidelines. Special
priority has been placed on many EIS's expected during the
next year This priority list will be reviewed annually.
... is actively developing consolidation of procedures for
applying for, reviewing, and issuing environmentally-related
project authorizations and is seeking to reduce or eliminate
duplication of those requirements. The Region will coor-
dinate its regulatory responsibilities and decisions with
other Federal agencies and with appropriate State and local
agencies. Delegation of permit programs to States, where
authorized by law and warranted by circumstances, is an
EPA policy which is being given the fullest credence ana
emphasis in Region VIII.
Development of these energy resources will change the
environment and the life styles of the Region. Mining ac-
tivities and fuel conversion facilities will generate vast
amounts of solid waste. Construction and operation of syn-
thetic fuel facilities and conventional power plants will con-
sume water resources and release pollutants to the at-
mosphere. The labor and support force to construct and
operate these mining and conversion facilities will rapid-
ly increase population in predominantly rural settings.
The potential for social and economic problems is great
unless adequate and timely planning and financing are
available. New transportation systems will have to be de-
and people needs
A coordinated local. State, and Federal government
industry/public effort is going to be necessary to ensure
that energy resource development goals are achieved while
environmental standards and objectives are maintained.
EPA Region VIII has a responsibility to ensure that time-
ly and effective coordination of environmental decisions
occurs Thorough environmental reviews and effective
public participation are essentia! and will take time Hcw-
12-14-79
Pi.ui.i-.tO oy ThE 3J = E-j 3- '.ATICNAL AFFAIRS INC WASHINGTON DC 20037
-------
ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS
Solid Waste
EPA OFFICIAL SAYS SOLID WASTE
WORST ENVIRONMENTAL RISK OF SYNFUELS
The solid waste problem is the worst environmental risk
associated with the production of synthetic fuels because its
risks are unknown, according to an Environmental Protec-
tion Agency official.
Environmentalists also agree with this assessment
But the technology will be developed to solve possible
health-rplat-pri prohlemsT~arfd"lRe~50lid waste problem will
A impede development of oil~shaIe and other_synthetic
fuels," a~~k~ey "part of President" Carter's recent_ energy
program~sai(l Terrv Thoem. director of EPA^s Energy
Policy Coordination Office in EPA Region VIII, Denver,
Colo., where a very large portion of synthetic fuels produc-
tion will take place.
Thoem August 21 told Environment Reporter that develop-
~~enr~oF U.S. oil shale reserves, however, could yield
cancer-causing waste materials, including benzo-a-pyrene
(BAP), a known mutagen, and certain nitrogen compounds.
Thoem said that this fact nonetheless does not mean that the
PreiTdent's energy program causes cancer-causing wastes.
Thfl£m_said that no one has yet determined what levels of
the cancerous substances would appear in the waste
-laterials from process shale or shale oil and what concen-
..ations would be hazardous to human health.
In addition to determining what levels and concentrations
are hazardous, Thoem said, the chance for human exposure
from the process shale or shale oil also must be determined.
According to Thoem, no commercial oil shale processing
plant has yet begunTooperate, although the first is scheduled
for completion in Colorado within five years. Colorado
s about 85 percent of U.S. oil shale reserves, buried in the
Green River Formation, particularly in the Piceance Basin.
Under President Carter's energy program, 2.5 million
barrels of synthetic fuels, including 400,000 barrels of shale
oil, would be produced daily by 1990. Eight oil shale plants
are planned, each producing about 50,000 barrels daily.
Thoem said that probably two of the oil shale plants would be
' - Utah, and six in Colorado.
60.000 Tons of Waste To Be Produced Per Plant Daily
Thoem said that each of the projected commercial surface
oil shale plants producing 50,000 barrels of oil shale daily
would also have the undesirable effect of producing 60,000
tons of waste materials that would have to be disposed of
each day. The in situ, or underground, oil shale operations
ould produce only 30,000 to 40,000 tons of waste materials
j/er day.
"If you don't dispose of these waste materials correctly,
there is a potential for water getting into them, and leaching
out toxic materials. If it gets into streams or groundwater, it
has the potential for contamination," Thoem told Environ-
ment Reporter.
Thoem said that EPA, the Energy Department, and the
merican Petroleum Institute are studying the oil extrac-
tion process and its wastes to determine possible car-
cinogenic effects. He said EPA is looking at what levels of
BAP are in process shale oil and what concentration would
be in leachate that could get into surface or groundwater.
He said EPA is also studying industry proposals for ways
to dispose of process shale waste materials. Some proposals in-
ude disposing of waste materials in impermeably lined
gulches or canyons. The waste materials would be placed in
the impermeably lined ponds, the water would evaporate,
and the remaining residue would be covered over with an im-
permeable or strong material at the end of the life of the
plant — after 30 or 40 years, Thoem said.
He said the impermeable layer above and below the pon
would prevent the waste material or contaminated wate
from leaching out of the pond.
Thoen said other industry proposals, including using th
processed shale itself in a compacted form as an im
permeable water holding material, are not so good. Althougl
industry claimed this method is effective, government ex
perts conducted tests showing it to be 99 percent ineffective
Thoem said.
"It's questions like that that leave us concerned," Thoen
said.
Environmentalists agree that the solid waste problem i:
the "most serious environmental hazard associated with oi
shale" and other synthetic fuels "production, according tc
Friends of the Earth and other environmental group:
(Current Developments, July 20, p. 722.
Environmentalists believe it to be unwise to commit
billions of dollars to oil shale and other synthetic fuels
development until safety, health, and environmental
questions associated with the technology are determined.
Air Pollution
EPA ALLOWS NEW METHOD FOR SHOWING
COMPLIANCE WITH OHIO AIR REGULATIONS
The Environmental Protection Agency said August 22
that it will accept an alternate method of demonstrating
compliance with the federally promulgated Ohio sulfur
dioxide regulations (44 FR 49296).
The original policy statement on this subject, issued by
EPA on February 15, 1978, authorized coal analysis con-
ducted in accordance with American Society for Testing
and Materials methods D 3176, based on a 24-hour period
of fuel averaging as an alternate means of demonstrating
compliance.
EPA now says it will accept coal analysis based on
a 24-hour period taking into account two exceedances, as
determined by fuel sampling, at any single source in any
consecutive 30-day period, with each day completing a new
30-day period.
Kansas
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES INVESTIGATING
TOXICS-CONTAMINATED CATTLE DEATHS
State and Federal Government agencies are investigating
the cause of death for 54 cattle in Kansas found to have "ex-
tremely high" concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) in body fat.
Region VII of the Environmental Protection Agency
August 17 announced an investigation in which the Food and
Drug Administration, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, and Kansas
Department of Health and Environment are cooperating.
They are looking into the deaths of 54 of 168 cattle delivered
by Don Busenitz of Newton, Kan., to Pawnee Valley Feedlot,
Hanson, Kan. The cattle died seven days after delivery.
EPA said Busenitz used waste transformer oil, containing
carcinogenic PCBs, in animal back rubbers. EPA in April
issued final rules prohibiting PCB manufacture and restric-
ting use (Current Developments, April 27, p. 2390).
The state ordered Busenitz and Pawnee Valley Feedlot to
hold remaining animals or animal materials until in-
vestigations are complete. The Kansas Department of
Health and Environment ordered Jayhawk Rendering Plant,
Garden City, Kansas, which processed the 54 PCB-con-
n eporter
.00 50
8-24-79
Copyright ® 1979 by The B
0013-9:
-------
• By ELLEN WHEELER -.
¦--v .;.- .-— -i N«w»Suff ¦- ij
After decades of big talk and, false
starts,, a..working shale-oil industry,
mighractnally be on the horizon in
Coloradqj"according to those in- the
business:;!":' .. ~- .is?.
It's true, the :talk isn't as big."as7it;
usedtobe.'*? ''y'fj
In-.-l?7L 'the federal government1
projected that national production- of
oil" from ."the rock that burns" would,
reach 1 million barrels a day by 1990.
Eight years later, no oil is being-
produced from shale, except for a
small" amountjised ja_ testing.; And::
President-" Carter's recently ^stated-
goal of 400,000 barrels a day by 1990-.
is considered by many to be ambitious13
if not impossible: Some industry
sources say a more realistic goal
would be 200.000 barrels a day.
IN COLORADO, Interior Depart-
ment" officials in 1971 expected the
5,000-acre tracts to produce 150,000"
barrels of oil a day by the-early 1980s. "
Work, is continuing on those tracts,
but nooirhasbeetr produced yet from
either.-Rio Blanco Oil Shale, operator
of the-area designated Tract C;a (see
map»won't decide until 1981 if it will
build a-^commercial operation.- Occi—
dental"Oil Shale predicts initial
productionfii 1984 of only 5,000
barrels a day from Tract C-b. " ' * "r -
In spite of "the richness of the're--'
source that lies beneath Western land,
the promise of oil shale development ¦
never has been fulfilled — usually-
becauseot cheap imported crude oiL
In fact, veteran oil shale watchers-
are fond of pointing out that commeP
rial production has been "just around-1
the corner" since the early part of this-
:entury.'
With foreign oil no longer a bargain1."
Dil shaje once_aga;n seems to be Just--
3round the corner." Prices for oilj
from shale are estimated at between |
520 and $35 a barrel now, compared
wuh an Arab oil pr.ce of $23.50 a
barrel.
EUT IN ORDE?l for the shale;
industry to get off the ground, indus-
try and government sources say, there
will have to be either federal econom-
incentives o: '"..g'-er oil prices, or
COi:i.
"The uncertainty-remains.'" says
Henry O. Ash, director of the Depart-
ment of the Interior's Oil Shale Env>.
ronmental Advisory Panel. "There's a
lor more talk, news articles and a lot"
of; consultants running around, "bat".
. nothing has really changed. >
"You have to be an optimist'to be
involved in oil shale.""-.' -r-
Judged by current^activity. the-
industry seems to be long, oa-opti-
mists;. Despite the' Increasing costs,',
delays, environmental problems and a..-,
history of punctured boomlets^ virtue-
ally everyone invoLved with- Colorado*
oil shale predicts--a; boom, will-start-
soon.
It will take fiveto I^-jears from the
time a company "announces-its plans-
for a commercial facility— generally-
. one that processes 25,0Q0;_tons ofshale
...or more'a day -vuntil;itis\at full
production. j
What-has kept th^[mhistr/s infer-"
if est strong througboatnti'darker mo>
ments is a rich resource-in the Green-
River Formation underlying' about
16,000 square miiesof Colorado, Utah
and Wyoming. - - ;
• AN ESTLMATED 1.8 trillion bar-,
rets of oil are held within the marl-
stone, commonly known as oil shale,
in that formation. From 80 billion to
several hundred billion barrels of that"
are economically recoverable.
About 80 percent of the-richest
shale lies within northwestern Colora-
do's Piceance Basin, where-dozens of
^ oil_companies _and Jndjyiduajs _have
_ holdings. Some have-done extensive
development work, while.others-are-:
waiting until shale production is com- _
menially feasible before investing'
" further! -. -'"'9
The- federal government is by far •
-the" largest' owner of-shale, with about
.- 8.1} percent of the total resource. ."-
C'-.'U a-ad wheiv.shale-'development;
.'occun^the two companies likely to be--1
. first out' of-the. gate irr.Coiorado-are^
l.Uhion-Oil Co. .aid" Colony Develop-^
ment Operation^ both of which have-i
extensive shalec property in-Garfield.
County near Grand Valley. 4
BOTH COMPANIES have stated -
their preference for a proposed 33 a.
barrel tax credit; which proponents':
point out wouldoit obligate the gov-4
ernment to any spending unless
industry actually produces oil. And \
both have produced some- oil from j
shale. ~j
. .Colony, a joint venture 0/ Arco and
TOSCO, has obtained almost all the 4
" permits it needs to build ar.d operate a I
HOCO-barrei-a-cay facility on its ¦
. 3,00'>acre site, including a federal OlT -
pollution permit )
The company also is considering '
. initial production of only 25,000 bar-
rels a day, in parr because of concerns-
about rapid growth expressed by re- ]
•gional officials.-according, to Colony j
" manager Les Lu'dlam-, *i'.* J
Each ton of Colony's rich shale will-
produce about 35 gallons of oiLhe.
said The final product will either be a.-,
high-grade crude sent for refining to-:"
Rocky Mountain refineries or •silTbe.~
upgraded by Colony to a diesel ocfuel;
oilleveL -" " '.
Colony mined 1 million tons of shale
"between 1969 and 1972, retorting it in-
a r.OOO-ton-a-day facility. Faced with
" inflation and uncertain national ener-
gy-policies, the. company suspended
"itsoperationsirrl974. -----—-y-^-
. "THE ECONOMIES of the project"
are^ beginning to look better,"_said-
- Ludtjrmr.Hut "alt oi our plans are -
really tied to seeing something-come
out of Congress;"
Colony's neighbor, Union Oil, also
has obtained most of the-necessary
permits. For several years in the
1950s it operated a retort near Grand
Valley,-processing-up to U00 tons of
' ore and prcduciag about 300 barrels
of oil a day. ---; - • .
Union plans to.build a 9.000-barrel-
a-day facility initially and hopes for
production of 150,000 barrsisa day by
1995. l-t . . —
"If Congress enacts the $3 a barrel
tax credit or other appropriate risk-
sharing, we are-ready," said Union
spokesman John Hopkins,
. It would take 2 Vs. years to have the
prototype facility in operation, he
said. --- --
Other active companies include:
. -Occidental, operator oL federal.-:
tract C-b and a pioneer in "in situ," or |
underground, retorting. It-has pro -i
duced -50,000 barrels of .oil at. its i
privately owned Logaa Wash test site- i
near Debeque and is building facilities j
for modified in situ retorting on the j
federal tract (Modified in- situ in-
volves mining of some 0; the rock
first to create an underercund cav-
ern.) First production of 5,000 barrels
a day is expected LJ34.
Full-scaie production is set for
198f», with a goai 01 56,0GJ barrels a
day.
-RIO BLANCO OIL Shale Co..
operator of tract C-a. Gdf and Stand-
ard of Indiana are the participants in
this project which has purchased
Occidental's modified :h situ tecnno!-
ogv and is fr.cili:i3s for
underground re'.j, c.r.g. 2. end 0:
1931, the company plans to finish
burning three test retorts.
Only then, after spending 5'iS0 mtl-
lion since its formation, will Rio-
Blanco decide whether to go ahead
with-a commercial-sized project
originally pegged at 75.000 barrels a
dav. .- "...
-------
Oil companies-and their pieces of Colorado's
Piceance Basin. Most of those tracts and control-
ling firms are indicated above. The Superior Oil
Co. tract at the-top of the map actually is about
15 miles north of federal tract C-a. The state
map indicates !o€ation of me- Piceance Basin.
— Paraho Development: Corp.,
which just finished producing, an
undisclosed amount of oil from Israeli
shale at its Anvil Points site.Original-
ly a consortium of 17 oil companies*.
Paraho had produced about. 110*000
barrels of oil prior to the Israeli run-
About 100,000 barrels oft thafc-was
produced in 1977 and I97S from
federal shale under contract with-the
Navy.
PARAHO IS SEEKING federal
funds for planning of a project, that
could be located at Anvil Points or on
its private reserves in the Piceance
Basin or Utah. Program director
Harry Fforzheirner said the output ,
hasn't been determined but couid be ;
both oil and gas equivalent to about'-!
3,000 barrels a day of oil.
—Superior Gil Co.. which has been
waiting since 1973 for approval of a
proposed land exchange with the Bu-
reau of Land Management. A decision
on the exchange is expected- from
Interior by mid-1330, and at that time
Superior will decide if the project is
economically feasible. Its plans call
for production or an average of 11,500
barrels a day on a site near Meeker.
—Equity Oil Co., which recently
began testing in situ technology under
contract to the Department of Energy
..on less than one acre in the Piceance
Basin. The company hopes to extract
70 percent' o£ an estimated 635,000
; barrels of oil under thatract. .
IN ADDITION TO these firms, a
number of major oil companies hold
oil shale reserves, including Conoco,
Texaco, Exxon,_ Shell, Chevron and
Mobil
Chevron, with about 40,000 acres of
prime shale land, is- preparing plans
for a 100,000-barrei-a-day facility
within 10 years. It is loosing for front-
end incentives from the government,
such as accelerated depreciation and
investment tax credit increases.
Exxon recently began inquiries into
a possible land exchange with the
federal government in- an effort to
consolidate its holdings into more
easily mined blocks. Ictoo, is inter-
ested in tax.credits, as well
guaranteed purchase agreements or
grants that would be paid Sack should
the project become profitable
-------
> - >¦ -M"« '-Wll
i ' -.»v - » • **+
§1011
in SI
Ifek.; Colora86's~.-~d:
.^energy
~ ~ fy^Z By FT T.TvN WTTFTrT FTr-r;""—.
¦ ' NwnStaff'T : --— -
- :The crucial decisions that -will determine Lf._
Colorado shale is deve'opedt -probably will be--,
made-far from the Western: Slope. — in places:=
suchas Washington and RipriBySatidTArabia.^,.
Most veterans of oil shale's.ups and downs
over the years say tie industry's development
this time around hinges on two factors:" " |
—Whether Congress decides the federal gov-
ernment should lend more than: just moral sup-
port to the industry.
—How soon and how higfr. the member
nations of the Organization of Petroleum
Exporting Countries raise their prices for oiL
-j "Within the next five years, (an oil shale
industry) has to happen," said John S. Hutchins,
an energy industry consultant and former presi-
dent of Cameron Engineers in Denver.
-"If Congress doesn't do something, the next)
time OPEC meets it could make it happen,"!
Hutchins said. "Congress has the option of speed-
ing up the start of production.";
The OPEC oil price stands at $23.50 a barrel, •
- compared with current estimates for a barrel of-t
shale oil ranging from $20 to $35. Liquids from
coal are more expensive, with some cost esti-
mates exceeding $40 a barrel
Given OPEC's recent expressions of concern-
that the decline of the dollar is eating away at
the real income of its members — as well as
their view that they must earn, what they can
before their oil is depleted — it'sjikely that the
price won't hold at $23.50 for long. "
That gives some encouragement to the oil
shale industry.
And it looks like Congress, having lost some
enthusiasm for President Carter's proposed 583
; ~"2nd of 4 drticles
. billion "crash" synthetic fuels program, will
- approve a number of lower-priced incentives by
.the end of the year.--,- .
A variety of proposals, including tax' credits,
loans, loan guarantees and guaranteed prices and
purchases, are under consideration. What seems
apparent, according to members of Congress and
t'neir aices, is that incentives aimed at gradual
development of synthetic fuels will be approved.
The shale industry is looking for cash from
the government because of the high capital cost
of facilities, now estimated at $15,000 to $20,000
per barrel of daily capacity. That compares with
estimates of $3,000 a barrel jusf 10 years ago_
.7^-"From the beginning, it has been clear~the
:. question-was cot whether to develop synthetic
- fuels but rather how to do it, how fast and at
-what cost," said Sen. Gary Hart, D-Colo., who
chaired the Budget Committee's Task Force on
Synthetic Fuels.-
~~ Hart also said he thinks Congress will ap-
-. prove incentives that "emphasize production
_ rather, than construction — incentives such as
L. tax credits and price guarantees." ""
iu-^In the Senate, the Energy Committee has
" backed a two-phase synthetic fuels program that
would cost $20 billion in the first phase. In
addition to its energy package, the Senate Fi-
nance Committee also is considering these meas-
ures which relate to taxation. _
In addition, the committee is holding hearings
Thursday •and Friday on Hart's proposal to .
allocate $1.75 billion for aid to energy-impacted
towns.- - -
That would provide grants for planning and
immediate assistance and then loans as up-front
money for schools, roads and other facilities. The
. loans would be paid back to a fund at the state
level from which other towns could draw.
The House has passed legislation providing
purchase guarantees for synthetic fuels, but
other legislation for loans and loan guarantees
still is before the Ways and Means Committee.
Also before that committee is a proposal for the
$3 a- barrel credit, sponsored by Rep. James
Johnson, R-Coio.
The budget committees of both houses are
likely to agree on a ceiling for energy spending,
according to Rep. Timothy Wirth, D-Colo. He
said the energy package would include funds for
plants testing each synthetic fuels technology, as
well as increased spending for conservation and
solar energy. A couple of oil shale projects might
be funded next year under the legislation, he
said. - -
• One aspect of the administration's energy
proposals that has caused particular concern in
. Western states is the plan for an Energy Mobi-
lization Board to cut red tape on energy projects.
The Senate already has passed a bill which Hart
and Sen. William Armstrong, R-Colo., argued
against because they said it gave the board too
much power to waive state laws.
A floor fight is likely over the two House
¦ proposals for the EMB, one of which. Westerners
oppose because of the same override powers.
The other bill, proposed by Rep. Moms Udall,
D-Ariz.. and hac'«:ed by rrost Western congress-
men ar.d governors, would set up a board that
could expedite projects, but with no substantive
overrides.
Even if Congress had become convinced of
the need for a crash program, there are indica-
tions that other limits — such as construction
.capacity — would make it impossible .
- --wetinQ. tnat tne controlling restraint will
probably be construction industry capability to
engineer, design and construct plants^' said a
report prepared by Cameron Engineers for the
Synthetic Fuels Task Force of the U.S. Senate
_ Budget Committee.
~ -"Achieving a production level on the order of
the announced administration goals could re-
quire 50 percent of the total existing capability
of the industry," it continued. "Without'a war-
time levei of effort and significant diversions
from the rest of the economy,, this will limit
syniueb output by L990- to less than 1 nuiiico
barrels per day." -
Carter's goal had been Vh million barrels a
day — 400,000 of them from oil shale
In addition, Hutcnins pointed out that the rata
of growth will be limited somewhat by the
• ability of towns in northwest Colorado to absorb
development
j. The ultimate size of the industry — as op-
I posed to rate of growth — will be' limited by
factors such as water supply and possible envi- ,
I ronmental problems, Hutciunssaid. i
! The environmental impacts could include air
[and water pollution, harm to wildlife, production
'of toxic substances, disturbance of the land's
Isurface, and creation of great amounts of waste-
¦material.
1 The Environmental Protection Agency, while
acknowledging the potential of environmental
harm from shale oil production, has taken the
position that none of the problems presents an
rurmountable barrier to development
"Our belief is that environmental constraints .
- - - - - .
won't pose significant barrier? for an individual
facility," said Terry Thoem, head of the agency's
regional energy office in Denver.
-- Those constraints, however, could limit the
size of the industry, he said. EPA is comforable
with an industry large enough to produce 200,000
barrels of oil a day.
Although the agency is aoDrehensive abent
400.000 barrels a day, Tho^n said. "With careful
siting and adequate controls, w® probably will be
able to do that — as long as it's spread La
Colorado and Utah."
A number of studies are under way within
EPA and the Deparraect of Ecerty en :i:e
release of toxic and carcinogenic substances
from both raw and processed scale, and EPA is
preparing a document that will list the environ-
mental effects of shale development and -hat
controls might be required.
That document probably wili be cut earl^ in
1980, Thoem said.
"We've got an obligation to make sure the
industry develops in a safe and sane fashion." he
said. But the problem so far, according to-
Thoem, is the lack of solid evidence on environ-
mental effects.
-------
In any case, both EPA and the industry:-J
maintain- that tie only way to judge the real -1
effect of shale processing is to get a few plants in
operation and see what happens.
"We've always maintained that we need to ¦
have something go out there, some modular- -
scale plants... You can then better design control \g
equipment for a commercial facility," Thoem ¦
said. _ ¦;
Neither EPA nor the state of Colorado consid- -
ers water supply a problem for the oil shale ,
industry.
4rWe estimate that there are adequate water
supplies to provide the needs of a 500,000-barrel-
per-day oil shale industry without a trade-off
between competing uses," said Harris Sherman,
head of the state Department of Natural Re- :
sources. •"?
He said development beyond that level could j
especially affect agriculture, which is an j
important part of the economy in oil shale |
country.
"It has been state policy to encourage a j
strong agricultural economy in northwestern i
Colorado," Sherman said. "We want to continue 1
to see agriculture thrive in that portion of the •.
state." ;
Sherman said the most important question for j
the 500,000-barrel-a-day industry relates to I
water storage, rather than supply.
"Colorado will clearly need additional storage I
to provide the needs of the oil shale industry," he j
said. '
-------
Colorado's--~~
energy boom
- . By ELLEN WHEELER .
•' - — -"NcnSuif ¦
Since President Carter announced -
his $88 billion synthetic fuel propos-
als. much of the discussion on coal's
possible contributions to national -
energy production has centered on
development of sophisticated, tech-. _
niques for turning it into liquid or gas. _
Although Colorado coal production -
is expected to-increase steadily —
possibly doubling or tripling by 1385
— most experts say that w:!l have
little to do with synthetic fuels — at
least in the next id to 15 years.
Instead, rr.cst of the state's coal
probablvwill be mined-and shipped to '
electricity-generating plants, where it ' •
well be burned to produce steam.
"Coal is a resource whose time has .
come," says Cecil Roberts, energy
minerals coordinator for the Colorado - -
office of the Bureau of Land Manage-' -
ment. ¦'
Few argue with the notion that the-
country's abundant coal reserves
must be developed if the United States
is to reduce dependence on oil im-
ports. According to government
figures, coal represents 90 percent of '
- the nation's fossil fuel reserve, but it
currently is used to meet only 18
percent of the country's energy needs.
The coal reserves in Colorado have
been estimated at about 15 billion tons
— about three-quarters of that mina--
ble-by underground methods and the
rest by surface methods. For the most
part, surface mining is the most prob-
able method for northwestern
Colorado, with underground mining
more fe3s;ole in the Delta and Trini-
dad areas.
In 1373. state coal production sur-
passed 14.3 million tons, breaking the
record of 12.6 million tons set in 1913-
By 1285. production ;n the state is
expected to range between '25 million
and 50 million tons, according to a
number of estimates.
But two facers probably will have
a lot to do w:v. v.he'.her that projected
growth over present ievels actually
occurs.
'One-is the demand for coal, which '
z has increased only slightly since 1977. :
in spite of government efforts to en-
courage industry to stop burning oil
- and start burning coal. Industry has -i
complained that the signals from gov- i
eminent on switching to coal have- i
been confusing and sometimes contra- j
dictory. :. - - - - 4
_The National Coal" Association, in 3~
letter to President Carter, last spring, J
noted' that Jhe^ industry. C3n produce ij
far more coal than it can find buyers 1
for. Although production capacity .
stands at about 354 million tons a
year, the association sa;d, production i
in 1979 is expected to be only 713 |
• million tons-
Growth in coal use through 1S85,
according to the trade group, will
depend on increased demand for elec-
tricity, construction of new coal-fired
power plants, substitution of coal for -'
; oil and gas, air quality requirements^
enforcement of strip mining law and ;
the. effects of higher transportation
costs.
A second factor affecting coal
development is the renewed federal
leasing program, under which the-]
first coal lease sales since 1971 will -1
begin in January 1981. Over the fol- ;
lowing three years, the Interior De- I
partment plans to lease tracts that |
will produce 1.5 billion tons of coal, j
The first sales; occurring over two j
years, will cover the Green River-1
Hams Fork region of Wyoming and |
northwestern Colorado. A lease target 1
of 321 million tons has been set for the j
region.
Industry and some members of Con-'
gress have criticized the government
for moving too slowly on leasing — !
while environmentalists have been
concerned that it will move too quick- ,
iy-
"The federal government, by most
; estimates, owns about 50 percent of ¦
! Western coal. But it is believed to -
control development of about 30 per-
cent because oi land ownership pat-
terns.
Water suoply is one factor that
could help limit the ways in which
coal is used Colorado, according to
Jerome Morse, a professor at the.
Colorado School of Mines and consult- j
ant to the Colorado Energy Research .
Institute. Transmission of electricity^
e.r/i. //SCO'S
of-state users is unlikely because of-}
the large amounts of water required,.;]
hesaid.. - _ j
'"It "takes seven-times as much7!
water for a conventional electric '¦
power plant as to move the same--1;
amount of energy through a slurry j
pipeline,'*" said Morse. Production of j
synthetic liquid and gaseous reel from j
coal also can use significantly more-j
1 water than slurry, according to a re—|
port Morse prepared for CERI. -I
Should oil shale development occur
on the western. Slope, thai also would
put demands on the state's water sup- j
ply, although a state study has said -i
water is available for production of -«
500,000 barrels of shale oil a day.
-Harris Sherman, director oi the j
state Department of Natural Re- ]
sources, said coal mining won't 1
compete with oil shale for water
supplies.-Coal development couid-»
'come-in "conflict with oil snale, he -
said, if there were extensive coal-
fired power plants or production of ¦
synthetic fuels from coaL
- The only coal synfuels project under _-j
way in Colorado now is a 60-ton-a-day — i
pilot gasification plant being built in ;
Golden by Denver-based Enrecon inc. - j
Radon Tolman, president of the ]
firm, said the piant will be finished -i
early next year. By 1933, Enrecon -j
hopes to build a 800-ton-a-day demon- ¦-
stration plant, hesaid.
Colorado Interstate Gas, a prime .
supplier of natural gas to Public Ser/- •
ice Co., also is considering
participation in a proposed coal-
gasification project in Wyoming. 1
CIG spokesman Jack Chancier said
the company has beep asked by a''
¦ group of firms if it wouid be interest-
ed in buying gas produced from such a
project. He declined to give the exact
location.
The group is one of several interest-
ed in obtaining Department oi Energy
funding ur.cer n upcoming prcg~m,
Chandler said.
. Such a coal gasification project
would produce gas with about oflrt to -
400 ar.tish thermal units, he said, a
relatively low level That compares '•
with pioeline-qualib/ natural gas — of
about 964 Btu - delivered to CIG's j
customers^'according to Chandler.-.-- -
-------
The low-Btu gas could ."be used- as
turbine fuel or for ammoaia or metha-
nol production. Chandler said,.or-it
could be upgraded to pipeline quality: ..
If gasification should become more .
economically feasible, it eventually "
could spur development of low-2tu -
lignite coal in the Denver Basin coal
region, , •
"In situ," or underground, gasifica-
tion techniques have been shown to
make lignite more economically
recoverable than it is by traditional
mining methods.
-------
' ~ C'-*. if —
"¦jjc-yVfwwva »'¦**"? '*•" ¦ r;C*,
-V^By ELLEN WHEELEKV?
-- jfewi Stiff . 'a^StL-
¦• If a community has a distinct per-
Moalitjr, says Rangeiy Mayor^Cedl
Lollar, his town is like an. oilfield
worker who's ready to leave the old
behind and move on to something -
bigger and better.
But Meeker, only 73 miles'away in
eastern Rio Blanco County, is more
like a Nebraska farcer, says Collar.
If s comfortably settled and not at alT
eager-for the change thafcwfllrcdm« -
with growth.
One of the ironies of Colorado's
energy development is that so far it's
Meeker that has been doing the grow-
ing.
Both towns are in an area that's
expected*to boom in the next few
yean because of rapid development
of coal and oil shale and, to a lesser
extent, uranium.
So far, growth has been slower than
many expected because of delays in
oil shale development. Those delays
have been a blessing to the affected
towns, according to community offi-
cials, because they've bad several
extra years to get ready.
Rangeiy and Meeker have seen the
experience of other so-called boom
towns — Rock Springs, Wyo., being
the most notorious exam pie — with
social problems such as increased
crime, alcoholism, family problems,
poor mental health and inflation.
They've also seen rapid growth over-
crowding nearby Craig and Rifle.
Officials of the two towns are trying
to prepare for the new residents by
planning and building needed streets,
sewers, schools and other facilities.
They hope that by looking ahead they
can avoid the Rock Springs experi-
ence.
But despite the well-documented
problems, Rangeiy looks forward to
growth as bringing an injection of new
life.
'Ttn fortunate to represent a com-
munity that wants the growth." said
Lollar. "Here, everybody is looking
forward to the future."
Rangeiy is r.o stranger to energy
bccms, for it -.TdS founded in 1345
during an oil boom. Located in and
country near the Utah border, the
town or.ce had about 4,500 residents.
Townsiolk would like to see it that
populous again.
At the start of this year, Rangeiy
had an estimated population of 1,900,
only a small increase irom- the 1,371
recorded in a 1977 special census.
According to population projections
just released by the Colorai&r^est'
Area Council of Governments, Range-
ly*s population should peak at more
than 3,600 in 1934: ¦¦ — •
"We're geared op for a population
- of 6,000 to 5,500/* Lollar said recent-
ly. The town has built" a new water
treatment' plant, recreation center
and elementary school, and has added
' to sewer facilities, in anticipation of
growth.
"-^^We'rfc planned .—'as much'Iaa
¦ person can plan." said Lollar. —r-~'
The only problems he foresees are z
lack of housing — a problem Meeker
and other energy boom towns share —
and lack of a good shopping area. Eut
he said one company is ready to build
new housing as soon as growth justi-
- Hes a minimum of LQOuew homes a
year. , - -
V Rangel/s desire to grow has been
thwarted in part because it lacks a
. direct road to the nearest federal oil
shale lease tract, C-a. It's 70 miles
Last of four articles
from town by the existing road, but by
a direct route it would be only 25
miles away.
Lollar said the town has gained only
11 new families from oil shale so far.
Many workers on C-a, operated by Rio
Blanco Oil Shale, and tract C-b, oper-
ated by Occidental Oil Shale, are
living in Meeker or Rifle,- both of
which are a shorter drive by present
roads.
Rifle is attractive to newcomers
because its location on Interstate 70
provides easy access to Glenwood
Springs and Denver to the east or
Grand Junction to the south.
Lollar said he hopes the Legislature,
which has balked at funding the short-
er road until it's sure that C-a will be
commercially developed, will agree
to fund its constriction in three
phases. The first would be a gravel,
all-weather road, readv by fall of
1930.
Rio Blanco spokesmen have said a
decision won't be made cn commer-
cial development of tract C-a until the
firm finishes burning three test
retorts in 1981.
Lollar, whose personality theory ex-
tends to corporations, describes Rio
Blanco Oil Shale as a company wear-
ing a "conservative, dark ghy suit."
"I'm really jealous sometimes of
Rifle, dealing with Oxy (Occidental),"
Lollar said. "I really do believe in the
* long run that we're better off dealing
-with- Rio Blanco," he said, but its
conservative projections have hurt
¦ Rangel/s ability to get funding for.
the road and capital foe housing' and
. other construction.. -
¦ No matter what the oil shale firm
.decides to do, it doesn't look like
Ran gel'/s growth- will be postponed
.-much longer." .
- Two sites have been proposed for a
power plant that will supply electrici-
ty to Utah. One is just six miles east of
Rangeiy and the other 14 miles to the
west across the Utah border.
¦ About 800 workers will be employ-
ed during construction of the plant, -
Lollar said, and 300 will work there
once if s in operation. In addition, the
coal that will fuel the plant will be
mined near the proposed plant site
east of Rangeiy. About 300 will work
there. ~ "
The state originally opposed con-
struction of the plant in Colorado,
Lollar said, but has changed its posi-
tion.
"All the pollution will come into
Colorado, all the impacts rill-come
here — everything but the tax base,"
if the plant is built in Utah, he said.
Population projections for Rangeiy
— which assume commercial opera-
tion of C-a, Superior Oil Co.'s oil shale
tract, and the coal mine for the Utah
" power project — foresee growth to
2,223 in 1980 and 4,729 ia 1983.
< As eager for growth as he is, Lollar
" said, "My attitude would be complete-
ly different if I owned acreage at the
edge of Meeker. It's a much prettier
town."
Surrounded by picturesque farms
and ranches in the White River Val-
ley, Meeker is apprehensive that rapid
growth will change ia quiet and com-
fortable way of lite.
Founded in the 1370s, Meeker is the
county seat. Its substantial-looking
courthouse dominates an estabiisned
downtown shopping area.
"I think if you asked i':> ..typical
older citizen on the street, you'd get
the answer that he'd just as soon build
a brick ?/all around the community"
to keep out the growth,-said Duane
Rehbort, Rio Blanco County planner
. and a Meeker resident. -
-------
Yet those same residents are voting
for bond issues to increase the capaci- j
ty of the schools and sewer facilities,, j
because they don't want to be over- j
whelmed when the boom does come. j
So far. Meeker has been growing by
about 10 to 15 percent, a year,
Rehborg said. But the population is .
expected to double by 1931. - - —
In 1977, at the time of the special
census, Meeker had a slightly smaller
population than Rangely, with a total
of 1,548. But, by January 1979, the
population was up to 2,250, according
to the Council of Governments. . .
-~:-That growth is expected, to pick up
speed, bringing the town to a popula-
tion of 4,523 in 1981, more than- 9,300
in 1983 and 12,500 in 1985. Those
i V*-a auu s
"t^eopie a um uut' problem _ ,
said Rehborg. "The problem is getting
ready ior the growth."
Housing is the town's most critical
immediate need, Rehborg said.
"If you went out to try to rent a
house or apartment in Meeker, you!
.couldn't find one," said Rehborg..
Aggravating the situation is inflation,
that has hit all the northwestern Colo-
rado communities. "»'•
The median cost of a house-in-1
Meeker rose from 548,000 the first six j
months of 1973 to 551,000 the rest cf. j
the year, according to one survey. It "I
then dropped, apparently because of a |
drop in the-number of construction 1
workers at tract C-b, to $49,100. . [
Housing problem^ have been allevi- j
ated somewhat by Occidental Oil
Shale, which paid two years rent in
advance for three new apartment
buildings. The apartments are filled/
and the company is getting its money
back. ' -. -
The increases in housing and other
costs- are especially worrisome to
Meeker officials, became almost 30
percent of its residents are elderly.
Thafs aboat_6¦*, - i
'-;4 •
lack of housing mcy be the most serious problem feeing the smell towns cf northwestern Coiorcdo hit by
energy development. MobileJiorcejjcrks such cs this one in Rangely are becoming common^ -_Vi;. ^
A
------- |