Amador County – Amador County staff is preparing for a pair of lawsuits regarding county approval of the Buena Vista Biomass Power plant on Coal Mine Road, near Ione, but as yet, no hearings have be scheduled.
Deputy County Counsel Greg Gillott said two suits against decisions of approval by the Amador County Board of Supervisors, and the Planning Commission, will be heard at a date to be determined.
Two plaintiffs have challenged the decision for a use permit, which was approved by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, and later approved unanimously by the Amador County Air District board of directors on Feb. 3, though that decision could have been made with or without the suit in place.
The two plaintiffs are the group, the “Center for Biological Diversity,” and Ione resident. Thomas Strout. Gillott said the cases are separate, but “will sort of track together,” and the county now is preparing the administrative record of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report that was prepared by a consultant for the county, as lead agency. The administrative record will include everything that went into the decisions of approval made by the planning commission and board, including the SEIR, a statement of mitigated negative declaration, and a use permit.
There are no firm dates going into the future, Gillot said. The county counsel’s office is scanning documents from a relatively large record involved in the Buena Vista Biomass Power plant. He said the parties will talk about when they will issue their briefs.
There was no request for a Biomass injunction, but the suits are asking for the same thing. Gillott said the contention is that county did not properly comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. He said the Biological Diversity case is based on greenhouse gas emissions, and whether the county calculated those properly in the SEIR.
Strout’s suit also is on CEQA grounds, but it also challenged the actual use permit itself, Gillott said, and the issuance of the use permit. He said Biomass asked for an amendment to the use permit to do 100% biomass burning, instead of partial lignite coal burning, along with woody biomass, as originally permitted.
Gillott said the Subsequent EIR treated it as if there was no plant at the location, with impacts based on zero impact, to compare emissions and determine impacts that could be expected from the plant, then base its mitigations on that. He said that’s the EIR evaluation, the environmental part of it, because what CEQA tends to do is see that a project has been mitigated to the extent that it can be mitigated.
Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
